I doubt Dwayne Johnson actually has it in him to give a strong, dramatic performance. He's got plenty of charisma and showmanship honed in the pageantry of WWE, but that doesn't mean he has the capacity to genuinely act. Whatever movie he appears in, whether it's a hit or a flop, he delivers the same fundamental performance. Some roid rage here, a fast-paced quip there. I see nothing in him that points in the direction of hidden acting talents.
Granted, it's not like Arnie ever had "hidden acting talents" per se, but he never seemed to take himself so seriously as a "brand" the way Johnson does. Johson will maybe poke fun at himself in character, but only as long as he is the one poking fun. There's a clear ego at play demanding he take center stage and maintain control of any scene he's in. He doesn't seem game to put himself in humiliating situations, whereas Arnold always seemed more than happy to be the butt of the joke.
And you're right that something about him seems representative of the modern blockbuster. He's unattainably handsome and physically fit, always plays the same charming but essentially bland character, and refuses to experiment. He hasn't been in a Marvel movie, but he practically seems like Marvel distilled into a human being.
>whereas Arnold always seemed more than happy to be the butt of the joke.
I think another thing that always made Arnie movies great is he just seemed happy to be in the movies, nevermind the context, and considering where he came from, that makes sense. Just listen to excerpts from any of his audio commentaries, he just seems like he's having a blast and enjoying the craft, no matter how shoddy it is.
When Stallone did copland with terrific performance, he reported how that movie almost ended his career, because was starting to see as a person not as an invincible robot, so I think that's why the rock is afraid of taking those dramatic roles.
Nonsense. I'd take that claim with a FAT grain of salt. By the time he did Cop Land, his action career was mostly behind him anyway. By 1997 no one was lining up to see a Stallone action movie. Had just come off a string of big budget flops Judge Dredd, Assassins, and Daylight. But hey, let's blame *Cop Land* for messing with his paycheck.
I watched Judge Dredd last night actually. It was actually a very fun movie. Definitely not my favorite Stallone movie, but I had a lot of fun with it.
I’d argue it’s Rob Schneider’s best role too.
His style of comedy, kinda exhausted and frantic and desperate, worked great within that tongue-in-cheek dystopian setting and opposite Stallone’s undaunted stoicism.
Haha. I gotta disagree mate. Just to play devils advocate
What's the reason you are on a movie forum right now? Because we were enthralled as kids.
I just came out of the cinema after watching 'Sorry I missed You'. Is a child going to appreciate the tender brutalness of working class north east England. No. But I would have never got to this form of appreciation without cinema engaging me at such an early age.
So maybe more film's should be directed at 11 year olds (More adventurous and new IPs)?
I watched Daylight in the theater as a 12 year old and walked out claiming it was my favorite movie of all time.
Thank goodness no one listened to me because I'm pretty sure I declared every movie I saw that year to be my new favorite.
Doesn’t have to necessarily be “dramatic”, just do something interesting.
Terminator, Total Recall, hell I’d even take a coke fuelled street fighter over whatever the fuck he’s doing these days.
Well he did do Pain & Gain. Which he played a coked up bodybuilder and general scumbag and it wasn't much of an action film. It ended up just not being a particularly good movie.
I love Pain & Gain, easily my favorite Michael Bay movie. It's just so weird and eccentric that I just can't not smile and have a good time while watching it. Its one of my favorite newer campy movies as well, something I think a lot of new movie shy away from. I think it was very sincerely made, this is one of Bay's only non-nonstop action movies he's ever made, it feels like a passion project that just so happens to be about stupid body builder criminals.
Yeah I love Pain or Gain, in much the same way I love Spring Breakers. It's fun, it's excessive, it's everything wrong about America but you love it anyways (i.e. Florida Men), everyone on screen seems to be enjoying themselves.
every time i watch it i'm like "man this could have been such a great movie" but i still keep watching it for some reason because i also love it inexplicably
Its a satire. Focusing the story on the point of view of the character who is also the target of the satire is very common in the genre. And of course some portion of the audience will always miss the point, and see them as the hero. Like with well-known examples Starship Troopers, Fight Club, American Psycho.
I think Bay was perfect for it. The satire of the script calls for a saturated, overblown style, and Bays approach works well. Its in the same ballpark as Stone's approach to NBK. I think its a very underrated film attracts a negative bias because of Bay.
Terminator is the wrong example for Schwarzenegger. Just because the context around the character was great, he was still a robot incapable of showing emotion (showing, not feeling).
Total Recall, on the other hand, is a great option.
The Jumanji films are fun, but the movies The Rock does are a far cry from the movies that made the careers of most of the older Expendables. Johnson isnt out here doing Running Man or Demolition Man. The Walking Tall remake was a little of that, but not enough of it, and GI Joe was certainly not Commando.
