[!@#$%!]

Originally Posted by sarramkrop

Can we try to separate the fact that an actor/actress is dishy-looking from the fact that they are technically and emotionally versatile? All of the above have been in at least one movie that I have enjoyed (particularly Norton) , apart from Jahansson. That still doesn' t convince me about their acting abilities. It just seemed that in those movies the director was carrying the movie, rather than the actor/ess.

sure.

edward norton is a damn good actor. american history x, fight club... i recently saw him in the painted veil and he managed to remain almost invisible which is what i htink this required. not at all like keanu reeves in "dracula" faking an english accent, jeezus. no man, edward norton is totally an american actor but he's really good. and you dream.

johnny depp is great, come on-- his "pirates" is hilarious, then you get edward scissorhands on the other end of the spectrum. watchu want porks? more range? insane willy wonka, dead william blake in dead man. former undercover cop in teenybopper drama "21st jump street". the libertine, i admit, sucked blood clots, but ... ed wood? oh cmon, you're baiting-- are you baiting?

---
about drew barrymore yes, she sucks in every way, and chloe sevigny is famous for being indie but i don't think she acts much (sorry chloe). and scarlett-- well, scarlett has those tits. she's good in certain roles though, she did great in lost in translation, as well as match point. she's no jessica lange though-- jessica lange! that's a real actress.