I don't think so.
2007-01-27 10:34:10 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Arts & Humanities ➔ Theater & Acting
I agree he is not all that "convincing" to me. Perhaps if he tried some more serious roles, that would portray him a more of a real actor and less like a "comedian"
2007-02-01 04:38:32 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Tom Hanks got early recognition in "Bosum Buddies," Sally Field in "The Flying Nun." Will Smith did some good work early on in "Fresh Prince of Bel Air," and since then has shown great promise. I can even suffer through a movie like "Independence Day" because of his portrayal.
Tom Hanks did "Joe vs the Volcano," "Bachelor Party" and "Volunteers." Sally Field did a lot of early TV movie work and two "Smokey" movies. Both actors have a great body of work overall, and the statuettes to prove it.
I think Will is capable of great things. Yes, he's a good actor.
2007-01-28 12:25:02 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's entirely a matter of taste. To some people, he may be considered a good actor, but let's consider this for a moment. A good actor is a person who is able to act convincingly in any role and has not been typecast. A good example of this is Jame Judi Dench who has acted in roles as diverse as a James Bond character, a comedienne in a sitcom, a role in Shakespearean drama and comedy, stage roles and film and television, in comedy and drama. That is a good actor, one who is versatile and acceptable in the majority of roles.
2007-01-27 19:01:02 · answer #3 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's a matter of personal opinion. Some things he's done I've liked & others not so much. That's why the acting field is so versatile. Not everybody will like everyone or everthing they act in.
2007-01-27 19:05:55 · answer #4 · answered by Sandi Beach 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I suspect he's a very good actor, but his overwhelming commercial success has prevented him from really showing off his chops. You should see "Six Degrees of Separation," in which he was terrific (in a very un-blockbuster kind of flm), and, if you haven't already, you should see "The Pursuit of Happyness;" he's quite good in it, and it bodes well for things to come.
2007-01-28 08:20:29 · answer #5 · answered by shkspr 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I have a little bit of a bad taste about his acting because I saw Wild West or whatever that atrocity was called. I am sure he has improved, and he is up for an Oscar. after all.
2007-01-27 23:15:49 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
He's good enough for what he does.
He's likeable and fun to watch.
Not every actor needs to be an Olivier or Brando.
2007-01-27 20:45:11 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
He's an awful, one-dimensional actor, and I use the term 'actor' lightly!
2007-02-01 15:22:36 · answer #8 · answered by newyorkgal71 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
What he does is hard work. He makes it look easy. But don't be fooled; there is more to the man than meets the eye.
2007-01-27 22:16:02 · answer #9 · answered by Joe Schmo from Kokomo 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think he is, I like him.
2007-01-28 00:19:18 · answer #10 · answered by Cuit 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