Shop More Submit  Join Login
About Traditional Art / Professional Official Beta Tester Diarra HarrisUnited States Recent Activity
Deviant for 2 Years
1 Month Premium Membership
Statistics 1,049 Deviations 168 Comments 3,464 Pageviews

Newest Deviations

Favourites

Groups

Activity


FERGUSON EPILOGUE:

1. Rioting and looting solves nothing. 2. The lack of an indictment in this (and other cases for over 23 years) is what happens when YOU DON'T VOTE(!) and the same person St Louis County Prosecutor Robbert McCulloch stays in an office and effectively does nothing while he's there(check his record). 3. The fact that a lot of people thought that this lock of an indictment was fair and that only the rioters and not St Louis County and the grand jury are to blame shows we still have decades(at least) to go.

I know this must seem like a laughable but really think about the question. If your a great actor does that mean you have immense acting range? Can become just about any character? Can change the tone of the character at will? The only reason why I'm thinking about this sometime ago while watching the YouTube show Movie News either one of the commentors or the hostess stated that Tom Hanks doesn't have a lot of range. 


If you look at the first part of his career where he only played the the lovable goofy smart aleck. That changed a little with punchline, even more with BIG , SLEEPLESS IN SEATTLE and A LEAGUE OF THEIR OWN. That said I feel the real watershed moment was with PHILADELPHIA. When he played Andrew Beckett both the critics and the general public could take him seriously. He played a multifaceted character. He was now able to emit wider emotional range(or perhaps a just different form). He was no longer the quick witted snarky character. You had compassion for whatever character he played. It was at this point where he finally became a superstar. 

Perhaps that's also the problem.


When you think of actors such as Daniel Day Lewis, Christian Bale, Meryl Streep or Idris Elba whether it's on tv or the film they play a wide range of characters and the with different character tics and flaws. You can't look at the printed script and just say that this Christian Bale character because they can take any character and make it their own. Sure every actor will put a little bit of themselves into every role but some actors put more of themselves into it to the point that it seems at times they are playing themselves. I believe that this is where Tom Hanks find himself. Nearly every character he plays will go against type to a point.

He rarely transforms into a role. You know it's Tom Hanks. That would be problem if not for a few things: 


1. He's relatable. The general public well always go with his characters or to his films because of the emotional component they have with him.

2. He's good in the roles. Maybe nearly every role he has seems to have more of his(apparent) personality in it than the way it's been written but he does show emotional layers to the characters he plays which leads to-

3. He's a more diverse actor than people give him credit for. CAPTAIN PHILLIPS, CAST AWAY, PHILADELPHIA, SAVING PRIVATE RYAN(interesting it's arguable that his best roles are huge films where his character faces catastrophic life threatening odds, hmm) is proof that he doesn't always take the safe role(BONFIRES OF THE VANITIES proves that as well). Just look at Captain Phillips how Phillips reacted to everything that happened to him during the film. Heck don't watch the entire film just watch the last 10 minutes, or just the last scene. The various emotions hitting his character all at once and it happened in roughly 2 minutes. Most actors can't achieve what Tom Hanks did in this film.


I believe EVERY actor has at least one great performance in them. I also believe awards(especially the Academy Award) shouldn't dictate what a great actor is. An actor is great when they give multiple outstanding performances and the at worst have been "just" consistently good

So yes Tom Hanks is a great actor.


Maybe what we should be asking is are their different tiers  for how good an actor and if so then where does he rank? I'd say he's probably on the level of Chiwetel Ejiofor who has has some outstanding parts(12 Years A Slave, Serenity and Children Of Men)and good in others(his case is a bit different since he rarely has lead roles, unlike Tom Hanks).


I guess what it comes down to is despite being a respected actor Tom Hanks is to a degree still underrated. He can change this perception of his acting if he takes larger leaps in his future roles. Try going against type again. after all it's worked before.

 

I know this must seem like a laughable but really think about the question. If your a great actor does that mean you have immense acting range? Can become just about any character? Can change the tone of the character at will? The only reason why I'm thinking about this sometime ago while watching the YouTube show Movie News either one of the commentors or the hostess stated that Tom Hanks doesn't have a lot of range. 


If you look at the first part of his career where he only played the the lovable goofy smart aleck. That changed a little with punchline, even more with BIG , SLEEPLESS IN SEATTLE and A LEAGUE OF THEIR OWN. That said I feel the real watershed moment was with PHILADELPHIA. When he played Andrew Beckett both the critics and the general public could take him seriously. He played a multifaceted character. He was now able to emit wider emotional range(or perhaps a just different form). He was no longer the quick witted snarky character. You had compassion for whatever character he played. It was at this point where he finally became a superstar. 

Perhaps that's also the problem.


When you think of actors such as Daniel Day Lewis, Christian Bale, Meryl Streep or Idris Elba whether it's on tv or the film they play a wide range of characters and the with different character tics and flaws. You can't look at the printed script and just say that this Christian Bale character because they can take any character and make it their own. Sure every actor will put a little bit of themselves into every role but some actors put more of themselves into it to the point that it seems at times they are playing themselves. I believe that this is where Tom Hanks find himself. Nearly every character he plays will go against type to a point.

