Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bob Odenkirk as the father in the most recent Little Women. Good god, that was painful to watch. And I love him.

I admit he made almost no impression on me in that film, but I will see you a Bob Odenkirk and raise you Florence Pugh as Amy March. Even worse when her fake tan dyed hair self was paired with Timothee Chalamet as Laurie.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Worst ever? As in I can't watch this part of the movie and it's ruined for me? Andie McDowell 3 Weddings and a Funeral. No question. Such a shame.

Yes, THANK YOU. Can't stand her in general, but this was the worst. "Is it still raining? I hadn't noticed." Ugh.

The original choice for the role of Carrie was Jeanne Tripplehorn, but she had to drop out because of a death in her family.[10] Marisa Tomei and, reportedly, Sarah Jessica Parker, were also considered before Andie MacDowell was cast.[7] MacDowell took a 75% cut in her fee to appear, receiving $250,000 upfront, but due to the success of the film, she earned around $3 million.[11]

Anonymous wrote:Bob Odenkirk as the father in the most recent Little Women. Good god, that was painful to watch. And I love him.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Renee zelweger in Bridget Jones Diary. Those books were actually hilarious and now I’m embarrassed to have read them because she effed it up so bad.

Strongly disagree.

Yes, I loved her in BJD!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kevin Costner in anything

Wrong. Loved "Dances with Wolves".

Good God. I can't decide which was worse--his terrible acting or terrible directing.

+1 Thisis an epically bad take. Kevin Costner was surprisingly good in Bull Durham, but he’s a dreadful actor, and Dancing with Wolves was tied with Waterworld for the worst of the worst.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kevin Costner in anything

Wrong. Loved "Dances with Wolves".

Good God. I can't decide which was worse--his terrible acting or terrible directing.

Yeah, it only won seven Oscars, with another five nominations. What garbage.

But please, do tell us more. You're really putting that B- you got in the Intro to Film Studies class you took 25 years ago to good use.

Oh please. Goodfellas losing the Oscar to Dances with Wolves is one of the most embarrassing awards in Oscar history.

OK, so it won 6 Oscars and was nominated for another 6. Does that materially change the point?

No, because how many Oscars a film has received has nothing to do with whether or not it's a good film. There are whole lists of bad Oscar-winning and -nominated films, actors, etc.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kevin Costner in anything

Wrong. Loved "Dances with Wolves".

Good God. I can't decide which was worse--his terrible acting or terrible directing.

Yeah, it only won seven Oscars, with another five nominations. What garbage.

But please, do tell us more. You're really putting that B- you got in the Intro to Film Studies class you took 25 years ago to good use.

Oh please. Goodfellas losing the Oscar to Dances with Wolves is one of the most embarrassing awards in Oscar history.

OK, so it won 6 Oscars and was nominated for another 6. Does that materially change the point?

Anonymous wrote:Halle Berry in Monster’s Ball - not at all believable as a poor, downtrodden Black woman in the rural South
Sarah Chalke as the 2nd Becky in Roseanne - similar to Halle Berry. Her looks, speech and mannerisms didn’t fit in with the rest of the blue collar family.
Chloe Grace Moretz in the Carrie remake - they tried to make her look mousy but she was too pretty to play that character.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kevin Costner in anything

Wrong. Loved "Dances with Wolves".

Good God. I can't decide which was worse--his terrible acting or terrible directing.

Yeah, it only won seven Oscars, with another five nominations. What garbage.

But please, do tell us more. You're really putting that B- you got in the Intro to Film Studies class you took 25 years ago to good use.

Oh please. Goodfellas losing the Oscar to Dances with Wolves is one of the most embarrassing awards in Oscar history.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I dont get PP saying benedict cumberbatch in Star Trek is an example of white washing: Khan is a genetically engineered super human, so hard to say he should be played by any particular human race. He was played by Ricardo Montalban originally but RM was a European-Mexican (both parents from Spain) so as European as BC. Plus, since Khan is a genetically engineered being, again, you can’t really say that BC was taking a Latino role. He was great in the movie and really did seem to have the vibe of a young Khan as played by RM.

.

I'm the person who said Avatar and I agree with this. I wouldn't have put BC on that list.

Avatar was horrific -- terribly done and offensively whitewashed. It was unwatchable.

I'm the person that listed Benedict Cumberbatch. Don't get me wrong, I like him as an actor, but the character was Khan Noonian Singh, who was a Sikh Indian by heritage. They got away with Ricardo Montalban, because he was of mixed Mexican descent, so he at least was non-white enough to pass as an Asian Indian. But Cumberbatch is as white as can be. If you insist on casting a white actor, at least change the character to a white character. If you're going to leave the character be an Asian character, then cast an Asian actor or an actor that can pass for Asian.

For example, one of the other cases I criticized was Tilda Swinton as the Ancient One in Dr. Strange. At least in that one, they changed the character's background to be a Celtic mystic instead of a Buddhan Asian mystic. Although it made no sense that a Celtic mystic would be at a monastery in the Himalayas, but at least they made a change that justified why someone that was so pale was playing the role; they just changed the role to be non-Asian deliberately. Star Trek did not do that. They still left the name and history of the character the same and just white-washed it by casting a white actor.

Whether you like the portrayals or not by talented actors (and I am not denying that Tilda Swinton and Benedict Cumberbatch are both talented actors who performed well), the problem is that Hollywood continually takes Asian characters and refuses to give opportunities to actors of Asian descent. Asians are traditionally given roles as the antagonists, the humorous sidekicks, but rarely the lead or prominantly featured roles. The number of Asian actors that get featured roles are a tiny portion of the acting community. Hollywood needs to start opening up opportunities for Asian actors. At a minimum, just cast Asian characters with Asian actors.

