The most immediately noticeable thing about the chart is that the collective list, yours, is more star driven and the individual one has more quirk. But that's the nature of individual versus collective I suppose. Plus, I get to whittle away to create a whole structure and you get one vote (it would be cool to see how your list would be different if you got to "grade" each candidate the way I do but my goodness, I shudder to think how complicated that would get.)
Two more things: First, I think it's worth noting that if my list were made in 2006 Meryl Streep would undoubtedly have placed higher given her dazzling return to form and ubiquity. Second, the biggest difference in the charts is the fate of Naomi Watts who readers like a lot more than I do. I was entranced for Mulholland Drive but I've been distancing myself since (though I did think she was swell in King Kong. You can see the complete top 100, both versions, here.
Posts
51 comments:
glad to see that your personal bias against naomi watts which is of course eggs on your face now,is confirmed.
it's only egg on my face if i'm wrong. and since i never am ;)
I am placing a link to this blog on my own. (filmaddicts.blogspot.com/) hope you dont mind. . .
Of course, there would be more discrepincies (er, spelling?) but because we were all working from the names on your list...
I know my Top 10 would be something like:
1. Nicole Kidman
2. Cate Blanchett
3. Scarlett Johansson
4. Chloe Sevigny
5. Patricia Clarkson
6. Toni Collette
7. Naomi Watts
8. Kerry Armstrong
9. Joan Allen
10. Diane Lane
With spots possibly going to Ziyi Zhang, Gwyneth Paltrow, Kate Winslet and Kirsten Dunst.
Or... i dunno.
that's also a good point, Glenn. The most glaring omission from my top 100 would probably be Judi Dench. But I'm not as wild about her as others. She still would've made the top 100 had Mrs Henderson & Pride & Prejudice come out before the list was made (so what I'm saying is it's very possible she'll be in the list at decade's end.
The thing I really don't understand is how Zeta-Jones made it to #4. How do all those people think she's better than Kidman, Streep, Moore, Blanchett, Winslet, Pfeiffer, Allen, etc.
And people from their own countries have their own actresses. Like, My own Top 100 would definitely include people like Kerry Armstrong, Daniella Farinacci and Rachael Blake but most people wouldn't have even of heard of these people.
Other people that you didn't include but others probably would )at least one or two): Audrey Tautou, Jennifer Connolly, Maria Bello, Hilary Swank, Keira Knightley and Sandra Bullock are the first that come to mind.
You really should see The Cooler before the next chart (ya know, in 5 years).
To be honest, when I IMDbed her I found that she mad way more stuff than i thought. Mostly Chicago, Traffic, Intolerable Cruelty and High Fidelity.
But, yeah, those sort of oddities happen from time to time.
you admitted it in your summary, didn't you? egg on your face.
you're of course wrong whether you admit it or not and your readers have told you so. :)
but... he doesn't like Naomi. Just cause his readers like her doesn't mean he has egg on his face, it just means readers like her more than he does.
That seems pretty standard on the Internet.
yeah, Maria Bello I'm POSITIVE would have made the list had I seen more. I see 100ish a year but even then you miss some people. I love her lots right now so she's definitely rising up. (same thing with Keira... didn't use to like her but P&P tipped me into the thumbs up. we'll seee if itlasts. Bullock i have no use for. Swank makes me ill --as everyone knows)
Audrey Tatou is beautiful but I fail to see what's so special otherwise. Amelie is all about the direction and cinematography and she is like the plaything of the technical bravado. or at least that's the way i see it. Cute as a button though.
But at any rate: it's a personal list. If I included every big star it would indicate that i had no personal feelings/opinions of my own in which case --why make a list? why exist?
:)
My Top Five:
1) Michelle Pfeiffer
2) Cate Blanchett
3) Isabelle Adjani
4) Kate Winslet
5) Jessica Lange
Mine, just to state I still read your blog (but I don't care much about actress worshipping):
1 - Charlotte Rampling
2 - Kate Winslet
3 - Julianne Moore
4 - Maggie Cheung
5 - Nicole Kidman
6 - Zhang Ziyi
7 - Miranda Richardson
8 - Samantha Morton
9 - Hilary Swank
10 - Scarlett Johansson
Something like that.
- cal roth
My Top 10 (Aughts ONLY):
1 Meryl Streep
2 Kate Winslet
3 Judi Dench
4 Nicole Kidman
5 Cate Blanchett
6 Patricia Clarkson
7 Samantha Morton
8 Joan Allen
9 Laura Linney
10 Toni Collette
Rob
I agree that having only stars in a Top 100 would lose all of the character. For me, though, most of my personal Top TEN would be stars (and would look something like this):
1. Nicole Kidman
2. Meryl Streep
3. Kate Winslet
4. Scarlett Johansson
5. Cate Blanchett
6. Laura Linney
7. Catherine Zeta-Jones
8. Julianne Moore
9. Marcia Gay Harden
10. Diane Keaton
Annette Bening & Zhang Ziyi would round out the rest of the dozen, and I suspect both will have fairly healthy second halves of the decade.
cal --the actor/actress worship will conclude (at least for the time being in this intensity) next week and I'll be on to other movie things. who knows what but still...
