cinemafan97
Sophomore
@cinemafan97
Posts: 102
Likes: 13
|
Post by cinemafan97 on Jan 27, 2019 20:54:15 GMT
Who's the better actor and why?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 27, 2019 21:04:20 GMT
Brad Pitt might be more versatile. It's hard to know for sure. They're both good actors, and they're both better than they've given credit for because they also happen to be super-hunks...mostly.
Tom Cruise seem to me pretty passionate about most things. He's very entertaining when he puts his best foot forward. He's not always a great actor, but when he sets his mind to it, he can be a lot of fun.
Brad Pitt is also quite believable. He's better at holding down a side character I would say. He can go in and out of being a lead-man, whereas I think Cruise is most comfortable as a lead man.
They're both good, but sometimes they lack a bit in range. Tom Cruise hasn't had as many good movies lately, and it still seems to me like it's not for lack of trying. I can never really tell if he's limited by the role or himself. Even in Eyes Wide Shut, I had difficulty believing sex was so bewildering a concept to him. He had two children, and he was a doctor, and married to Nicole Kidman, but he walks around like sex is a foreign concept.
It's a toss-up for me.
|
|
|
Post by James on Jan 27, 2019 21:09:53 GMT
Brad Pitt
|
|
|
Post by gbone on Jan 27, 2019 21:22:50 GMT
Pitt , for his spot on Italian accent in Inglorious Basterds.
Arrivederci !!
|
|
|
Post by movielover on Jan 27, 2019 21:27:41 GMT
I prefer Tom Cruise, but they're both good actors.
|
|
|
Post by moviebuffbrad on Jan 27, 2019 22:39:36 GMT
Cruise has more charisma, but Pitt has more versatility and can sink into a role easier to where you're not constantly thinking "that's Brad Pitt".
|
|
|
Post by hi224 on Jan 28, 2019 0:07:06 GMT
Who's the better actor and why? Ill say Cruise actually.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 28, 2019 4:03:03 GMT
I prefer Pitt by quite a bit but I do enjoy Cruise's films as well.
Pitt is at least mixing it up a lot more than just doing action films . He actually stars in more thought provoking films over the years . I know everyone is hyped for Once Upon a Time in Hollywood (as am I ) but there's another Pitt film coming out this year called Ad Astra (sci fi film directed by James Gray) that sounds really intriguing too.
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Jan 28, 2019 4:04:33 GMT
I prefer Pitt by quite a bit but I do enjoy Cruise's films as well. I know everyone is hyped for Once Upon a Time in Hollywood (as am I ) but there's another Pitt film coming out this year called Ad Astra (sci fi film directed by James Gray) that sounds really intriguing too. I know right? It seems people forgot about that one.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 28, 2019 4:15:00 GMT
I actually prefer Tom Cruise, but I feel like Brad Pitt has more range. Tom is pretty much the same guy in every film. I will say that he brings a certain charm to his roles that Pitt doesn't. For example, I don't think Pitt could have pulled of the vampire Lestat the way Tom did.
|
|
|
Post by lenlenlen1 on Jan 28, 2019 4:44:05 GMT
Its hard to say because I actually think of them both as being the same "type"; Good looking leading men who stay within a certain range in terms of the roles they take. If you really think about it most of the roles they've done you could interchange the actor and it wouldn't make too much difference.
As a perfect example think of Interview with the Vampire. If they had switched roles you'd probably have exactly the same movie.
@marilynluvstigger I guess we disagree on that one. lol
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 28, 2019 4:50:03 GMT
Its hard to say because I actually think of them both as being the same "type"; Good looking leading men who stay within a certain range in terms of the roles they take. If you really think about it most of the roles they've done you could interchange the actor and it wouldn't make too much difference.
As a perfect example think of Interview with the Vampire. If they had switched roles you'd probably have exactly the same movie.
@marilynluvstigger I guess we disagree on that one. lol Totally. I don't think Pitt could have brought the same flair to Lestat that Cruise did. That said, I don't think Cruise could have played the nuanced character Pitt did in Meet Joe Black
|
|
|
Post by lenlenlen1 on Jan 28, 2019 5:00:03 GMT
Its hard to say because I actually think of them both as being the same "type"; Good looking leading men who stay within a certain range in terms of the roles they take. If you really think about it most of the roles they've done you could interchange the actor and it wouldn't make too much difference.
As a perfect example think of Interview with the Vampire. If they had switched roles you'd probably have exactly the same movie.
@marilynluvstigger I guess we disagree on that one. lol Totally. I don't think Pitt could have brought the same flair to Lestat that Cruise did. That said, I don't think Cruise could have played the nuanced character Pitt did in Meet Joe Black We're gonna have to disagree again. Meet Joe Black was one of the biggest piles of dreck ever and the only thing Brad Pitt brings to that role are angelic good looks. He was so good looking in that movie that it was almost hard to look at him, and I'm hetero!
The only reason that movie made any money at all was because the Phantom Menace trailer was playing ahead of it. LOL. Pitt slept walked through that movie. I think you're looking back on that film through rose tinted glasses.
I was always a little curious as to why Tom Cruise even wanted the role of Lestat, as it was a supporting role. The main role is Louis, as he is in more of the story (in the movie AND the book) and is the title vampire who is being "interviewed". Lestat only takes on greater stature in the 2nd and further books. But in the 1st its all about Louis.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 28, 2019 5:07:41 GMT
Totally. I don't think Pitt could have brought the same flair to Lestat that Cruise did. That said, I don't think Cruise could have played the nuanced character Pitt did in Meet Joe Black We're gonna have to disagree again. Meet Joe Black was one of the biggest piles of dreck ever and the only thing Brad Pitt brings to that role are angelic good looks. He was so good looking in that movie that it was almost hard to look at him, and I'm hetero!
