Top 100 Characters 2018 countdown has begun, Number 39 Will Blow Your MInd!!

[IronJimbo]

Black and white is fine Chas!

 

I've got a black and white copy of Avatar I sometimes watch.

[TomCruiseTop]

25 minutes ago, IronJimbo said:

I've got a black and white copy of Avatar I sometimes watch.

Seek help Jimbo. 

[chasmmi]

37 minutes ago, Jake Gittes said:

Do you think they mix in some chemicals into the black and white film stock that makes people act differently than they would in a color film? 

 

To be fair, the issue for me is more down to how much better editing, scores and so forth are now. In the 40s or 50s you kind of just had the actor on their own just giving the lines. (There may also be a factor of most black and white actors still being stage actors adapting to a new medium.)

 

But for me yeah, in older films I just find it harder to get over the idea that the person on screen is an actor delivering lines, whereas today even something like say... I don't know Ant Man. You have make up, effects, sound, editing, multiple cuts and so forth that make everybody feel like they are acting better than in older films, but its more just a case that they are given an awful lot more technical help to make them look good. 

[IronJimbo]

51 minutes ago, JamesCameronScholar said:

Seek help Jimbo. 

You should try it! New way yo watch Avatar and it holds up suprisingly well.

 

 

[Jake Gittes]

16 minutes ago, chasmmi said:

 

To be fair, the issue for me is more down to how much better editing, scores and so forth are now. In the 40s or 50s you kind of just had the actor on their own just giving the lines. (There may also be a factor of most black and white actors still being stage actors adapting to a new medium.)

 

But for me yeah, in older films I just find it harder to get over the idea that the person on screen is an actor delivering lines, whereas today even something like say... I don't know Ant Man. You have make up, effects, sound, editing, multiple cuts and so forth that make everybody feel like they are acting better than in older films, but its more just a case that they are given an awful lot more technical help to make them look good. 

Technical elements were perfectly well accomplished in the classic era. They just weren't necessarily in service of realism, or naturalistic performances, which is just as well. And I don't think things like music and effects have any real effect on acting unless it's a heavily effects-driven film, which most old films weren't so it's a moot point.

 

I'm also not sure there were many more stage actors crossing into film in that era than there are today. The medium was "new" early in the century. The switch to sound happened in the late '20s. No one was still adapting to anything 15-25 years after that. 

 

It sounds like for you today's actors just feel like they exist in a more natural environment onscreen, which, sure, but a) there's enough variety in classic movies to make room for plenty of performances that feel natural in their context too and b) if someone doesn't have it as their purpose to give a perfectly naturalistic performance that doesn't make them a bad actor. It's just a different approach. And there were a lot of approaches both then and now.

 

More importantly to what started this talk, Casablanca, which you profess to love, isn't some unicorn among classic B&W movies. It's better than most, sure, but I mean Bogart doesn't act much more or less naturally in it than he does in anything else he's made. Nothing in it aims to do something radically different than what most Hollywood films were doing at the same time. So I'm sure if you explore some more you'll find others to like. 

[DMan7]

4 hours ago, IronJimbo said:

You should try it! New way yo watch Avatar and it holds up suprisingly well.

 

 

I also heard there's a cut of Avatar where everyone's heads is digitally replaced by Cameron himself. Wild!

[IronJimbo]

32 minutes ago, DMan7 said:

I also heard there's a cut of Avatar where everyone's heads is digitally replaced by Cameron himself. Wild!

Link

[IronJimbo]

ch... chas?

[4815162342]

4 hours ago, IronJimbo said:

ch... chas?

 

There is no Chas, only Zuul.

[chasmmi]

Yeah, weekend was a bit hectic, my laptop is currently at a friends house, I will get it back Tuesday and will continue this at double speed from then. 

[baumer]

8 hours ago, 4815162342 said:

 

There is no Chas, only Zuul.

 

 I find Chas interesting because he's a great member of the site and because he sleeps above his covers... FOUR FEET above his covers. He barks, he drools, he claws!

[chasmmi]

Joint 74th - Belle - Paige O Hara - Beauty and the Beast 

 

One of Disney's early rebel princesses, she dared to wear blue in a pink girl's world.

 

 

Our first animated lady on the list I believe.  (Yep, I'm right as fish don't count). Belle is the only major Renaissance princess to make the list with Ariel and Jasmine both receiving only the one vote each and Nala... well lions cannot be princesses. 

 

Is she the highest rated animated character? Is she the highest Disney character? Is she the highest singing character? All these questions will be answered shortly...  

 

[chasmmi]

Joint 73rd - Catwoman - Michelle Pfeiffer - Batman Returns

 

Coincidentally, she also wore a cat suit for a lot of this role. 

 

 

I love the villains in Batman films, whether its the Burton films, The Nolan ones, or somewhere in between, they have a lot of personality and even the bad ones are memorable (Batman and Robin is a good example of this.). 

 

Pfeiffer is as good in this role as her surname is hard to spell. She is still my favourite Catwoman and the forum agrees as Hathaway's ended the vote in 382nd. How many Batman villains are still to come though?

 

 

 

 

 

[IronJimbo]

We are back!

 

Didn't vote for either but respectable, Belle especially.

[chasmmi]

Joint 72nd - Mary Poppins - Julie Andrews - Mary Poppins

 

Soon to be superceded by Emily Blunt in a few months time. 

 

 

IS she Disney's most iconic Live action character? Well I suppose it depends on what a Disney character is considered as being these days isn't it. Mary Poppins is one of those films I watched every couple of months as a child and know all the songs almost by heart (even the dreary birds one at the end). Even now when I see Julie Andrews I react Mary Poppins before I do her real name. 

 

This is the only Andrews character on the list. Maria finished in 201st.  Criminally, Van Dyke never even got a vote. 

 

[chasmmi]

Joint 71st - Marge Gunderson - Frances McDormand - Fargo

 

Her role in the failed sequel Nearcome did not do as well.

 

 

For the first time in 10 places we have a film I haven't seen.  But there are some good actors in that scene above and Marge is not the only one to receive votes from the forum public. Jerry however did not make the list, finishing in 343rd. 

 

As for the Coens... They maybe still have a character to two left to appear on this list. 

[chasmmi]

Joint 70th - James Bond - Daniel Craig - James Bond

 

The Best Blond Bond we have ever had.

 

 

Our first appearance from the Bond Franchise and it may or may not be our last. Craig took the Bond character in a new more realistic direction when he took over the role and is responsible for almost three good films in the role. He may be approaching the end of his tenure, but he has set a difficult bar for the next holder of the 007 license to live up to. 

 

As an aside, Q, M, and Moneypenny all received at least 1 vote each (although nowhere near the top 100), not a single villain was nominated though.

[Jake Gittes]

9 minutes ago, chasmmi said:

Joint 71st - Marge Gunderson - Frances McDormand - Fargo

 

For the first time in 10 places we have a film I haven't seen. 

Drop all this and go watch it then come back.

[Cap]

37 minutes ago, chasmmi said:

Soon to be superceded by Emily Blunt in a few months time. 

This is slander and reportable, Chas.

[TomCruiseTop]

The scenes when the Queen Alien beats James Bond.