The worst actor working today

[axlryder]

Vin Diesel?
I mean, the guy can only play 1 character - Vin Diesel.

That is all he needs to play

Also, he can actually act. But no one pays him if he does. Fo realzies



I'm gonna go with... John Cusack, or that guy who hasn't actually acted in any film he's been paid to act in since American Beauty. The dad.
Fuck that guy

Kevin Spacey and John Cusack? Harsh. John Cusack is a weird one though. He's practically never won a significant award, but he's played leading man in a lot of good films. I think it's because, unlike Labeouf or Worthington, he doesn't really get in the movie's way. He has a decent on screen presence and can carry emotional tension well, but doesn't really steal the scenes that he's in. I liked 1408 and Grosse Point Blank (his performances included) way too much to call him a bad actor though.

Kevin Spacey has played in a lot of mediocre movies recently, but I think he's proved his acting chops too many times to really be called bad. Besides, I think it's obvious he can still act when you compares his performances in films like Margin Call, Men Who Stare at Goats and Horrible Bosses, IMO.

Thats the thing: the worst actor working today.
He WAS good. Even Cusack has made good films. But now, they make the WORST actors... Lebouf at least is TRYING. Spacey and cusack have consistently turned out worse performances than "bad" actors, and did it by not giving a fuck. This makes them all the worse in my opinion

Right, but Men Who Stare at Goats, Horrible Bosses and Margin Call are all very recent films, and Spacey turned out pretty good performances is those. John Cusack has also recently played in a few good movies, 1408, Hot Tub Time machine, Joe Strummer and I think The Raven is grossly underrated. It's not great, but it's deserves a better average score than what it got. More to the point, even their "bad" performances are really just okay. They're not Kristen Steward or Megan Fox bad. I think the exceptions might be War inc. and Father of Invention, which really were extremely shitty movies, but that's just one film for each of them and I mostly blame the script and screenplay for Father of Invention.

Also, and I should have made this more clear in the OP, I wasn't necessarily just referring to the actor's recent films, more so just trying to avoid people bringing up really old actors. I meant for people to take into account the entire filmography, but I also said the criteria is yours to determine so basing your judgement off more recent films is fair either way.

I didn't get to see MWSTG, Horrible bosses looked, sounded, and has been widely reported to be awful. Never even heard of the other. So maybe Spacey's turned around

But every Cusack movie you've listed was just terrible.
I am taking their tracklist into account, that's WHY they rate worse for me than Vampire Woodgirl and sweaty, well-used whore. Stewart and fox have never made a good film, nor performed well. Spacey and Cusack HAVE made good films, and done well in them, and have since made awful movies with worse performances than other, newer actors and actresses. So, today, they are WORSE than the others, because they will DISAPPOINT. Go into any film with Megan Fox. You can't be disappointed, because you know it will suck. You can only be disappointed she didn't get her tits out (Jennifer's Body made money because of this possibility), and not by the film or performance itself

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/horrible_bosses/

that's not widely reported to be horrible, sorry. I saw it, it was fine. Also, Margin Call got excellent reviews

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/margin_call/

1408 was not the least bit horrible. It was old fashioned, psychological horror in the style of Hitchcock. Admittedly, it didn't reach the same level as Hitchcock's best films and also didn't reach its potential, but it was still pretty damn good. http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/1408/ Again, good reviews. Also, again, I'd defend The Raven. It's not as bad as people say, and I think it's because many missed the point of the film. As for Hot Tub Time Machine, it was an homage/commentary/parody to/on/of schlocky 80's comedy. It did its job. Also got solid critical reviews. I can see why you wouldn't like it (I didn't like it that much), but as far as comedy goes you can do much, much worse. My point is that they're not bad actors. To call them bad just because you're disappointed by them (even though they're not even making bad films, just some mediocre ones) doesn't seem fair. It's your opinion, of course, so I can't tell you you're wrong, but your reasoning just seems silly. For instance, I'm not suddenly going to say that Derrick Rose is the worst there is if he starts missing some lay ups even though he's still playing way better than the actual bad players. That's doesn't make any sense.

