I have been thinking, because I in IMDB go true all actors what came in my mind and such like Patriz Sweazy, Baldwins, Charlie Shean, Christtofer Lambert, Curt Russel etc waste they tallants in romantic comedies and other kind a films. We all know they most fits into action movies or close, specely Sweazy. IMO Pointbrake ruined his carear, he becaim popular. Same rest of guys had some good action films and then some cheasy commedies. IMo ppl who has fighting skills, and knows how to fight must play in action movies all the time. Like C Norris, Seagal, Willis, van Damme, Stallone, transporter guy .... there are others who can kiss a girl, dance and play some romantic role, but kickers, fighters, gun fighters must be in action .... movie industry would be better, much better if those would made more actions... and those are only fiev examples

What do you think about this?

And I know many will laught on me, so c mon, feel free make fun about me, I am ready to hear how stupid I am

Damn, you just opened up the pandora box mate. Have fun.

People need money ,yes?

Written by ANGEL REAPER on 03.04.2013 at 21:46

People need money ,yes?

yes but thay had enought. less they need bibmo blond, silicon girl sleeping near pool and sucking out money
But seriusly Sweazy, get milions in 80's Shean also ... this cheasy commedy series .. c mon

Written by Bad English on 04.04.2013 at 00:45

Written by ANGEL REAPER on 03.04.2013 at 21:46

People need money ,yes?

yes but thay had enought. less they need bibmo blond, silicon girl sleeping near pool and sucking out money
But seriusly Sweazy, get milions in 80's Shean also ... this cheasy commedy series .. c mon

each man come to this point in life when he got bored/over-exhausted of dong what he do the best soon or later and start doing this mindless stuff... especially if they are poorly raised -if they get some huge money from their talents (football players,actors, musicians,car racers ) they would start to waste it .Its same case as Maradona -he was good football player ,got some great money and then started doing coke ...
But than can we really judge whereas they really wasted their talent or they utilize it in good way by doing all those crappy films/shows ?

Maybe not wasted talants but I think ppl who are made to be in action movies must be in action movies .... its like David Backhem or Maradona said, I am tired of football, I will go do balet or work in a hotel

Agree with you till some point ... Nick Cage for instance..he never rejected roll ,no mater how bad it was..to me he is the man who really wasted a lot of talent on worthless crap...

Written by ANGEL REAPER on 04.04.2013 at 01:08

Agree with you till some point ... Nick Cage for instance..he never rejected roll ,no mater how bad it was..to me he is the man who really wasted a lot of talent on worthless crap...

well some like playing but its like hmmmm Laura Angel will ask to role in 15 oscar movie.
Why Seagal, Norris (yes some says they are bad actors ) stay in action, there are more, but those are top examples
Walker hardly kissed Alex in TV Series , Stalonne ... he can be only in action movies, he is ugly , he never would fit into romance

Kinda surprised nobody else has done this yet... *talent!

Written by Bad English on 04.04.2013 at 01:39

Written by ANGEL REAPER on 04.04.2013 at 01:08

Agree with you till some point ... Nick Cage for instance..he never rejected roll ,no mater how bad it was..to me he is the man who really wasted a lot of talent on worthless crap...

well some like playing but its like hmmmm Laura Angel will ask to role in 15 oscar movie.
Why Seagal, Norris (yes some says they are bad actors ) stay in action, there are more, but those are top examples
Walker hardly kissed Alex in TV Series , Stalonne ... he can be only in action movies, he is ugly , he never would fit into romance

well those guys were cut for that specific films . Remember when Schwarzenegger played the common dad in that Christmas themed film. THe film itself wasnt bad,but come on-that was wrong on so many levels.

Conan is cool, he was cult fiction in metyal society like manowar and all fuck up steel idea
Conan is not so bad, but to be honest I like only 80's Arnie fillms, now he do Conan III, I dont like his those fatasy about future films,
Comando, Red Steel, and those was good

We have actors like Richard Geer, Dustin Hopman, even Seam Connery, Pierce BRosman, Daniel Craig. Antony Hopkins, Viggo Mortensen, Micheal Douglas .... they are also in some action movies, but same time they are in films where are no guns, unfgaitfull, game, meet joc black, all those I can remeber
Those kind actors can also be super cup in super fighting film, same time can be in other films, like De Niro, Pacino etc

Dont you agree those what I mentioin also, Snipes, ....those simply dont fits, they are action guys

I dont like Washinhton, L Jackson, Freeman, non actin films, IMO those are boring

Well i agree with you that there are actors who are "good" only for action movies .But that dont mean they have no talent whatsoever.Arnold is not an actor and that is reason why Conan was good: he simply fits the role of barbarian ,muscular and (acting speaking) amateurish . Also Hopkins is great actor and one of best i have seen on films-but the man is "educated" actor -cut for the any role (like in theater) so may find interesting to play psyko-murderer one time and some poet/gardener/romeo next time.
Connery is great but there were roles he only accepted for money -like Indiana Jones III .Speaking of which why do you think that Harrison Ford filmed the Indiana Jones 4 20 years later?Money thats why.See there is an old saying that says : actors are rich of talent but they are judged to be poor.So while we think that they waste their talent on bad films they are in fact using it to make money.And about awards :number of Oscars nowdays is not the best indicator is the actor bad or good-its all business today.