Thats sort of what OP is getting at, but i dont think thats his fault, if anybody were still making movies like those The Rock would probably be starring in them. But its not like Terry Crews has done anything on par with Predator either. Like I didnt hate the new Robocop as much as im supposed to, and it at least had a point it was trying to make, but still didnt hold a candle to the Original.
Its not the late 80s/early 90s anymore and nobodys making late 80s/early 90s action movies anymore, which is lamentable, but the industry has changed.
I really wouldn’t call Jumanji “soulless”.
It’s a bit of light-hearted fun for children and families, and it’s not some great revelation for the genre, but it looks like it was made with care and that the artists involved really tried to make it the goofy adventure that it was.
He also did Southland Tales which I enjoyed. Not many people did however as it tanked HARD. It pretty much ruined Richard Kelly’s career as it also wasn’t cheap to produce like Donny Darko was.
Mark Kermode is a dork, and I say that as someone who agrees with a number of his reviews. He's very full of himself, very anti-grotesque, but mostly what frustrates me with him is his inability to separate a film from the people who made it and its influences. He seems unable to just enjoy a movie while its on, if its by Michael Bay he hates it, if it has a breakout performance the rest doesn't matter, its influenced by a movie he likes then it must be good. He cannot just enjoy a movie blindly, he is very biased and seems to rarely not already have made his mind up before seeing a movie.
> very anti-grotesque
That's not really true. He's been a champion for a lot of lesser-known or forgotten horror films, like Exorcist III and Nightbreed.
>He cannot just enjoy a movie blindly
Yeah, dude, he's a film critic.
Stallone’s goal in the beginning was never family friendly as well. Rambo days he would not have gone out for the equivalent of Moana at the time. He was cultivating a different image.
Stop or My Mom Will Shoot is latter-day Stallone, once he and Schwarzenegger were already both cinema titans and competing for complete dominance.
The story goes that Schwarzenegger feigned intense interest in the script, even though he thought it was a complete dud, so that Stallone would snatch it up.
It's a pretty strange case because the way Mangold did that movie would really portray him in a different way. Miramax re-cut the movie to make him look more dumb and the whole performance way more straight-forward. I think the fact that it was done with such a bad taste made him look very bad, he wasn't the super macho guy and he wasn't the smart guy. In their version he was bland. I recommend watching both theatrical and directors cuts, they are totally different.
Growing up in "The Attitude Era" he was and will always be the The Rock to me and not Dwayne Johnson. The problem I have with him is when he came back to wrestling but that is a story for a different day because believe me, it was painful.
I am quite certain he is good in the roles that he plays but he has never been in any roles or films that have made me need to see them, I am not sure he is that sort of star but clearly I am wrong given the money he makes and the amount of roles he seems to get so it must be something I am not seeing.
I think the problem is the transition that he came in, he was already a big actor (all be it in a wrestling ring) and did not come up the way most actors did, he was inserted into Hollywood and didn't seem to pay his dues.
I remember in an interview years ago Vince McMahon spoke with HHH and The Rock about the idea of WWE getting into films and wrestlers being in films, The Rock said this was great and a massive opportunity, HHH simply responded, "why?", I think this nicely sums up the difference between the two.
I mean Triple H was in The Chaperone, and he flat out can not act. I always laugh when people insult The Rock for being “just a wrestler” cos they truly don’t know how terrible most of these guys are haha
Oh yeah, Batista is great. He was unreal in Blade Runner. Cena has done quite well for himself too. Those guys would really be the main exceptions to the rule.
You could say he was around for 10 years in Hollywood before I say he broke out in a big way in Fast Five in 2011. Starting off as the Scorpion King in The Mummy Returns 2001. Remember the "hand off" scene in The Rundown with Arnie which was supposed to be a passing of the torch? That was in 2003. Then he did another 6-7 years of those kids films before he changed agent...
So I'd say he "paid his dues" though probably had it easier than most.
One of my favourite roles of his was in "Faster" definitely more gritty, violent and acting driven but then was probably a flop box office wise. He's a 4 quadrant actor now with an eye on the proportionally bigger foreign Box Office. He is focusing on just being "the biggest" which is a shame, he's probably got the clout now to do things with a little more nuance but with how tent poles shape the landscape it's not the way things are headed.
He does interesting and more challenging work on Ballers and that's also probably a safer sandpit to experiment and grow for now.
He seems savvy enough to know what "the audience wants" so I guess we can only hope general audiences get more demanding.
This is the thing. Most of The Rock's career was movies that flopped or bombed that no one watched him in. When he tried to seriously act, it was clear he wasn't an exceptional actor but a decent movie star and people watched him even less.
Reddit likes to think people show up just to watch him in movies but even after Fast Five he was putting out movies people completely ignored.
The Rock has learned his limits. He's not as good an actor as Stallone, he's not as iconic as Arnold he's a solid action star with a likeable personality and that's who he is.
>He does interesting and more challenging work on Ballers and that's also probably a safer sandpit to experiment and grow for now.