 

[Atmos Duality]

Notable eh?

-Marky Mark
His hilariously dull, stupid performance in The Happening nearly set acting back 10 years, and everything I've seen of him since has been bland, mediocre garbage. And now they want him to make MORE movies? ACTION movies? WHY?! There should be no instance, no single moment on God's Green Earth that should make me PINE for more Steven Seagal.
But this Jason Statham wannabe has somehow done it.


-Megan Fox
She isn't an actress; I refuse to call her an actress. She's the anti-actress.
She's a pair of tits with a nice ass that you put on the screen to make everyone else's performance look better (like, say, Shia of the Beef). That's the one role she's been given, and yet she has somehow still managed to make the job of "Camera slut" BORING.

I do not exaggerate when I say that the strippers and hookers Uwe Boll hired to play female roles in his early movies, were better than ANY performance I've seen out of Megan Fox.

Still, she's no longer an issue. After mouthing off to Michael Bay, I doubt she's going to find employment in anything remotely notable ever again. Good fucking riddance.

Honestly, I'd rather take Tommy Wiseau any day of the week over either of those two borefests. His acting is a trainwreck, but it's so unbelievably hilarious and awkward that it's entertaining.

 

[Dark Prophet]

Kristen Stewart was ok in Runaways and Adventurealnd, I seriously don't understand what people expect her to do with the role of bella in twilight.
Sam Worthington was decent in Terminator Salvation and I rather liked him in The Debt and Last Night.

Worst actor as of now is Megan Fox, although I liked her in Transformers because she was just an ass and pair of nice tits in there but she totally murdered her roles in Jonah Hex and Passion Play, in the last one she also effectively killed the whole movie.

 

[TheSchaef]

-Marky Mark
His hilariously dull, stupid performance in The Happening nearly set acting back 10 years, and everything I've seen of him since has been bland, mediocre garbage. And now they want him to make MORE movies? ACTION movies? WHY?! There should be no instance, no single moment on God's Green Earth that should make me PINE for more Steven Seagal.
But this Jason Statham wannabe has somehow done it.

Not that you were going just on this one performance, but I don't think it's fair to use The Happening as a benchmark for, well, anything. That movie was so bad, it dragged down everything and everyone involved in it. Even John Leguizamo, who is a quality character actor, floundered in a role in which he seemed to be required to have no character at all. You know, kind of like the way Lucas directs everybody he works with.

 

[Atmos Duality]

Not that you were going just on this one performance, but I don't think it's fair to use The Happening as a benchmark for, well, anything. That movie was so bad, it dragged down everything and everyone involved in it. Even John Leguizamo, who is a quality character actor, floundered in a role in which he seemed to be required to have no character at all. You know, kind of like the way Lucas directs everybody he works with.

True. The Happening would have been a trainwreck without Marky Mark.

And yeah, I remember how Lucas strained himself to suck every last ounce of personality out of Natalie Portman, Yuan McGregor and Samuel Jackson for the Prequel Trilogy.

 

[userwhoquitthesite]

Vin Diesel?
I mean, the guy can only play 1 character - Vin Diesel.

That is all he needs to play

Also, he can actually act. But no one pays him if he does. Fo realzies



I'm gonna go with... John Cusack, or that guy who hasn't actually acted in any film he's been paid to act in since American Beauty. The dad.
Fuck that guy

Kevin Spacey and John Cusack? Harsh. John Cusack is a weird one though. He's practically never won a significant award, but he's played leading man in a lot of good films. I think it's because, unlike Labeouf or Worthington, he doesn't really get in the movie's way. He has a decent on screen presence and can carry emotional tension well, but doesn't really steal the scenes that he's in. I liked 1408 and Grosse Point Blank (his performances included) way too much to call him a bad actor though.

Kevin Spacey has played in a lot of mediocre movies recently, but I think he's proved his acting chops too many times to really be called bad. Besides, I think it's obvious he can still act when you compares his performances in films like Margin Call, Men Who Stare at Goats and Horrible Bosses, IMO.