I'm the one who initially flagged Avatar. I guess I'd classify them differently, because TS and BC did well in their roles, so while I actually agree with you that it would have been much better to cast talented Asian actors, I wouldn't say they resulted in "worst casting decisions ever."

Avatar, on the other hand, was a travesty. It took a whole Asian world and several extremely beloved characters and basically flat-out destroyed the whole thing. The movie is frequently on lists of "worst movies of all time." The casting was awful, and the movie was horrifically bad. That's why I think it's worse than either TS or BC for the purposes of OPs question.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I dont get PP saying benedict cumberbatch in Star Trek is an example of white washing: Khan is a genetically engineered super human, so hard to say he should be played by any particular human race. He was played by Ricardo Montalban originally but RM was a European-Mexican (both parents from Spain) so as European as BC. Plus, since Khan is a genetically engineered being, again, you can’t really say that BC was taking a Latino role. He was great in the movie and really did seem to have the vibe of a young Khan as played by RM.

.

I'm the person who said Avatar and I agree with this. I wouldn't have put BC on that list.

Avatar was horrific -- terribly done and offensively whitewashed. It was unwatchable.

I'm the person that listed Benedict Cumberbatch. Don't get me wrong, I like him as an actor, but the character was Khan Noonian Singh, who was a Sikh Indian by heritage. They got away with Ricardo Montalban, because he was of mixed Mexican descent, so he at least was non-white enough to pass as an Asian Indian. But Cumberbatch is as white as can be. If you insist on casting a white actor, at least change the character to a white character. If you're going to leave the character be an Asian character, then cast an Asian actor or an actor that can pass for Asian.

For example, one of the other cases I criticized was Tilda Swinton as the Ancient One in Dr. Strange. At least in that one, they changed the character's background to be a Celtic mystic instead of a Buddhan Asian mystic. Although it made no sense that a Celtic mystic would be at a monastery in the Himalayas, but at least they made a change that justified why someone that was so pale was playing the role; they just changed the role to be non-Asian deliberately. Star Trek did not do that. They still left the name and history of the character the same and just white-washed it by casting a white actor.

Whether you like the portrayals or not by talented actors (and I am not denying that Tilda Swinton and Benedict Cumberbatch are both talented actors who performed well), the problem is that Hollywood continually takes Asian characters and refuses to give opportunities to actors of Asian descent. Asians are traditionally given roles as the antagonists, the humorous sidekicks, but rarely the lead or prominantly featured roles. The number of Asian actors that get featured roles are a tiny portion of the acting community. Hollywood needs to start opening up opportunities for Asian actors. At a minimum, just cast Asian characters with Asian actors.

Were you born yesterday, sweetheart?
Casting directors are trying to cast the biggest start they can get for the smallest sum of money. No one knows - or cares - about a no-name 'Asian actor' and Cumberbatch is immensely popular.

Anonymous wrote:Diane Keaton in The Godfather

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I dont get PP saying benedict cumberbatch in Star Trek is an example of white washing: Khan is a genetically engineered super human, so hard to say he should be played by any particular human race. He was played by Ricardo Montalban originally but RM was a European-Mexican (both parents from Spain) so as European as BC. Plus, since Khan is a genetically engineered being, again, you can’t really say that BC was taking a Latino role. He was great in the movie and really did seem to have the vibe of a young Khan as played by RM.

.

I'm the person who said Avatar and I agree with this. I wouldn't have put BC on that list.

Avatar was horrific -- terribly done and offensively whitewashed. It was unwatchable.

I'm the person that listed Benedict Cumberbatch. Don't get me wrong, I like him as an actor, but the character was Khan Noonian Singh, who was a Sikh Indian by heritage. They got away with Ricardo Montalban, because he was of mixed Mexican descent, so he at least was non-white enough to pass as an Asian Indian. But Cumberbatch is as white as can be. If you insist on casting a white actor, at least change the character to a white character. If you're going to leave the character be an Asian character, then cast an Asian actor or an actor that can pass for Asian.

For example, one of the other cases I criticized was Tilda Swinton as the Ancient One in Dr. Strange. At least in that one, they changed the character's background to be a Celtic mystic instead of a Buddhan Asian mystic. Although it made no sense that a Celtic mystic would be at a monastery in the Himalayas, but at least they made a change that justified why someone that was so pale was playing the role; they just changed the role to be non-Asian deliberately. Star Trek did not do that. They still left the name and history of the character the same and just white-washed it by casting a white actor.

Whether you like the portrayals or not by talented actors (and I am not denying that Tilda Swinton and Benedict Cumberbatch are both talented actors who performed well), the problem is that Hollywood continually takes Asian characters and refuses to give opportunities to actors of Asian descent. Asians are traditionally given roles as the antagonists, the humorous sidekicks, but rarely the lead or prominantly featured roles. The number of Asian actors that get featured roles are a tiny portion of the acting community. Hollywood needs to start opening up opportunities for Asian actors. At a minimum, just cast Asian characters with Asian actors.

I'm the one who initially flagged Avatar. I guess I'd classify them differently, because TS and BC did well in their roles, so while I actually agree with you that it would have been much better to cast talented Asian actors, I wouldn't say they resulted in "worst casting decisions ever."

Avatar, on the other hand, was a travesty. It took a whole Asian world and several extremely beloved characters and basically flat-out destroyed the whole thing. The movie is frequently on lists of "worst movies of all time." The casting was awful, and the movie was horrifically bad. That's why I think it's worse than either TS or BC for the purposes of OPs question.

?? Avatar is the highest grossing film of all time.

You are mixing up 'Avatar' and 'Avatar The Last Airbender.' This discussion is about the latter.