On the Catherine Zeta-Jones thing: I don't actually remember who I voted for because it was a tough choice and I just went with somebody in the end, but I actually did briefly consider Zeta-Jones. She just stood out to me somehow, I loved her in Chicago and like her a lot in other things. I know I didn't pick her, but I think I can understand why other people might have.
Yes, similarly amazed that CZJ placed so highly, but I can't tear my eyes off what she's doing whenever she's on screen, so I'm quietly pleased she placed that high.
Rob
Well, it's true, CZJ does have major gonzo screen presence (I loved her in Traffic as well as Chicago), but it's the lack of range that irks me. That and that she just seems spoiled and catty as a person.
Nathaniel, if you could go back, would you flip and give Nicole the 2001 gold medal instead of Naomi? And/or give Lynch the award instad of Baz? Just curious. But you can't go back, so it doesn't matter. History is foever ;
Nat, have you seen Dirty Pretty Things? Because it'll most likely convert you to Tautou-loving. It did for me.
If I could go back to 2001 Nicole would indeed take the Gold. But Ewan and Baz would lose theirs. Sad but true. I still love Moulin Rouge! in great heaping helpings but i would have to go Kidman / Wilkinson / Lynch for the golds and the wealth would be spread.
Ewan would lose!? Whoa. Well, I guess I understand. But many, many people (including myself) think Ewan was much better than Nicole in MR!. But her perf grows on my every time I see it, and when you add in her Others work, I think she is worthy of the gold... especially now that in retrospect, it becomes clear that Lynch was at least as responsible for Naomi's Mulholland perf than she herself was.
Naomi still wins for me, but Ewan was never my #1. He always felt upstaged by Kidman and Broadbent. My gold for men that year went to Anthony LaPaglia for Lantana.
I agree with the Dirty Pretty Things sentiment. Great movie. Plus, it'll help to see it so when u do this list in 2010 (lol) you will have further proof of Chiwetel Ejiofor's brilliance.
CZJ is never an actress I don't like, which may be why she's so popular. It's hard to call a ZJ performance (from 2000 onwards) BAD. And unlike other similar people she's worked consistently and in usually decent movies. I can see why she got so high.
What about directors worshipping?
Directors of the Aughts?
-cal roth
Ignore, please. You will die if you take this request. This actor actress lists... They give you lots of work, don't they?
Take a rest.
-cal roth
directors would actually be strange since they don't work as often as actors usuallybeing part of the films development.
The exchange of comments regarding Naomi Watts is interesting. While I'm not a fan, I think she deserves her position being a very talented actress giving consistently excellent work. The fact that this blogger has found it necessary to remark especially on her high position in the poll as being different from his own seems to show that he somewhat does feel eggs on his face, and is embarassed if not upset on seeing her getting such support and recognition. Any denial would only support the argument. Although everyone can have his own opinion on anything, but the readers' polls here have shown that one's personal opinion can be biased, or wrong, and all that I've read so far have indicated clearly that he is indeed wrong and is uneasy about his readers proven him wrong.
"The fact that this blogger has found it necessary to remark especially on her high position in the poll as being different from his own seems to show that he somewhat does feel eggs on his face, and is embarassed if not upset on seeing her getting such support and recognition."
Oh, he was embarrassed! I thought he was just analysing the lists against each other. Funnily enough, I thought that, the fact that there is such a huge difference between Naomi Watt's placing on the 2 lists, was just one of the more notable observations in comparing them. But thanks for clearing that up for me, anonymous.
You also show great wisdom in how to win any argument. I think I'm learning a lot from you-
"Any denial would only support the argument."
So - Tell people that if they disgree with you, you automatically win! Brilliant! I'm taking notes.
I'm also silly and stupid enough to have had the impression that he was actually quite confident in asserting his own opinion even when people strongly disagree with him. But if you detect that he's uneasy...well, I'm just gonna go put a dunce cap on my head. *sigh* I feel as though I have egg on my face...
Well, I agree with Nathaniel that Naomi has gone downhill since Mulholland, with a few exceptions (I think she deserved another oscar nomination for Kong, and I also found her excellent in Huckabee's). I just can't take a liking to her as an actress; I find her off-putting in interviews and such, what with her overearnestness and weirdly frightening fashion choices. She seems to have an unhealthy fixation with the dark side, and a lack of perspective on said fixation.
And yes, this is total armchair psychology, but stars exist to be analyzed in this way.
Those are my feelings on Ms. Watts.
i heart adam
"And yes, this is total armchair psychology, but stars exist to be analyzed in this way."
hee. so F***ing true!
: )
Seriously, if you can't stand the heat, get out of Hollywood... or at least stop wearing that crazy hair and bad eye makeup that makes you such an easy target.
Did anyone see Watts on Inside the Actors' Studio? She looked like a cheap whore.
(Sorry, Glenn) ; )
OK sorry, that was mean.