Thats the thing: the worst actor working today.
He WAS good. Even Cusack has made good films. But now, they make the WORST actors... Lebouf at least is TRYING. Spacey and cusack have consistently turned out worse performances than "bad" actors, and did it by not giving a fuck. This makes them all the worse in my opinion

Right, but Men Who Stare at Goats, Horrible Bosses and Margin Call are all very recent films, and Spacey turned out pretty good performances is those. John Cusack has also recently played in a few good movies, 1408, Hot Tub Time machine, Joe Strummer and I think The Raven is grossly underrated. It's not great, but it's deserves a better average score than what it got. More to the point, even their "bad" performances are really just okay. They're not Kristen Steward or Megan Fox bad. I think the exceptions might be War inc. and Father of Invention, which really were extremely shitty movies, but that's just one film for each of them and I mostly blame the script and screenplay for Father of Invention.

Also, and I should have made this more clear in the OP, I wasn't necessarily just referring to the actor's recent films, more so just trying to avoid people bringing up really old actors. I meant for people to take into account the entire filmography, but I also said the criteria is yours to determine so basing your judgement off more recent films is fair either way.

I didn't get to see MWSTG, Horrible bosses looked, sounded, and has been widely reported to be awful. Never even heard of the other. So maybe Spacey's turned around

But every Cusack movie you've listed was just terrible.
I am taking their tracklist into account, that's WHY they rate worse for me than Vampire Woodgirl and sweaty, well-used whore. Stewart and fox have never made a good film, nor performed well. Spacey and Cusack HAVE made good films, and done well in them, and have since made awful movies with worse performances than other, newer actors and actresses. So, today, they are WORSE than the others, because they will DISAPPOINT. Go into any film with Megan Fox. You can't be disappointed, because you know it will suck. You can only be disappointed she didn't get her tits out (Jennifer's Body made money because of this possibility), and not by the film or performance itself

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/horrible_bosses/

that's not widely reported to be horrible, sorry. I saw it, it was fine. Also, Margin Call got excellent reviews

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/margin_call/

1408 was not the least bit horrible. It was old fashioned, psychological horror in the style of Hitchcock. Admittedly, it didn't reach the same level as Hitchcock's best films and also didn't reach its potential, but it was still pretty damn good. http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/1408/ Again, good reviews. Also, again, I'd defend The Raven. It's not as bad as people say, and I think it's because many missed the point of the film. As for Hot Tub Time Machine, it was an homage to schlocky 80's comedy. It did its job. Also got solid critical reviews. I can see why you wouldn't like it (I didn't like it that much), but as far as comedy goes you can do much, much worse. My point is that they're not bad actors. To call them bad just because you're disappointed by them (even though they're not even making bad films, just some mediocre ones) doesn't seem fair. It's your opinion, of course, so I can't tell you you're wrong, but your reasoning just seems silly. For instance, I'm not suddenly going to say that Derick Rose is the worst there is if he starts missing some lay ups even though he's still playing way better than the actual bad players. That's doesn't make any sense.

Widely reported by people I KNOW, who share my tastes, to be awful. I've also seen 30 minutes of it, and thought it sucked.
1408 WAS terrible. Every bit of it. And it DID reach its potential, because there is only so much potential to be had from something based on Stephen King did in five minutes to illustrate a point about writing formula.
Hot Tub Time Machine was not funny. Even once. When your movie is so cliche that I have literally seen every scene and joke play out in fucking cartoons, you fail to amuse me. It was not an homage, it was a reshoot.
I have not seen the raven. I have, however, seen commercials and trailers for it. Trailers that betray an idiotic premise and john cusack at his most miscast. And a fundamental logic flaw that negates the idiotic premise.
Your comparison is also not apt. Firstly, my position is that the two actors WERE performing more poorly than other, lower tier actors. Secondly, my assertion was that the prior quality of their work (again, more spacey then cusack) and the appalling LOW quality now make a movie that much LESS enjoyable. Your basketball player, on the other hand, cannot make a bad game WORSE because he fails to play well. The game is bad BECAUSE he plays poorly. Cusack and Spacey, on the other hand, can not only drag a good film down, but also make a bad film LOOK like it could be good, then fail to try to turn out a decent performance, so now you are let down AND watching a bad movie

 

[marioandsonic]

Nobody has said Shia Lebeouf yet?