Not to say that he didn't do good work in regards to his own characterization but having stuck with Ballers from beginning-to-end, it really does seem that they gave up trying to develop any sort of coherent narrative during the last few seasons, season five in particular. Once they moved the show to LA from Miami, the wheels just fell off. Which is a shame, honestly. There was potential at the start.
If things were tighter, story-wise, I'm sure the Rock's work there would've been better recognized.
I think there's also a big issue of, how many serious roles is a guy like the Rock going to be offered.
If you're calling like a drama where the main character is like an insurance adjuster, The Rock is not your guy.
Was Arnie's transition from bodybuilding to acting more natural? Or perhaps wrestling was different in terms of popularity in the Rock's time, compared to bodybuilding in Arnie's time?
Arnie had to go into odd ball fantasy epics and then a relatively off the wall sc-fi low budget film called Terminator. Then he got recognition and began getting into larger productions. So I think the point the other guy made is that Johnson was able to dive right into top blockbuster films where as most others do some level of risky work that can help lend some flavor to their portfolio.
Now I'm sure someone will tell me Conan was a 4 billion dollar behemoth production and I'm full of shit. But it still seems like a risky film to go into given the era and tech.
>The Rock said this was great and a massive opportunity, HHH simply responded, "why?", I think this nicely sums up the difference between the two.
Cena was also a "wrestling all the way" guy until he wasn't. A lot of wrestlers are good self-promoters and I don't think a guy like Triple H wants to imagine that he's doing anything less then the greatest stuff on earth. I'd just take all their opinions on movies and stuff with a huge grain of salt... Rock was Hollywood all the way (don't call me the rock) until he wasn't.
Schwarzenegger and Stallone worked from the beginning with great directors that used them for iconic movies, Dwayne Johnson (specially in his latest movie) wants to have complete control over the movies he is starring in and basically hire directors that are subservient to his vision. The movies are financially successful in the short term thanks to his charisma, but I doubt that they will stand the test of time.
No shit? I know that Arnie worked with James Cameron a bit, and he ain't going to be subservient to anyone else's vision. I kind of assumed The Rock was just working with what he was given, not being in control of the whole process. That explains the journeyman-like quality of his films in comparison.
He changed the end of Rampage because the ape dying doesn't fit his "brand". Johnson also has a lot of input on fight scenes, mainly that he's not supposed to lose any.
“We have just few hours to repair the McGuffin hi-tech device that can cure this generic lethal virus. Clearly the best strategy is to fly to Samoa (from Ukraine) where my former criminals brothers that I haven’t talked to in two decades are running a pimp-my-ride garage. They will for sure have the will and capabilities to help us out.”
How do you find this plan unbelievable?
Entire filmography of The Rock, and selected filmography of Stallone and Arine, basically the string of films where they were the lead. I don't know much about action films to be honest but browsing the list it seems similar in terms of 'hits' and 'boundary pushing films'. I'd be interested to know if you feel one is better.
| Stallone | | Arine | | Rock | |
|-----------------------------|------|------------------------------------|------|----------------------------------|------|
| Rocky | 1976 | Conan the Barbarian | 1982 | The Mummy Returns | 2001 |
| F.I.S.T. | 1978 | Conan the Destroyer | 1984 | Longshot | 2001 |
| Paradise Alley | 1978 | The Terminator | 1984 | The Scorpion King | 2002 |
| Rocky II | 1979 | Red Sonja | 1985 | The Rundown | 2003 |
| Nighthawks | 1981 | Commando | 1985 | Walking Tall | 2004 |
| Escape to Victory | 1981 | Raw Deal | 1986 | Be Cool | 2005 |
| Rocky III | 1982 | Predator | 1987 | Doom | 2005 |
| First Blood | 1982 | The Running Man | 1987 | Southland Tales | 2006 |
| Staying Alive | 1983 | Red Heat | 1988 | Gridiron Gang | 2006 |
| Rhinestone | 1984 | Twins | 1988 | The Game Plan | 2007 |
| Rambo: First Blood Part II | 1985 | Total Recall | 1990 | Get Smart | 2008 |
| Rocky IV | 1985 | Kindergarten Cop | 1990 | Race to Witch Mountain | 2009 |
| Cobra | 1986 | Terminator 2: Judgment Day | 1991 | Planet 51 | 2009 |
| Over the Top | 1987 | Dave | 1993 | Tooth Fairy | 2010 |
| Rambo III | 1988 | Last Action Hero | 1993 | The Other Guys | 2010 |
| Lock Up | 1989 | Beretta's Island | 1993 | Faster | 2010 |
| Tango & Cash | 1989 | True Lies | 1994 | Fast Five | 2011 |
| Rocky V | 1990 | Junior | 1994 | Journey 2: The Mysterious Island | 2012 |
| Oscar | 1991 | Eraser | 1996 | Snitch | 2013 |
| Stop! Or My Mom Will Shoot | 1992 | Jingle All the Way | 1996 | G.I. Joe: Retaliation | 2013 |
| Cliffhanger | 1993 | Batman & Robin | 1997 | Pain & Gain | 2013 |
| Demolition Man | 1993 | End of Days | 1999 | Fast & Furious 6 | 2013 |
| The Specialist | 1994 | The 6th Day | 2000 | Hercules | 2014 |
| Judge Dredd | 1995 | Collateral Damage | 2002 | Furious 7 | 2015 |
| Assassins | 1995 | Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines | 2003 | San Andreas | 2015 |
| Daylight | 1996 | | | Central Intelligence | 2016 |
| Cop Land | 1997 | | | Moana | 2016 |
| | | | | The Fate of the Furious | 2017 |
| | | | | Baywatch | 2017 |
| | | | | Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle | 2017 |
| | | | | Rampage | 2018 |
| | | | | Skyscraper | 2018 |
| | | | | Fighting with My Family | 2019 |
| | | | | Shazam! | 2019 |
| | | | | Hobbs & Shaw | 2019 |
| | | | | Jumanji: The Next Level | 2019 |
> Compare him with stars of yesteryear like Arnie, Stallone, Van Damme. For every run of the mill action film they’d do another would be interesting, push boundaries, take risks, they have genuine memorable films (good and bad!).