Written by ANGEL REAPER on 04.04.2013 at 13:41

Well i agree with you that there are actors who are "good" only for action movies .But that dont mean they have no talent whatsoever.Arnold is not an actor and that is reason why Conan was good: he simply fits the role of barbarian ,muscular and (acting speaking) amateurish . Also Hopkins is great actor and one of best i have seen on films-but the man is "educated" actor -cut for the any role (like in theater) so may find interesting to play psyko-murderer one time and some poet/gardener/romeo next time.
Connery is great but there were roles he only accepted for money -like Indiana Jones III .Speaking of which why do you think that Harrison Ford filmed the Indiana Jones 4 20 years later?Money thats why.See there is an old saying that says : actors are rich of talent but they are judged to be poor.So while we think that they waste their talent on bad films they are in fact using it to make money.And about awards :number of Oscars nowdays is not the best indicator is the actor bad or good-its all business today.

There was a reason why I put '' '' in wasted , because many dont fits in, same like hmmm Dany De Vitto would be some super cop, he fist in parodies
same like J Chan , his fighting , he si funny I doubt he would be in Die Hard

Those Hoping san dco I mean they are good in all roles, all type of films, they can be good fuckers or dancers, same time they can be good in shooting film. Connery was 007 true and real one, and he can be in commedy
Those what I menation fits in all roles,

Best acor was Reygan he was playing best roll of his life and century... he was playing a pess of USA

BTW Eastwood also is not good comedy actor, his best roles was in westerns and dirty harry and some good action films made in 90's
He made soem commedies and romance, worst was whit Meril Steep hmmm forgot name....same like Mel Gibson dont fits in some real action, IMO Leathal Weapon, ok it is classic but its more like action commedy , IMO Bruce Willis could be better there but what was made, was made

Written by Bad English on 04.04.2013 at 13:15


I dont like Washinhton, L Jackson, Freeman, non actin films, IMO those are boring

Racist much ?

Well an actor is supposed to be able to play any role. That's how you judge a good actor, so saying an actor is only good for action, doesn't make him better than an actor who can pull of a good action movie and at the same time be perfect for a comedy as well.

I think there are very few actors who can pull off all the roles they have played. Most actors have one or two bad movies/roles if not more.
The question here is whether you are judging the actor by the movie or by their performance in the movie? The movie could have been crap, but maybe the actor did a really good job.

Written by Spirit Molecule on 04.04.2013 at 14:46

Written by Bad English on 04.04.2013 at 13:15


I dont like Washinhton, L Jackson, Freeman, non actin films, IMO those are boring

Racist much ?

Well an actor is supposed to be able to play any role. That's how you judge a good actor, so saying an actor is only good for action, doesn't make him better than an actor who can pull of a good action movie and at the same time be perfect for a comedy as well.

I think there are very few actors who can pull off all the roles they have played. Most actors have one or two bad movies/roles if not more.
The question here is whether you are judging the actor by the movie or by their performance in the movie? The movie could have been crap, but maybe the actor did a really good job.

YOU GET ME WRONMG, I dont like films where they are in comedy or non action
Freeman is one of my fav actor, same L Jackson and Washington,
I love alone came spider, kiss the girls, I like dejavou, and I simply love those guys but I HATE those films where they play some romantic comedy or whatever gay scenes

I agree actor must but simply some actors dont fits there, they must stay in action if they are skills to be action

BTW if Ashley Judd, Sharon Stone, Natsha Kinskey, Juddy Foster, whatever female actress who was on glory and are on TOP whatever she do in movies, decides no to movie sand go to porn industry and have a rolls in b level modern american porn what is horible, cant compare whit marc dorcel made... wont it be waste of talant?

Stupid to compare but stlll

Oh i now get what you meant the first place ...

Seeing Ashley Judd in a porn film would never be a waste of talent if you ask me.

Written by Guest on 04.04.2013 at 19:10

Seeing Ashley Judd in a porn film would never be a waste of talent if you ask me.

She was example but let me thiunk put her and replace her whit Dora Venter .... I doubt Dora could do such roles than can Ashley, but Ashley might same level porn actress

Well about charlie sheen...he kinda felt more natural in his role in two and a half man than his 80's and 90's action movies..probably because that's how he is in real life lol but i agree on the other "action heroes"

Yeah charlie sheen is fit for role in Two and Half Men because he was not acting but re-living the scenes from his real life

I hate that TV series, he might fin in parodies,

I liked that TV series ... I hate Big Bang Theory ,and every following season of How I Met Your MOther since season 3 or 4 ...

On unrelated note this is mine 2000th post !

Written by ANGEL REAPER on 04.04.2013 at 22:00

I liked that TV series ... I hate Big Bang Theory ,and every following season of How I Met Your MOther since season 3 or 4 ...

On unrelated note this is mine 2000th post !

I doubt you can recah 34 000 whit discussing only movies

Well than CHALLENGE ACCEPTED

When in acting school they are taught to ably act in all kinds of character/emotion/style role... and yes for money too : ))))))

Written by ANGEL REAPER on 04.04.2013 at 22:00

On unrelated note this is mine 2000th post !

gratz and keep up the good work xD

Written by Malphas on 05.04.2013 at 01:05

Written by ANGEL REAPER on 04.04.2013 at 22:00

On unrelated note this is mine 2000th post !

gratz and keep up the good work xD

thanks !