Dude, I may love me some Naomi but she's not in my top 20 of all time so calling her a cheap whore is totally within my bounds of okayness. I call plenty of people cheap whores. :P
"The fact that this blogger has found it necessary to remark especially on her high position in the poll as being different from his own seems to show that he somewhat does feel eggs on his face"
LOL, that makes absolutely no sense! As Anon 12:33 said, it just appears that Nat was making mention of the difference of opinion. Everyone has their own biases, it's the freakin' internet and it's his own blog. If he can't be biased here where can he be biased?
This whole argument is so ludicrously absurd.
I think it's absurd to be sour and bitter about and launch attacks on someone one doesn't like to have made it high on the readers' polls. It's mean. The readers like her ;-), as much as the critics around the world like her ;-). Period.
Well, I'm just wondering if Ms. Watts were a cheap whore, what would be Nicole Kidman, Kate Winslet and Julianne Moore who have all shown off their full frontals shamelessly in films. And what about Scarlett Johansson's notorious baring all for the Vanity Fair Magazine cover for publicity? That was even cheaper.
>>>it just appears that Nat was making mention of the difference of opinion. Everyone has their own biases, it's the freakin' internet and it's his own blog. If he can't be biased here where can he be biased?
Ahem, everyone is of course entitled to his own "bias", as long as he admits it ;)
bias is a silly word. always tossed out like it's a bad thing ;)
shouldn't we just say 'opinion'?
if i didn't have any, why the hell would any of you read me?
this message brought to you by the "society of the unimpressed with naomi watts" or SUNW -cuz that just slips right off the tongue.
The "cheap whore" remark had nothing to do with Watts' nudity in films, and everything to do with her bad fashion choices at public events. I don't care who shows frontal in their films; I DO care when a celebrity is standing there talking to someone looking like her makeup bin exploded onto her, all the while acting as if nothing were wrong.
it's so silly that people are arguing with Nat's (as he likes to call it) opinion on his own blog. That's the thing that seems so ridiculous.
If Nat not liking Naomi Watts enough is so shockingly horrible I hate to think how these people react to matters that are actually worth getting in a huff about.
to be fair though the impression that i don't like Naomi is misleading. I just don't think she's AS great as people say.
i thought she was
EXCELLENT
in mulholland drive
QUITE FUNNY / WELL USED
in i heart huckabees
MOVING
in king kong.
and
ENORMOUSLY OVERPRAISED
in everything else ... most especially 21 Grams in which I think she was awful in a relentlessly nathaniel-irritating one note way.
Aren't we talking about the reader's poll here? I'm happy that the readers are so right here recognizing the talents of Ms. Watts. I was also very happy that the Oscar voters nominated her for her outstanding performance in 21 grams which she so rightfully deserved. When i say readers and voters, i'm not talking about one single biased person and this is important in our democracy society when the majority rules.
In my opinion, Ms. Watts is beautiful, talented, versatile and decent, and is probably the best actress amongst the lot here with the exception of perhaps Ms. Streep.
anonymous guy who's all bent-out-of-shape about this Naomi Watts thing:
Why does it bother you so much that Nathaniel isn't a big fan of Naomi Watts? It's his OPINION. He never told you or anyone else that you weren't free to love her. Why does his opinion irk you so much? And why are you going on about democracy and majority rules and all that - what does that have to do with anything? You're right, this is just one single biased guy on the Internet - it seems to be you who is unable to grasp what that means.
my bad - sorry for the double post
I love Naomi Watts and think she is a fantastic actress. She has character that she is not liked by some people. The fact that other actresses like Nicole Kidman, Kate Winslet and Cate Blanchett who are liked by almost everyone makes them so f**king boring comparing to Naomi Watts.
I know this conversation is probably good well and done with, and it should probably be left alone, but I wanted to add that I think we're all misusing the word bias here.
'Bias' and 'opinion' aren't synonomous. A bias is a prejudice that can effect your opinion. To say that someone is biased is a genuine criticism - it's saying that someone is making a judgement about something for, basically, irrelevent reasons. For example, if Nathaniel had a bias against blond actresses, he would automatically rate any blond actresses performances as lesser than any brunette actresses, even if the performances were exactly the same in every other respect.
I don't know if Nathaniel has any true biases against Naomi Watts or not, but I certainly have not seen any evidence provided in this thread that he does. Not absolutely loving Naomi Watts does not automatically mean he has a bias against her.
I just wanted to say that.
>>I think she was awful in a relentlessly "nathaniel-irritating one note way".
Is this evidence of some kind of a name-brand bias?
..."In my opinion, Ms. Watts is beautiful..."
YES
...."talented"
MORESO THAN MANY, TRUE
..."versatile"
LOOKS THAT WAY
...and "decent"
UM... IN WHAT SENSE?
...and is probably the best actress amongst the lot here with the exception of perhaps Ms. Streep"
[*silence*]
I WAS ENJOYING BEING AGREEABLE WHILE IT LASTED.
why is Emma Thompson not on the list?
Did she not make enough movies? Doesn't Nathaniel like her either? Is there something about Lindsay Lohan that Emma Thompson lacks (besides breasts) that I don't understand?
What a great site » »
Post a Comment