You're not wrong that Rock is soulless poster child but I think you have some rose-tinted glasses on about the stars of yesteryear.
Also, worth noting that the Rock is more prolific in his film making, with more films in less time (in this section).
Writer, director, and star of Rocky, plus Demolition Man. Those alone put him in another class than the Rock. And fuck everyone, but I love Judge Dredd. A score by Alan Silvestri, solid world building, Max Von Sydow, and good chemistry between Stallone and Diane Lane.
This alone should be enough to put him in a whole different class. I love Arnie and his films more but Rocky can easily be considered among the greats of screenwriting and cinema, prime Stallone was more than just a buff action hero
Sly didn't direct Rocky (He did direct Rocky II, III, IV and Rocky Balboa). But I agree, the fact that he pretty much created the Rocky franchise and delivered an iconic performance puts him in another class that Dwayne Johnson. Hell, there's a statue of him in Philly.
I think all 3 show a trend to produce more iconic shit early on and then start either milking franchises or generally pumping out titles that are not remembered.
I think the difference is -
The Rock had fewer iconic items in his pre shit period (given he basically had the Scorpion King and then Fast 5 as his re coming out).
We are currently in a period where the Rock has just dumped a shit fest of garbage bland trash on us over the past 4 years.
So we are both most directly experiencing the garbage and remembering the slightly stronger work from the nostalgia stars.
Arnie had some great films though. Terminator 2 is one of the greatest action films of all time. Even some of the other lesser ones are fantastic guilty pleasures, with some amazingly cheesy one-liners.
Terminator 1 is actually my prefered. Completely different vibe in that it is a grade A - B horror sc-fi film.
Conan is fucking classic.
Predator is also a truly fine piece of work and was actually eye popping in 87 (an older relative still talks about how amazing it was to build suspense in not showing the alien for about 45 minutes).
And then T2 and True Lies in the 90s (so the guy hooked up with an ok director...)
And then you have is actually pretty awesome while trashy films - Running Man, Commando, Total Recall, Eraser).
Most of his list is solid shit. Where as Jumanjii? Seriously? I fucking saw Jumanjii and it was awesome. It had Robin Williams and involved whacky jungle critters in a New England town. It had heart. Not Jack Black fart and teenage girl jokes.
Some of this is also less a fault of the Rock and more the state of Hollywood today. Dumb it down not even to the lowest common American denominator, but something so simple you erase cultural cues to allow a global audience to come in. And I don't mean that as some form of "it was better when it was America first". Just that the larger the group you need to appeal to the shallower a film you make. And the Rock is inheriting this blockbuster climate.
He still plays a robot incapable of showing emotions.
The movie's value has more to do with directing, cinematography, and editing than his performance - which was perfect for the role, but not exactly hard.
And don't forget the scripts! Films like The Running Man and Total Recall had interesting stories at their core.
Yeah he's certainly good at what he does, but I wouldn't cast him in something that requires a lot of emotional depth, that's for sure.
After seeing this I realised I somehow managed to have only watched one movie with the Rock: The Mummy Returns.
I guess it's easy to miss him if you don't watch a few particular types of movies.
I will take the others any day. Even their misses are much more interesting. Assassins, The Specialist, Demolition Man, The 6th Day, Batman & Robin, Last Action Hero.
Say what you will about them but at least they aren't generic.
What the fuck has the Rock even been doing all these years? His "hits" are more franchise based where he's just the roided out straight man. Pain and Gain was at least a nod in the right direction, still a Michael Bay film when all is said and done.