The only reason that movie made any money at all was because the Phantom Menace trailer was playing ahead of it. LOL. Pitt slept walked through that movie. I think you're looking back on that film through rose tinted glasses.
I was always a little curious as to why Tom Cruise even wanted the role of Lestat, as it was a supporting role. The main role is Louis, as he is in more of the story (in the movie AND the book) and is the title vampire who is being "interviewed". Lestat only takes on greater stature in the 2nd and further books. But in the 1st its all about Louis.
That's the point in Meet Joe Black, though. He isn't human, so wasn't supposed to have emotional depth. I feel like Pitt played it perfectly, and Cruise would not have been able to stop himself from letting his crazy show. It works for him in most roles. I love the film, but it was one of my grandmother's favorites, so that may be why. Lestat was the heart of that film. The end scene when he's complaining about having listened to Louis whine for centuries was pretty much how I felt about that character. Tom's crazy totally worked for Lestat. It might be my favorite role from him.
|
|
|
Post by lenlenlen1 on Jan 28, 2019 5:22:20 GMT
We're gonna have to disagree again. Meet Joe Black was one of the biggest piles of dreck ever and the only thing Brad Pitt brings to that role are angelic good looks. He was so good looking in that movie that it was almost hard to look at him, and I'm hetero!
The only reason that movie made any money at all was because the Phantom Menace trailer was playing ahead of it. LOL. Pitt slept walked through that movie. I think you're looking back on that film through rose tinted glasses.
I was always a little curious as to why Tom Cruise even wanted the role of Lestat, as it was a supporting role. The main role is Louis, as he is in more of the story (in the movie AND the book) and is the title vampire who is being "interviewed". Lestat only takes on greater stature in the 2nd and further books. But in the 1st its all about Louis.
That's the point in Meet Joe Black, though. He isn't human, so wasn't supposed to have emotional depth. I feel like Pitt played it perfectly, and Cruise would not have been able to stop himself from letting his crazy show. It works for him in most roles. I love the film, but it was one of my grandmother's favorites, so that may be why. Lestat was the heart of that film. The end scene when he's complaining about having listened to Louis whine for centuries was pretty much how I felt about that character. Tom's crazy totally worked for Lestat. It might be my favorite role from him. Don't get me wrong. I love Tom Cruise as Lestat and I think he crushed it. And you're right that Louis constant whining was annoying.
Its a failure on Pitt's part in both those roles that he doesn't grow as a character. In both movies he is the same at the end as he is in the beginning. And interestingly enough he is "not human" in both. In Interview he's supposed to make peace with his vampirism or at least come to terms with it, and in Joe Black he's supposed to go from unfeeling to totally caring as he falls in love.
If you want to see a role, by Cruise, where the character goes through that kind of change of depth consider Born on the Fourth of July and Magnolia.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 28, 2019 5:24:35 GMT
That's the point in Meet Joe Black, though. He isn't human, so wasn't supposed to have emotional depth. I feel like Pitt played it perfectly, and Cruise would not have been able to stop himself from letting his crazy show. It works for him in most roles. I love the film, but it was one of my grandmother's favorites, so that may be why. Lestat was the heart of that film. The end scene when he's complaining about having listened to Louis whine for centuries was pretty much how I felt about that character. Tom's crazy totally worked for Lestat. It might be my favorite role from him. Don't get me wrong. I love Tom Cruise as Lestat and I think he crushed it. And you're right that Louis constant whining was annoying.
Its a failure on Pitt's part in both those roles that he doesn't grow as a character. In both movies he is the same at the end as he is in the beginning. And interestingly enough he is "not human" in both. In Interview he's supposed to make peace with his vampirism or at least come to terms with it, and in Joe Black he's supposed to go from unfeeling to totally caring as he falls in love.
If you want to see a role, by Cruise, where the character goes through that kind of change of depth consider Born on the Fourth of July and Magnolia.
Those are both great films.
|
|
|
Post by mslo79 on Jan 28, 2019 7:10:38 GMT
Cruise
his filmography alone put him above everyone if you ask me overall when all things are considered like screen presence/movie quality etc.
p.s. I like Pitt but Cruise is definitely the all around better choice.
|
|
|
Post by twothousandonemark on Jan 28, 2019 7:33:36 GMT
Pitt is the finer actor I think, yet Cruise is by far the more commanding on-screen presence. I'd have to say TC is top 5-10 all time for that. Collateral was f'n excellent.
Pitt though can find his strongest lane in stuff like Jesse James & The Big Short.
|
|
|
Post by charzhino on Jan 28, 2019 10:29:58 GMT
Tom Cruise hasn't had as many good movies lately, and it still seems to me like it's not for lack of trying. I can never really tell if he's limited by the role or himself. Even in Eyes Wide Shut, I had difficulty believing sex was so bewildering a concept to him. He had two children, and he was a doctor, and married to Nicole Kidman, but he walks around like sex is a foreign concept. Really? In the last 4 years hes done American Made, 2 Mission Impossibles and Edge of Tomorrow. 2 bad films in The Mummy and Jack Reacher. 5 outta 6 aint bad
|
|
|
Post by Winter_King on Jan 28, 2019 12:03:35 GMT
I like both but like some have said: Brad Pitt has more range so I'm going with Brad Pitt.
That being said in the only movie they starred together Tom Cruise kills it. I can't see anyone else as the brat prince.
|
|