He rarely transforms into a role. You know it's Tom Hanks. That would be problem if not for a few things: 


1. He's relatable. The general public well always go with his characters or to his films because of the emotional component they have with him.

2. He's good in the roles. Maybe nearly every role he has seems to have more of his(apparent) personality in it than the way it's been written but he does show emotional layers to the characters he plays which leads to-

3. He's a more diverse actor than people give him credit for. CAPTAIN PHILLIPS, CAST AWAY, PHILADELPHIA, SAVING PRIVATE RYAN(interesting it's arguable that his best roles are huge films where his character faces catastrophic life threatening odds, hmm) is proof that he doesn't always take the safe role(BONFIRES OF THE VANITIES proves that as well). Just look at Captain Phillips how Phillips reacted to everything that happened to him during the film. Heck don't watch the entire film just watch the last 10 minutes, or just the last scene. The various emotions hitting his character all at once and it happened in roughly 2 minutes. Most actors can't achieve what Tom Hanks did in this film.


I believe EVERY actor has at least one great performance in them. I also believe awards(especially the Academy Award) shouldn't dictate what a great actor is. An actor is great when they give multiple outstanding performances and the at worst have been "just" consistently good

So yes Tom Hanks is a great actor.


Maybe what we should be asking is are their different tiers  for how good an actor and if so then where does he rank? I'd say he's probably on the level of Chiwetel Ejiofor who has has some outstanding parts(12 Years A Slave, Serenity and Children Of Men)and good in others(his case is a bit different since he rarely has lead roles, unlike Tom Hanks).


I guess what it comes down to is despite being a respected actor Tom Hanks is to a degree still underrated. He can change this perception of his acting if he takes larger leaps in his future roles. Try going against type again. after all it's worked before.

 

deviantID

mr-grump's Profile Picture
mr-grump
Diarra Harris
Artist | Professional | Traditional Art
United States
I have been a freelance artist for the last 20 years. My main focus has been illustration. I have done various styles: Manga, American comics, Fantasy and Burlesque are a few.
Interests

Visitors

Commissions

Sampling
Batman B&w12 by mr-grump
Guillermo Del Toro7 by mr-grump
LZ effect3 by mr-grump
Frank Quitely Homage2 by mr-grump
A Frank Quitely Homage by mr-grump
Vampra10 by mr-grump
Sampling of images you can get commissions for.
Examples of some of my work
BatWoman5 by mr-grump
Rose2 by mr-grump
Nop3 by mr-grump
Nop2 by mr-grump
Stara3 by mr-grump
Old Lady by mr-grump
Pencil schetches, inking and digital added in
old woman
/Users/diarraharris/Desktop/old_lady1_by_mr_grump-d5vbmmi.jpg
lil angels 1
/Users/diarraharris/Desktop/lil_angels_2_by_mr_grump-d5kup1u.jpg
Pencil
/Users/diarraharris/Desktop/pencil_by_mr_grump-d5e0xmu.jpg
Stara
/Users/diarraharris/Desktop/stara3_by_mr_grump-d5xqhp2.jpg
Wake up little flower 2
/Users/diarraharris/Desktop/nop3_by_mr_grump-d62cdxb.jpg
Wake up Little Flower 1
/Users/diarraharris/Desktop/nop2_by_mr_grump-d62cdqg.jpg
Rose
/Users/diarraharris/Desktop/rose_by_mr_grump-d63krmt.jpg
Bat-Woman
/Users/diarraharris/Desktop/batwoman5_by_mr_grump-d69xk6f.jpg

Comments


Add a Comment:
 
:iconpidimoro:
Pidimoro Featured By Owner Oct 26, 2014
Thanks for the fav! :) (Smile) 
Reply
:iconfedde:
fedde Featured By Owner Oct 16, 2014  Professional General Artist
Thanks for watching! =)
Reply
:iconjudilda:
Judilda Featured By Owner Oct 11, 2014  Student Traditional Artist
Thank you for the watch!! Love 
IF you are interested in commission... judilda.deviantart.com/journal…
Reply
:icondavelukas:
DaveLukas Featured By Owner Oct 7, 2014  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
Hi there, thank you for the fav
Reply
:iconstevie-wydder:
stevie-wydder Featured By Owner Oct 5, 2014
Thank you for the new fave ! :)
Reply
:iconmr-grump:
mr-grump Featured By Owner Oct 5, 2014  Professional Traditional Artist
no problem
Reply
:iconcandykappa:
CandyKappa Featured By Owner Oct 4, 2014  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Thank you for the watch :)
Reply
:iconjalpix:
JALpix Featured By Owner Sep 19, 2014  Professional Digital Artist
thank you very much for the favourite!!
Reply
:iconxavierx13:
XavierX13 Featured By Owner Sep 14, 2014  Professional
Thanks for the watch! =)
Reply
:iconshuukaku92:
Shuukaku92 Featured By Owner Sep 2, 2014  Student General Artist
Thank you for the +watch! Much appreciated :hug:
Reply
Add a Comment: