heath ledger was not mediocre. he was excellent in candy and brokeback mountain.
I just have to disagree. I haven't seen
Candy, but I have seen
Brokeback Mountain, and personally, that film is as mediocre as Ang Lee and Heath Ledger are in general. Heath could deliver a good performance, a great performance even (I liked his performance in
BM more than I liked the film), but he was also godawful in films such as
Casanova and
A Knight's Tale, which is something I think people like to forget, and has never been outstanding in any of the films I have seen (though granted, as per my own admission, I haven't seem 'em all). Perhaps he still had that ahead of him, but now we'll never know. Either way, putting him on a pedestal for a performance that really didn't deserve it as opposed to some other, arguably better (or should I say, outstanding
) performances that year is just unnecessary (this speaking of
The Dark Knight now.) I could go on about this for days, but whenever I do I'm attacked by my vicious
Brokeback Mountain &
The Dark Knight fan-buddies.
Johnny Depp - He hardly ever portrays real people but mostly over the top caricatures which imo is much much easier than having to actually emote.
I also want to some extent bring up Johnny Depp here. Don't get me wrong, I love him, I do, but he really does tend to only appear in these oddball, super-stylized and whacko roles, and sometimes I feel people find that fact alone as something that speaks for his range as an actor, whereas I see it as showing quite the contrary. The man
has range, but 64 Tim Burton movies isn't a sign of it.
Finally, I want to mention Mélanie Laurent in
Inglourious Basterds. Now don't get me wrong, I thought she was really very good in her role, certainly, but when Owen Gleiberman of EW.com called Diane Kruger's SAG nomination a snub of Mélanie's performance, he really pressed the wrong button. Mélanie had a much more dramatic, tragic and compelling role as the vengeful, deeply wronged Shosanna, and she certainly delivered some outstanding moments and generally great acting, but it was Kruger in her much less toted, less heart-rendering and more superficial role that really caught my eye. She was outstanding(!) throughout, and quite surprisingly so. Personally, I applaud the SAG for nominating the
right performance over the one that got more publicity.