Damn guys, I thought you were better than this...

I'm sure Lebeouf is a nice guy in real life, but every character he's played has made me want to punch him in the face.

 

[kasperbbs]

Tracy Morgan, i just can't stand the guy, whenever i see him in something he always plays the same exaggerated idiot, its so ridiculous and over the top that it's not even remotely funny. As for females.. I can't really think of any so i'll go with the one from twilight.

 

[tzimize]

Not sure if he has been mentioned but all other actors are oscar worthy in comparison to

HAYDEN CHRISTENSEN!

I loathe him and every movie he is in and every stone he steps on. My god he is awful, and not even in a funny way.

 

[Hatchet90]

For those people saying Adam Sandler, go see Punch Drunk Love by P.T. Anderson. While it certainly doesn't absolve the shit that Adam Sandler has done previously (Grown Ups, Jack and Jill, Billy Madison, 8 Crazy Nights), it shows that even the supposed worst actors can show depth under the right direction.

Also for those saying Nicholas Cage. The man was in Adaptation (where he's capable of playing two distinct twin personalities), Leaving Las Vegas (where he won an acting oscar), Moonstruck, Raising Arizona, Kick-Ass, Bad Lieutenant (a personal favorite), Matchstick Men, hell even Drive Angry was enjoyable at parts. Has the man been in some shitty movies? Hell yes he has, Ghost Rider, Knowing, and Next suck shit through a straw. But even at Nicolas Cage's worst (Wicker Man remake) the man is never boring, which means he can't possibly be the worst actor. It's for this reason that I wouldn't add Arnold Schwarzenegger to this list either. Sure the man may be by all definitions a "bad actor", but he's given us quotable and hilarious lines for the last 30 years. Plus, he's the god-damned Terminator.

My vote would go to actors who are truly boring, offering nothing new or interesting to the roles that they play. Gerald Butler and either Jennifer Aniston or Kristen Stewart (somewhat stereotypical choice) fit this requirement perfectly.

 

[axlryder]

Vin Diesel?in
I mean, the guy can only play 1 character - Vin Diesel.

That is all he needs to play

Also, he can actually act. But no one pays him if he does. Fo realzies



I'm gonna go with... John Cusack, or that guy who hasn't actually acted in any film he's been paid to act in since American Beauty. The dad.
Fuck that guy

Kevin Spacey and John Cusack? Harsh. John Cusack is a weird one though. He's practically never won a significant award, but he's played leading man in a lot of good films. I think it's because, unlike Labeouf or Worthington, he doesn't really get in the movie's way. He has a decent on screen presence and can carry emotional tension well, but doesn't really steal the scenes that he's in. I liked 1408 and Grosse Point Blank (his performances included) way too much to call him a bad actor though.

Kevin Spacey has played in a lot of mediocre movies recently, but I think he's proved his acting chops too many times to really be called bad. Besides, I think it's obvious he can still act when you compares his performances in films like Margin Call, Men Who Stare at Goats and Horrible Bosses, IMO.

Thats the thing: the worst actor working today.
He WAS good. Even Cusack has made good films. But now, they make the WORST actors... Lebouf at least is TRYING. Spacey and cusack have consistently turned out worse performances than "bad" actors, and did it by not giving a fuck. This makes them all the worse in my opinion

Right, but Men Who Stare at Goats, Horrible Bosses and Margin Call are all very recent films, and Spacey turned out pretty good performances is those. John Cusack has also recently played in a few good movies, 1408, Hot Tub Time machine, Joe Strummer and I think The Raven is grossly underrated. It's not great, but it's deserves a better average score than what it got. More to the point, even their "bad" performances are really just okay. They're not Kristen Steward or Megan Fox bad. I think the exceptions might be War inc. and Father of Invention, which really were extremely shitty movies, but that's just one film for each of them and I mostly blame the script and screenplay for Father of Invention.