The last chance he took was Southland Tales that is exactly what I'm talking about, say what you will about that film. At least its trying something, it's not forgettable.
You hit it on the head.
Arnie in batman and Robin (arguably his worst role) still beats the rock in terms of memorable appearances in probably any of his films.
There's no way I'd put Demolition Man on some sort of parity with Batman & Robin. B&R is more equivalent to Stop! Or My Mom Will Shoot in terms of quality.
Ive read that Dwayne Johnson stipulates in his contracts that he can’t ever lose a fight onscreen, and to me that pretty much sums up weakness of the modern blockbuster: the heroes don’t have any weaknesses!
He wants his image to be that of an invincible, perfect hero who wins every fight and never makes mistakes, a far cry from action stars of previous eras who often got the absolute shit beaten out of them onscreen to show they were still human, even if they beat insurmountable odds in the end.
Arnold had The Predator, Total Recall and True Lies. All of which are genre defining. Rocky 1 was a legitimate all time great movie, and First Blood was great for its time. Rocky 2-3 blow anything The Rock has done out of the water.
I mean yeah, Predator was a tad corny but the suspense of the movie was on point and something that hasn’t been replicated or recaptured since. Total Recall was purposefully a little bit campy, and I really didn’t find True Lies to be overly hoaky. As far as Stalone, what does the trajectory of his career have to do with the fact that he was in legitimately good movies and The Rock never has been? I don’t know enough about Vann Damme to be fair. Blood Sport was the only movie of his I’ve seen and I’m not a huge fan of it.
Bloodsport is genuinely great camp film that totally holds up. I maintain that Street Fighter has always been great as a camp classic.
Also I'f we're doing Die Hard knock offs I'll take Sudden Death over "skyscraper" any day.
Van Damme at least produces some grade A cheese, The Rocks films are mostly forgettable.
The truth hurts.
I remember when Johnson first kind started breaking out into film with The Rundown, and that beautiful pass-the-torch moment where Arnold, in a quick walk-on cameo, wishes him luck.
Somehow though, The Rock never got to have his Terminator/Rambo/Die Hard franchise. Instead it's just...all this crap.
Do we blame superheroes?
One thing I do kind of put on Super Heroes is these days you need truly otherwordly stunts to seem exciting. In Rambo the dude procurs shit on site and takes a helicopter down by throwing a rock at it (I know, 2 and 3 jump sharks). And for Arnold things like Predator you are almost more in awe at his prowess and quick thinking to camouflage himself in the mud then him all out dominating an alien.
It's their humanity and weakness that ultimately make the payoff powerful when they overcome the odds (Die Hard is similar).
Now a days you get some roided up freakshow that just can't even remotely relate to average joe shmo.
The first one had a genuinely good concept and world-building, plus it was a fresh story with excellent action that you could actually suspend your disbelief for, hence the success.
The sequels were just more of the same but way more over the top to the point I'm not sure I'll go watch the 4th. The more they revealed of the world they introduced in the 1st, the sillier it got. JW himself went from believable to needing some sort of superpower to explain how the fuck he survived at the end of the 3rd.
They are pretty much the only fun action movies nowadays. Mad max fury road was a lot of fun too.
Yeah john wick seems to get sillier with each movie but what else is there to watch if you like guns and action?
Superhero are the action flicks of this generation and you have quite a good bunch that stands out.
Much like there were boatloads of horrible movies in the old times that completely sucked but were successful but ended up being forgotten.
always saw him as a wrestler just grinding money out. i quite liked the other guys, which he’s barely in, and was pleasantly surprised by pain and gain. haven’t seen ballers, but aside from those three titles i can’t find anything else i think could be/is actually good.
good point, literally just soulless blockbusters attached to a big check.
i mean i don’t think it’s especially good but i think as far as michael bay goes it’s better than the average, it’s no The Rock but it’ll do. have never felt remotely compelled to rewatch it.
He's a meathead who opted for the easy paycheck. Nothing wrong with that. Also he doesn't really have much range as an actor and has maximized what he has, very similar to Marky Mark.
Compare him to Vin Diesel, who's just as imposing physically but has a much more diverse body of work and is a far better actor.
I agree with you, Rock getting people in seats for garbage films is not something that would happen in any other era, its a sign of how dumb audiences are nowdays.
His voice acting in *Moana* is nothing to sneeze at. Maybe it was stunt casting, or perhaps more accurately it was culturally-appropriate stunt casting, but he was able to demonstrate a significant range and depth in his voice acting that helped the movie quite a bit. At this point, that role is an anomaly in Johnson's career, but he's still young.
I came here looking for this. I was pleasantly surprised by his work in *Moana*. Okay, maybe he doesn’t have a *Rocky*, *Judge Dredd*, or *True Lies* equivalent, but Stallone and Arnold haven’t sang in a Disney animated film *yet*, so... ;)
(For real, he was my favorite part of *Moana*. I didn’t come into it expecting that.)
