RoR: Forum

Sure, he delivers his lines like he's got a mouth full of rice pudding but I've always had a soft spot for ol' Sly. He really shouldn't have succeeded the way he has. At most he should be a beefcake who does bit parts, but he transcended that.

I liked him in Cop Land. Also, The Specialist with the pre-plastic surgery Sharon Stone is a good little flick (or is that just 'cause of Shazza's legs?)

Ross

Post 1

Saturday, August 27, 2005 - 1:10pm

Yeah, I like Sly too.

He gets blasted a lot for not being a great actor but people tend to forget that Hollywood is in the entertainment business. Sly has been entertaining and making mucho money for himself and his biz for years. He virtually created the "Action Movie", which is a major cash cow for the studios. He also can write and direct. He's no dummy.

Rocky is a classic. (yeah, no acting in that movie!) I also liked Cop Land. I also really like First Blood and think it is a very well made and a very underrated film.

Stallone does what he wants. He makes his movies. He makes his money. And, he seems to be having fun doing both.

gw

Post 2

Saturday, August 27, 2005 - 2:48pm

The story of how the first ROCKY got made is a classic tale of individualism. It helps that it's a wonderful film.

If you have not seen the first ROCKY, go see it.

Post 3

Sunday, August 28, 2005 - 4:22am

Indeed the first Rocky movie was great and it was a blueprint for many more sport-star-movies to come in the later years (not only the Rocky-series).
Of course, Sly isn't a big actor (as can be seen in Rambo, Cliffhanger, Driven and so on), but he is a successfull entrepreneur and the entertainment scene in Hollywood would be a shade bleaker without him.
The Governator and Sly are very similiar in this and it shouldn't be forgotten that despite his lack of acting talent he survived while (f.e.) the actor of Universal Soldier, Van Damme, drowned.

Also, I think he was exceptionally good in Get Carter. (And ridiculous in Daylight)

Post 4

Sunday, August 28, 2005 - 11:22am

A lot of his more recent stuff hasn't been of any real quality but his early 80's stuff was great.

And I don't think anything beats the first Rocky's ending from the part where he tells the promoter that the color of his trunks is wrong on the promotional poster and the promoter replies with "They're not really here to see you are they?" And how he responds with his "Go the distance" speech to Adrian,... and then follows through on his promise. The fact that he pushed Creed to the limit but didn't win is almost a more beautiful than if he would have. It acknowledged that though Rocky had made some mistakes in his life, was standing on the brink of never accomplishing anything but he was still in a position where he could do something amazing if he called on every last bit of strength within himself.

I need to see that movie again.

---Landon

Post 5

Monday, August 29, 2005 - 9:38am

Landon:
The promoter, Mr. Jorgenson, doesn't say "They're not really here to see you, are they?" Jorgenson says, in response to Rocky's objection to the wrongly colored shorts, "It doesn't really matter, does it? I'm sure you'll give them a great show." Jorgenson is not cynical, unsympathetic or a voice of the anti-hero. At first he's just the messenger for and coordinator of Apollo's stunt. In that sense, he's just some guy off the street who's setting up a brawl but doesn't know the underlying story. But look at him ringside during the fight chomping on his cigar: He's impressed by Rocky. And by the end, he's amazed: At the end of the fight, before the judges come in with their split decision that gives Apollo the win, he calls the match "the most outstanding exhibition of guts and stamina in the history of the ring."
"Rocky" is an amazing film. I have it memorized (obviously). So don't fuck with me when it comes to misquoting it! :-)

Post 6

Monday, August 29, 2005 - 2:04pm

Jamie, you're right I was quoting from (an obviously worse) memory and haven't seen the original in a while. And I do remember the part about him being impressed. I just liked the fact that he was kind of there at that point to prove that it was a stunt and he knew Rocky was going to keep it interesting but it's kind of like this will be the last time Rocky get's that underestimated in his life. My interpretation feel free to tell me if I got it wrong again ;)

But no arguement on Rocky being a great film.

---Landon

Post 7

Tuesday, August 30, 2005 - 8:24am

I'm sorry folks, I do not agree that Stallone is a terrible actor. I am surprised to see Objectivists repeating the normal crap from stock-in-trade movie reviewers. I think as a character actor he does his parts wonderfully. And I think that there are a lot of terrible movie reviewers out there whose names I don't seem to remember right now.