Also, and I should have made this more clear in the OP, I wasn't necessarily just referring to the actor's recent films, more so just trying to avoid people bringing up really old actors. I meant for people to take into account the entire filmography, but I also said the criteria is yours to determine so basing your judgement off more recent films is fair either way.

I didn't get to see MWSTG, Horrible bosses looked, sounded, and has been widely reported to be awful. Never even heard of the other. So maybe Spacey's turned around

But every Cusack movie you've listed was just terrible.
I am taking their tracklist into account, that's WHY they rate worse for me than Vampire Woodgirl and sweaty, well-used whore. Stewart and fox have never made a good film, nor performed well. Spacey and Cusack HAVE made good films, and done well in them, and have since made awful movies with worse performances than other, newer actors and actresses. So, today, they are WORSE than the others, because they will DISAPPOINT. Go into any film with Megan Fox. You can't be disappointed, because you know it will suck. You can only be disappointed she didn't get her tits out (Jennifer's Body made money because of this possibility), and not by the film or performance itself

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/horrible_bosses/

that's not widely reported to be horrible, sorry. I saw it, it was fine. Also, Margin Call got excellent reviews

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/margin_call/

1408 was not the least bit horrible. It was old fashioned, psychological horror in the style of Hitchcock. Admittedly, it didn't reach the same level as Hitchcock's best films and also didn't reach its potential, but it was still pretty damn good. http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/1408/ Again, good reviews. Also, again, I'd defend The Raven. It's not as bad as people say, and I think it's because many missed the point of the film. As for Hot Tub Time Machine, it was an homage to schlocky 80's comedy. It did its job. Also got solid critical reviews. I can see why you wouldn't like it (I didn't like it that much), but as far as comedy goes you can do much, much worse. My point is that they're not bad actors. To call them bad just because you're disappointed by them (even though they're not even making bad films, just some mediocre ones) doesn't seem fair. It's your opinion, of course, so I can't tell you you're wrong, but your reasoning just seems silly. For instance, I'm not suddenly going to say that Derick Rose is the worst there is if he starts missing some lay ups even though he's still playing way better than the actual bad players. That's doesn't make any sense.

Widely reported by people I KNOW, who share my tastes, to be awful. I've also seen 30 minutes of it, and thought it sucked.
1408 WAS terrible. Every bit of it. And it DID reach its potential, because there is only so much potential to be had from something based on Stephen King did in five minutes to illustrate a point about writing formula.
Hot Tub Time Machine was not funny. Even once. When your movie is so cliche that I have literally seen every scene and joke play out in fucking cartoons, you fail to amuse me. It was not an homage, it was a reshoot.
I have not seen the raven. I have, however, seen commercials and trailers for it. Trailers that betray an idiotic premise and john cusack at his most miscast. And a fundamental logic flaw that negates the idiotic premise.
Your comparison is also not apt. Firstly, my position is that the two actors WERE performing more poorly than other, lower tier actors. Secondly, my assertion was that the prior quality of their work (again, more spacey then cusack) and the appalling LOW quality now make a movie that much LESS enjoyable. Your basketball player, on the other hand, cannot make a bad game WORSE because he fails to play well. The game is bad BECAUSE he plays poorly. Cusack and Spacey, on the other hand, can not only drag a good film down, but also make a bad film LOOK like it could be good, then fail to try to turn out a decent performance, so now you are let down AND watching a bad movie

You're still just throwing out your personal opinions without much criticism of the actual acting. I thought horrible bosses was okay. I've seen MUUUUCH worse films. I'm not going to argue the merits of it though, mainly because of the subjectivity of comedy. Same goes for hot tub time machine, while undoubtedly derivative (as is the majority of comedy), the premise was still amusing, the quality inoffensive and there was definitely as sense of meta awareness it carried that made it fairly watchable (assisted mostly by the film's intro). The Raven came off as more of a commentary on the genre than a straight faced film, so the premise itself took second fiddle to what the film was actually saying (in my mind), which made the film more watchable than just taking the whole thing at face value. Its problem was that it tried to be too many things, and ultimately failed at its superficial goals and belied the film's real meaning.