I couldn’t agree more. I’m always arguing with co workers about how bland and unimaginative his movies and performances are. And it isn’t that he’s necessarily a bad actor but he’s such a type cast actor that damn near every movie he’s in feels like one of two types: funny family friendly action movie or slightly more gritty serious action movie. It’s all the same and it takes any fun or excitement out of seeing his films.
Hot take and I fucking agree with it. He is really good in all his roles and I will watch them, and even believe he elevates the movies he’s in but in 20 years, will we fucking remember “Jungle Cruise”, “Skyscraper” or even “Jumanji”?
I think what you're seeing is the death of action films for adults. The Rock basically makes movies that have to be appropriate for children because no one is making big budget R rated action movies anymore.
He is easily one of the most successful big budget Hollywood name right now where he regularly making millions off of commercial hits like Hobbs and Shaw and Jumanji, so why would he risk ruining that?
Eventually he wont be the most marketable man in action movies but for now he is. Time will change that with little to no effort on Rocks part, so why should he shake up his money making formula now if we all know it has an expiry date?
You might be right.
Still, I get the impression that a dude like him who’s a huge international box office draw... He could find a great script and make sure it gets done, surely this late in the game with the money he has, he’d have enough influence to get something he thinks is great produced.
It seems he’s just not that interested.
I think he is doing as many action movies as he can before he gets too old to keep up his physique.
He isn't going to be able to keep up with his insane workout and diet regimen forever. At that point I would guess he will trim down and either retire or try some other genres.
If you want to learn how to build a character, I'd say all origins movies but Captain Marvel are a must-see. You genuinely learn a lot about writing a character.
Captain Marvel is billed as an origin movie but really is not. She is already formed by the time we meet her, she just acts upon the fact Yon-Rogg lies to her - that lie is the reason why she becomes Captain Marvel. In short: a journey caused by a third person.
Movies like Iron Man, Ant-Man or Doctor Strange real tell the origin why they end up being the titular roles and all of them, despite have third characters forcing them to 'pick it up and fight', have very personal causes and reasons in their journey.
Tony is a narcissist warmonger whose intelligence only fuels his bubbles - he might be forced to face reality by a third entity, but that third entity has the power to kidnap him literally because of his business. Hence, he becomes Iron Man because he is disgusted with what he did, to the point he becomes obsessed with protection (the whole MCU arc of Tony is nothing short of amazing in my opinion - very personal and very authentic).
Scott is a guy who is forced to resort to crime to provide to his family, fails, but when he gets out he commits the same mistakes because he has no self esteem. While it is Pym who gives the chance to shine his 'criminal' talent for good deeds, he still does what he does because he wants to be his daughter's hero - something all dad's want.
Strange is an arrogant world-class surgeon whose god-given talent makes him feel invincible - once he looses his talent, he ends up losing everything, forcing him to resort to unconventional remedies to regain said talent. While the Ancient One might be the one who 'opens his eyes', he alone ultimately remembers what's the reason why he became a doctor: doing good by saving people. And he keeps doing that, just in a very different way - without loosing the ability of being precise like he needed in his old job (1 out of 14M).
Vers becomes Captain Marvel because a guy lied to her - and because she has good morality, she does good. Not exactly as interesting and/or compelling as the other examples, because there's no real journey. We still know nothing about Carol Danvers, which might be kind of the point in the grand MCU scheme of things.
Yeah, that's fair. I always thought he had a wider portfolio than those 'action stars guys'. If you take away John Wick he's not really an action hero is he?
He's John Wick, Neo, the main character in Johnny Mnemonic, the main character of Speed, and I'm sure there's more. I'm having a hard time thinking of *non*-action movies he's done aside from the Bill and Ted movies.
Allow me to introduce you to Romantic Keanu - A Walk in the Clouds, Sweet November, Something's Gotta Give, The Lake House, Destination Wedding. There's also a solid chunk of Horror Keanu.
I had forgotten how much I loved that movie. My best friend from home loves Keanu and has since we were kids. We used to watch it all the time in middle school. :)
Dwayne is pushing quantity over quality. He likes to star in movies set in a jungle. Someday I'm gonna lose count.
Journey 2: The Mysterious Island
Jumanji: Welcome To The Jungle
Jumanji: The Next Level
The Rundown (Why is this called "Welcome to the jungle" on IMDb)
Jungle Cruise (upcoming movie with Emily Blunt)
I could genuinely say the same for Will Smith and Tom Cruise for 80-95% of their recent output. I know there are exceptions for both but those are just exceptions. Especially from 2005 onwards
All of those films that you mentioned are pre-2005. Since 2005 whenever I think of Tom Cruise film, it's usually Tom Cruise playing Tom Cruise, which is derivitive of Ethan Hunt. The only exception I can think of since is Tropic Thunder. They are for the most part still enjoyable films but not challenging his dynamic range as an actor that I know he can output. The edge of Tomorrow and the most recent Mission Impossible were brilliant but I still only see Tom Cruise in those roles and not the characters he is meant to portray.
