Subject:
|
Re: How talentless IS...?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Mon, 23 Apr 2001 02:57:55 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
118 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Steve Lane writes:
> With all this anti - Micheal Crichton bile going around I can't help
> thinking that we should fix Steven Segal's wagon first. Is their a martial
> artist with less acting talent and a worse on-screen persona than him?
> I wouldn't like to see their films if their was. How do his "films" keep
> getting made? Does anyone PAY to see them? HAS anyone seen, ANY of them?
Steve, I think you posted to the wrong group. This group is for debates--NOT
undeniable truths! Segal is so unbelievably awful that the best thing you can
say about him is that Under Seige didn't suck quite as bad as his other films,
but Segal himself was still terrible. The only (and I mean only) redeeming
thing about Segal (and please correct me if I'm wrong) is that he doesn't kid
himself into thinking he's an actual actor.
For comparison, I present Kevin Costner as Exhibit A. Worse, Costner
imagines himself not only as an actor but as a worthwhile social commentator.
When did he last release a film that wasn't dreadful? Certainly not Revenge, or
A Perfect World, or The Postman, or Waterworld, or Tin Cup, or For the love of
the Game, or Robin Hood, or The Bodyguard, or 3000 Miles to Graceland, or JFK
(which wasn't especially foul--just an Oliver Stone agenda film). I'm thinking
Dances with Wolves, and even that was overlong. And how many baseball films
are we going to let this hack make before someone pulls the plug on him?!
/End of crazed late-night rant.
Dave!
|
|
Message has 4 Replies:
 | | Re: How talentless IS...?
|
| (...) You left out Producer and Director... (...) Hey now. The Postman wasn't *dreadful*. It could have been a LOT better, mind you, as anyone who read the book would attest, but it wasn't as bad a mangle of a good book as Starship Troopers was. (...) (23 years ago, 23-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | Re: How talentless IS...?
|
| (...) You also think the top less scene with Erika Eleniak was that movies greatest part huh? ,) Steven Segal, yes. Quite bad. But at least I saw the movies to the end, I don't know how many Jean Claude Van Dam movies I've turned off though... (...) (23 years ago, 23-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | Re: How talentless IS...?
|
| (...) The only good thing about Under Siege is Tommy Lee Jones. I should note that Segal is at least a better actor than the bimbo in that movie (damned with faint praise <g>). I liked Segal in Executive Decision - I got to cheer when he died! (...) (...) (23 years ago, 23-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | Re: How talentless IS...?
|
| Dave Schuler at orrex@excite.com wrote: <snip> (...) <snip> (...) <snip> Hmm, I rather like Robin Hood. I think all the actors in it are quite good. Bearing in mind that Kevin Costner isn't an "actor" ;^) ~Grand Admiral Muffin Head (23 years ago, 23-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | How talentless IS Steven Segal
|
| With all this anti - Micheal Crichton bile going around I can't help thinking that we should fix Steven Segal's wagon first. Is their a martial artist with less acting talent and a worse on-screen persona than him? I wouldn't like to see their films (...) (23 years ago, 22-Apr-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
14 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