You say 1408 was terrible but that opinion is not reflected by the majority of professional critics. Most importantly, Cusack put in a believable performance and managed to create drama and intensity without hamming it up too much. His acting progressed through the story in a logical way (embodying the stages of grief just fine) and you are literally the only person I know who would put that performance on the same level as the worst of the worst. The only part I really disliked was the ending, and the alternative "real" ending remedied that significantly, though still came off as hollow. Whether or not the film itself is derived from a brief short story is irrelevant. It's like saying Will Smith is a shitty actor because I am Legend is a bastardization of the written source (though I don't think Cusack's performance is on the same level as Will's)

Of course your position still makes little logical sense, as you're taking the "objective" quality of an actor and saying their work is somehow diminished by your own personal disappointment. I could just as easily saying that Derrick Rose playing "poorly" is all the more frustrating and disappointing because he showed so much promise and skill earlier. More importantly, even in the roles you claim are terrible, they still show a basic understanding of inflection/delivery, emotional tension, and character progression. The same can not be said of many other actors getting thrown around in this thread. I can at least understand why people mention Cage; he's played in a LOT of definite shit recently where he just alternates between crazy and bored. Also, your last point is almost contradictory to your earlier complaining against the films in question, as you made it sound like the films themselves were fundamentally flawed (unfunny jokes, entirely derivative, poor, stretched out premise), not the performance of the actors. Of course I'd disagree with you on those accounts too, but it doesn't seem like you have a very solid platform for finding these actors to be as remarkably bad as you claim.

When comparing all this to the likes of, say, Katherine Heigl

 

[Fleetfiend]

Also for those saying Nicholas Cage. The man was in Adaptation (where he's capable of playing two distinct twin personalities), Leaving Las Vegas (where he won an acting oscar), Moonstruck, Raising Arizona, Kick-Ass, Bad Lieutenant (a personal favorite), Matchstick Men, hell even Drive Angry was enjoyable at parts. Has the man been in some shitty movies? Hell yes he has, Ghost Rider, Knowing, and Next suck shit through a straw. But even at Nicolas Cage's worst (Wicker Man remake) the man is never boring, which means he can't possibly be the worst actor.

Yeah, as bad as some of his movies have been, he's been in some really good ones as well. I, for another, really enjoyed Adaptation.

 

[Hatchet90]

You're still just throwing out your personal opinions of these films. I thought horrible bosses was okay. I've seen MUUUUCH worse films. I'm not going to argue the merits of it though, mainly because of the subjectivity of comedy. Same goes for hot tub time machine, while undoubtedly derivative, the premise was amusing and their was definitely as sense of meta awareness it carried that made it fairly watchable (assisted mostly by the films intro). The Raven came off as more of a commentary on the genre than a straight faced film, so the premise itself took second fiddle to what the film was actually saying (in my mind), which made the film more watchable than just taking the whole thing at face value. It's problem was that it tried to be too many things, and ultimately failed at its superficial goals and belied the films real meaning.

You say 1408 was terrible but that opinion is not reflected by the majority of professional critics. Most importantly, Cusack put in a believable performance and managed to create drama and intensity without hamming it up too much. His acting progressed through the story in a logical way (embodying the stages of grief just fine) and you are literally the only person I know who would put that performance on the same level as the worst of the worst. Whether or not the film itself is derived from a brief short story with other is irrelevant. It's like saying Will Smith is a shitty actor because I am Legend is a bastardization of the written source (though I don't think Cusack's performance is on the same level as Will's)

Of course your position still makes little logical sense, as you're taking the "objective" quality of a piece of work and saying it is somehow diminished by your own personal disappointment. I could just as easily saying that Derrick Rose playing "poorly" is all the more frustrating and disappointing because he showed so much promise and skill earlier. More importantly, even in the roles you claim are terrible, they still show a basic understanding of inflection/delivery, emotional tension, and character progression. The same can not be said of many other actors getting thrown around in this thread.