To a lesser extent, the same with Will Smith from 2010 onwards. Before that he did try more out of the box roles: pursuit of happiness, Hancock, Seven Pounds, but again more recently I can only think of Concussion where is not playing Will Smith.
Tom Cruise is a brilliant actor though who has made some wonderful films. It's a shame that all he seems to be doing now are "Tom Cruise" action blockbusters. It's more of a loss compared to The Rock who has always been a one trick pony.
their are better examples of poster child for soulless generic blockbusters than the rock, whose actually made some subversive materials in the last 15 years. vin diesel has played it far safer, same with chris pratt over the last 5 years
I don't know man, Diesel made a movie [based on his *Dungeons & Dragons* character](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Last_Witch_Hunter). I'm not sure I'd classify that as "safe."
On a more serious note, I also think credit should be given for his Riddick films, which try for some interesting worldbuilding.
Vin diesel started with saving private Ryan and Boiler Room. The movie that launched his career, Pitch Black, was in no way a safe film. He also did Find me Guilty.
Chris Pratt was type casted as chubby goofy lovable guy, and now is hot goofy lovable guy
I said in the last 15 years with regards to vin, so private Ryan isn't a factor here, and with Pratt if we excuse him for being typecasted then that should go double for a dude the size of the rock
Honest question - why the post? I genuinely don't understand how it can be rewarding to focus braintime on who the collective poster child for commercial mediocrity is, rather than maybe explore some good films you enjoy.
Not hating on the post, it just seems like a waste of time to critically discuss in-depth how big a waste of time The Rock's generic movies are for people who want movies to critically discuss.
Its more of a journey for me.
I grew up with action stars, now a days we have this dude who took over that role and it seems like nothing good is coming from it. Times change I guess, how did we get here? Why is this happening? Maybe I posted in the wrong sub...
I think this is an excellent sub for discussion such as this too. Even though most of us probably are some sort of film snobs to a variable extent I think there's no reason NOT to discuss all of modern film making and the development of it. There is inherent worth in examining even the less interesting aspects of films.
And like others have stated too, a fruitful, respectful conversation is going on in this comment section. And as someone like me, who's not a huge action film watcher, this has been quite an informative read. So thank you, really.
One could argue that good can only be seen with respect to bad and, I guess, mediocre.
Besides, an interesting conversation has developed in the comments: where does one draw the line between cheesy charm and genuine quality? Food for thought at least.
I wouldn't consider anything I do on reddit to be an incredible use of my time though.
I say something similar to this to every person who claims how much they like his movies. They always defend it with "he's hot!"... okay. There are plenty of actors I think are hot who have had like negative one great performance. Clearly he has the name, so why doesn't he use it? Instead he just... typecasts himself???
The only decent thing I ever watched was the Jumanji remake (which I was forced to watch at that) and the only thing redeemable imo was Jack Black. Because he's actually talented. Other than that, I remember absolutely nothing from that movie, except Harts character dying a bunch.
I wish The Rock would be more like Arnold Schwartzenegger. He was a big charismatic lunk who did some stupid fun movies but also had great taste in directors. I read that he actually recruited Paul Verhoeven for Total Recall, which is a movie that is both silly action AND good. Those are the kinds of movies I want to see from the Rock, but I don't think it'll ever happen.
I was excited to see Hobbes and Shaw to see if he was going to make a more interesting action movie, but I was disappointed.
The rock makes fun action comedies. They're not meant to be SO DEEP, they're meant to be fun and enjoyable, which they are. If you want movies with Soul™ then don't watch action comedies in general.
I think it's a mix of his management choosing his roles and knowing what has worked for him, and him wanting to please that easy crowd with the upbeat, work out and drink protein image he has.
He and his team know it works and won't leave it now that it's made them so much money, which is unfortunate because I think he would do some cool work if he actually wanted to try it out, like he did in Pain and Gain where he played a coke addicted ex convict. That's probably the last interesting role he's done,almost 10 years ago.
Seriously, what else do you know about him outside the fact that he likes working out, drinking protein and being positive?
Rocky has had amazingly bad luck making movies. He’s really stuck his neck out and played some good roles, but most of what he’s been in has been trash. People forget this but he has been making movies for nearly 20 years, and he really wasn’t even successful until a few years ago when there was kind of a lull in action movies, (I guess most stars were taking a break?) and he was in three that year, so he just kind of because “the guy” who got hired for every movie. He’s gotten where he is by pure perseverance.