Stallone gets his message across and you sit enthralled during one of his movies, captivated with his situation.

A bad actor gets in the way of the story all the time by delivering lines in ways that are simply out of character. You can't get into his situation.

OK, Stallone is a hammy actor, but he plays hammy characters. I know several unashamedly hammy characters in real life.

(Can anyone imagine an actor portraying Linz listening to Lanza as described by Derek in his article on Linz? If the actor even approached that reality, he would be branded as a bad actor. btw - I have never seen this phenomenon, just going on what Derek reported - and I heartily approve of this kind of "hammy" in life.)

So what if Stallone would not be a good choice for Hamlet? Since when does being a good or bad actor mean that you cannot be specialized in less complex characters?

Stallone is one of the giants of Hollywood (yes, in action character acting also) and I am unashamedly a fan. His approach is simple. He laughs like a simple hero, suffers like a simple hero, fights like a simple hero, is tender like a simple hero, portrays love like a simple hero, gets mad like a simple hero, even eats like a simple hero.

I only see Stallone misfire when he abandons the action hero character (and not always misfire).

Art is a selective recreation of reality - and Stallone give us the essentials of an action hero in his acting approach. His acting is a wonderful example of selection and economy and hitting the character's art versus believability balance squarely in the middle ("art" being from the Romantic Realist view).

In real life, his quote above shows that he actually is a hero and has overcome great odds.

Bravo, Sylvester Stallone!

Michael

Post 8

Wednesday, August 31, 2005 - 6:37am

So, If he is a good actor, than he has made bad movie choices ;)

But I think he is on the same stage as Charly Sheen (despite his political record). Both are not the best actors, although I still think that Get Carter is one of his better movies.

He played a loving father in this movie and he did it great. His typical method of problem-solving stays the same (first punch then ask), but this also makes hiim loveable in this movie.

Post 9

Wednesday, August 31, 2005 - 12:38pm

Amigo,

You, disagreeing with someone? Never saw that coming! :-)

I don't think he's a bad actor. The people who blast him are mainly his acting peers.
And, Shakespearean actors get to much credit. They have the benefit of a very good writer. Sly as Hamlet? Nah. But, I wouldn't cast Derek Jacobi as an action hero either.

I know several unashamedly hammy characters in real life.

Easy big fella, yer hitting close to home! Ha!

Anyway, what is my definition of a bad actor? - Madonna!

I respect the hell outta her and what she has accomplished. (I am willing to overlook the Kabballah crap for now!) But, she can't act her way out of a wet paper bag.

gw

Post 10

Wednesday, August 31, 2005 - 2:52pm

Come on Gary,

Madonna did a great job with a mask and as a dude in Dick Tracy.

//;-)

Michael

Post 11

Wednesday, August 31, 2005 - 5:45pm

(In a very bad and very Madonna-esque, English accent)

Ol' Chap,

Quite the bloody Cheeky Fellow, arn't you. But, don't be bloody silly. It was a bloody stand in! How else can you explain the bloody quality of the bloody dialogue?

Tally Ho, it's time for bloody tea!

bloody gw

Post 12

Wednesday, August 31, 2005 - 5:53pm

I always dug her early work (music mainly). I'm just kind of sad that this example is the closest I'm ever going to see to a big screen version of the Question.

Depression

----Landon

Post 13

Wednesday, August 31, 2005 - 6:36pm

Landon,

Shhhh....don't tell MSK, but, I thought Dick Tracy wasn't half bad. It is one of the few times, I think, that the actors were above the writing. (I watch the writing in films like a........writer!) The cinematography was excellent and in general I liked it.

But, like I said, "Do not let MSK see this post!!! It would go straight to his head!

gw

P.S. - Amigo & Landon - I say the best written movies are Reservoir Dogs (nobody beats Tarentino for dialogue) and The Manchurian Candidate (The Frankenheimer version.) and Animal Crackers.

(Animal Crackers) -

Spaulding: What do you fellas get an hour?

Ravelli: For playing, we get-a ten dollars an hour.

Spaulding: I see. What do you get for not playing?

How say you?

(Edited by gary williams on 8/31, 6:54pm)

Post 14

Saturday, September 3, 2005 - 12:03am