Oh, I'm sure there are worse, but one that sucks this much yet lands many parts....



That's the one expression he does, in role after role, regardless of emotion to be acted out, fury, sadness, joy, that's the one face he displays.
Or, hold on, has he ever had a role where he's supposed to be even slightly happy?

Oh dear, I have a feeling that some people might disagree with you there.

Keanu Reeves owns this award.

Co-owned by Nicolas Cage

Keanu Reeves and Nicolas Cage have been in some terrific films. The cinematic world would be poorer without them.

Being a star is not necessarily dependent on acting ability.

Stumpy Pepys wrote:
[quote]Keanu Reeves and Nicolas Cage have been in some terrific films. The cinematic world would be poorer without them.

No it wouldn't - but if you are being ironic I apologise

Tramp The Dirt Down wrote:


No I'm being serious. Richard E Grant can certainly act, but he only made one film I'd want to watch again.

Keanu, meanwhile, did two Bill & Ted films, Point Break and The Matrix. And Speed was alright.

Yeah. And Constantine - awesome film.

And Cage? Con Air!

The thread title specifies "actor" not "star", so Reeves must be at least close to the top of the list. He's probably kept off the top spot by the existence of Brendan Fraser.

I don't even know who that is in the picture in the OP

It's Andre Braugher...

who was brilliant in Homicide: Life on the Street and Men of a Certain Age.

So PPV must be trolling (or hasn't seen those. Which he should, they are both ace.)

ad hOkocim wrote:

Any nominee for the 'worst actor of all time' should be lacking in both ability and star quality.

Indeed, Matchenko. Braugher can exhibit a whole inner turmoil with one look and pained half-smile. If he had to play the "coulda been a contender" scene in On The Waterfront, he'd deliver the line straight and look at his brother to exhibit is emotions, instead of that gurning weepery perpetrated by the utterly overrated Method monkey Brando.

Men of a Certain Age is a pretty good show, by the way.

If we're using actor in the Graun style of meaning an actor of any gender, I'll nominate Ruby Keeler.

Matchenko wrote:


That's the sort of thing on TV I can't watch a minute if he's not in it, and not a second if he is.

G.Man wrote:


Well, that's my problem with him. All he does in scene after scene is exhibit inner turmoil. Someone brings him flowers because it's his birthday, he exhibits inner turmoil. Someone's making a joke, he exhibits inner turmoil. They might as well make a human size cardboard silouette of him and save money.

Tramp The Dirt Down wrote:


This was the first and, for a minute or so, only name that came to mind when I saw the thread title. If he ever knew how to act, he's clearly forgotten.

Second name that came to mind was Cuba Gooding Jr. If you doubt this, watch A Murder of Crows , where you can actually see "I have no fucking clue what I'm doing" written all over his face in almost every scene.

We're digging but we haven't got down to the Steven Seagals and Dolph Lundgrens of this world yet.

I've gone through entire films 'starring' SS looking only for the very slightest twitch of his features - to no avail. But the looking alone is worth it - it makes the films go much quicker.

Criticising Dolph Lundgren and Steven Seagal for their acting ability is like criticising a mule for its performance over the jumps at Kempton Park.

Its just not their role in the grand scheme of things.

Nicholas Cage used to be pretty good back before he started agreeing to appear in any old piece of shit.

Pauly Shore.