Bad Movies With Great Actors

[Defshep]

Worfster's comment about Christopher Walken as a scene stealer caught my attention. I feel the same way. Hell, I even sat through Envy 'cause he was in it! So it got me thinking. Which bad flicks have you endured because of great actors/performances?

[noddin0ff]

Caddyshack

[Smokey]

That honor might go to 1995 film Heat starring Pacino and De Niro. It could have a great movie, but it got bugged down with romance that didn't belong there, and made movie too long to watch

[Woochifer]

That honor might go to 1995 film Heat starring Pacino and De Niro. It could have a great movie, but it got bugged down with romance that didn't belong there, and made movie too long to watch

Boy, aren't we impatient!

I couldn't disagree more. I thought that Heat was a brilliant movie because it did not take a formulaic approach to crime pictures. I appreciate that the movie didn't just string a bunch of hackneyed dialog together to link one action set piece to another. It took the necessary time to develop and draw out the individual characters. If you watch the special edition DVD, even the deleted scenes add a lot to an already well explored story narrative. The romance added a key element to making the De Niro character more fully drawn out. Without those human touches, he could've easily been nothing more than a typically one-dimensional baddie, and that would have totally sunk the movie.

If you think Heat is the worst of what Pacino and De Niro starred in, I invite you to spend some time with Author! Author! (Pacino) and The Adventures of Rocky and Bullwinkle (De Niro)!

[kexodusc]

What was that uber-crap film Johnny Depp did a few years back? The Ninth Gate?
Bleeechh...Man, he proved even he can stink up a theater.

[noddin0ff]

Oh jeez, I read the question wrong. I thought it was bad movies that have endured because of great acting. Caddyshack was made great by Bill Murray. With out him it would've come close to sucky, IMO.

What truly sucky movies have I endured...that had great actors?

Hannibal
Bad Santa (I really like Thorton)
Blood Work
Entrapment

I'm sure there's more suck in the world.

[Smokey]

Boy, aren't we impatient!

I couldn't disagree more. I thought that Heat was a brilliant movie because it did not take a formulaic approach to crime pictures. I appreciate that the movie didn't just string a bunch of hackneyed dialog together to link one action set piece to another. It took the necessary time to develop and draw out the individual characters.

I am not an anti romance guy, but when it intefer with a movie plot, IMO it take away the effectiveness of movie. They could have dealt with romance at beginning and have it sidelined with story, but they choose to do high a octane scene, leave it, follow by melodrama, high octane scene and then again follow with melodrama, and on and on.

We could have saparated action and romance stories in two movies and wouldn’t know either one is related to one another.

[Lexmark3200]

I totally agree that HEAT is a fantastic crime picture whose pacing is deliberate by Michael Mann and sets the entire feel of the film -- a wonderful film that I recently purchased the double disc Special Edition of.

My nod for the original question for the thread has to go to COPLAND, which was not a BAD film per se, but the great actors involved -- Stallone, DeNiro, Liotta, Keitel, Rappaport -- seemed like they had nothing to work with in terms of the screenplay.

Anyone else agree about COPLAND?