To put in my two cents about John Cusack... High Fidelity is by far one of my favorite movies of all time and the reason it was so good was because John Cusack was so incredibly believable in the role of Rob Gordon, and Jack Black being in the movie certainly didn't hurt either.

 

[CianTheMighty]

Also, I don't hate Mr. Cera, but he plays whiny so well that I feel like he got some real world practice from somewhere.

That's the point. He's not actually acting. At least, he is in the sense that this stuff he'd doing and the thing's he's saying aren't true. The emotional message is constant and coming from a real place.

Is that good acting? Or is it good lying? (There is a difference)

 

[userwhoquitthesite]

Le snip

You asked a question. I answered it. Stop getting upset I don't agree with you.
/new thread

 

[axlryder]

Le snip

You asked a question. I answered it. Stop getting upset I don't agree with you.
/new thread

Upset? We're having a conversation, broskie. I'm merely questioning your position because I find it questionable. No need to go making ridiculous accusations of people of getting upset just because you want to bail out the conversation.

 

[DocMcCray]

Edit: Oh, I forgot to say a female. Eva Mendes, no question about it. Never good in anything. Ever. I'd say (in fact, I have said) she's worse than Megan Fox, really.

Oh snap! Ninja'd in the 3rd post!

As for the worst guy, as much as I'd love to say anyone from the Twilight series, I have neither seen those movies or anything they've done outside the series.

So...Hayden Cristiansen. Yep, Anakin sucked big balls in terms of acting and his other efforts were even worse.

 

[userwhoquitthesite]

Le snip

You asked a question. I answered it. Stop getting upset I don't agree with you.
/new thread

Upset? We're having a conversation, broskie. I'm merely questioning your position because I find it questionable. No need to go making ridiculous accusations of people of getting upset just because you want to bail out the conversation.

And I've explained my position. And you've responded "nu-uh!" and repeated your prior statement. And I'm bored now. Also, having read the rest of your post now, I have to add: will smith is a shitty actor too.

 

[axlryder]

Le snip

You asked a question. I answered it. Stop getting upset I don't agree with you.
/new thread

Upset? We're having a conversation, broskie. I'm merely questioning your position because I find it questionable. No need to go making ridiculous accusations of people of getting upset just because you want to bail out the conversation.

And I've explained my position. And you've responded "nu-uh!" and repeated your prior statement. And I'm bored now. Also, having read the rest of your post now, I have to add: will smith is a shitty actor too.

Actually, I made new points, and you had yet to really reinforce your own position with any kind of decent reasoning, basically just saying they're bad because you think they're bad and you somehow try and equate derivative humor to bad acting. Again, baseless accusations of people getting upset based around your own desire to bail are silly. If you no longer want to defend your position it's not as though finishing off with a childish personal attack is somehow going to make you seem more informed or intelligent.

Also, you can hate on Will Smith all you want, but given the quality of your reasoning so far I doubt too many people are going to take your opinion seriously (unless you're talking about the POS Seven Pounds). He's really not a great actor, though, just decent and pretty hit or miss.

 

[rekabdarb]

'It's my fault Kingdom of the crystal skull was terrible.'
No, fuck you Lebooof, you're part of why Kingdom of the Crystal Skull was terrible, the best actor in the world couldn't have saved that piece of crap.

I fixed it for you

There are only 3 indiana jones movies. Not four.

And to give an actual answer. The worst actor... From an objective standpoint: Almost any porn 'actor' =D In all seriousness The plethora of male actors who are taking over the 'action' star roles. And then all the females who are taking over the 'hot' role. Also Vince Vaughn. If you count 'today'

Personal standpoint: Olivia Wilde. She doesn't show emotion, much like kristen stewart. However everyone loves Olivia cause she's 'hot' Much like scarlet johansson (sp?)

But my opinion doesn't matter, there are 11 pages and noone maybe besides the guy i'm quoting is gonna read this.