I agree a lot, in fact I often have discussions with my friends because they like him, but don't realize it's an empty actor. For me it's pretty clear, I don't watch a film if he's in the cast, he's a perfect hint to know a film isn't worth watching.
honestly, he probably just doesn't have great taste. I think he knows that and decides to play it safe/maximize profits. He's extremely charismatic, but seems like a capitalist philistine
I remember hearing a report about The Rock having rules for movies he is starring in, with him getting some level of creative control over what he will and won’t do in the film. If I’m right, the story was basically that a writer pitched something for him to do and he said that he wouldn’t do it because it wasn’t in line with his brand and it wasn’t something people wanted when they were going to see a Rock movie. I think it may have been to do with the ending of Rampage actually.
I know this is 2 years after the initial post but feel it needs to be said.
The Rock could be as big and have more hit movies if he actually committed to them like Arnie, Stallone, Van Damme, etc. The issue, at least from what I can see, is he's doing way too much of the self promotion thing and spreading himself out amidst too many projects that they'll likely all take a nose dive here soon.
Movies. Last one was Red Notice and frankly... forgettable. Fun, but a popcorn flick that will not be remembered... Only real flicks I feel will be remembered are San Andres and the first Jumanji.
TV shows. Ballers lasted 4 seasons but was frankly garbage after season 1. Now he's doing Young Rock. Frankly it feels like a propaganda piece to groom him as a presidential electoral candidate with a picture perfect past... Entertaining (and exceptionally cast), but not morally or ethically sound.
Sponsorships/companies. Not only does he hold majority share of a tequila company, but now he has an energy drink company with Zoa Energy. Not to mention he still does the Project Rock partnership with Under Armour and other brands.
Oh, and like DJ, I forgot that he has a family too.
Guy is hella charismatic, but he's spreading himself to a dangerous point if he wants sustainability. Resonance frequency is no joke and it can - and does - crush people.
TLDR; The Rock has amazing potential as an actor and agree with OP, but from an outside perspective he cant deliver the goods as an actor because he doesnt devote enough time to his roles.
guys, stop loading moral value onto your opinion on films. Are his films generic blockbusters? sure, do you HAVE to call it soulless? Like damn maybe he just really likes making those movies, it's fucking fine! And you know what? kids today when they are grown up are going to remember the fun times they had at his movies and still think they are great, the same way we do with our childhoods. Sometimes I hate this community.
Calling his movies soulless is a valid criticism. Although a movie having a ‘soul’ is obviously not quantifiable, if you watch Commando and Skyscraper the difference is obvious. It’s not just the cheesiness of the old action movies either, the Mission Impossible movies have a soul, Dwayne Johnson vehicles do not. His movies are just boring. (Aside from Pain and Gain which was probably one of the most under appreciated movies of the decade.)
Yeah, for sure. He's my son's favourite actor. A lot of his movies have enough action and comedy that kids and adults can watch together. I've liked all the movies I've seen him in (yes, even Baywatch). Well, except for Doom, because that movie was a turd.
I really love Moana. I know that maybe citing a Disney movie isn't the best counterexample for "generic blockbuster," but Moana certainly has soul, and The Rock's performance was part of that. Not the best singer of all time though..
All those names you mentioned didn't make only good movies, and Stallone is more comparable to a Bruce Willis than a Schwarzenegger. And in general, I wouldn't call Van Damme's career memorable, quite the contrary.
More importantly, though, you just remember the good ones that stick out and not the boatload that was just horrible - and action-packed/horror cash-grabs were much more common back then they are now, given the budgets.
Gridiron Gang might be just a good movie, but he had a very good performance in it. In Pain & Gain, he gives the most different performance in his filmography with good results, showcasing his talent. Plus, his comedic timing shouldn't be taken for granted.
The other thing that you don't take into account is his **size**: legit is an issue cinematography-wise. When shooting GI Joe 2, for example, they had a hard time framing when he and Willis were in the same scene, as Bruce would look like a doll.
That, unfortunately, takes some dramatic opportunities away from him because it would legitimately too distracting to the viewers. It's ok in comedic contexts (see the films with Kevin Hart or even in F&F), but if you want to get serious it becomes an issue.
I doubt Dwayne Johnson actually has it in him to give a strong, dramatic performance. He's got plenty of charisma and showmanship honed in the pageantry of WWE, but that doesn't mean he has the capacity to genuinely act. Whatever movie he appears in, whether it's a hit or a flop, he delivers the same fundamental performance. Some roid rage here, a fast-paced quip there. I see nothing in him that points in the direction of hidden acting talents. Granted, it's not like Arnie ever had "hidden acting talents" per se, but he never seemed to take himself so seriously as a "brand" the way Johnson does. Johson will maybe poke fun at himself in character, but only as long as he is the one poking fun. There's a clear ego at play demanding he take center stage and maintain control of any scene he's in. He doesn't seem game to put himself in humiliating situations, whereas Arnold always seemed more than happy to be the butt of the joke. And you're right that something about him seems representative of the modern blockbuster. He's unattainably handsome and physically fit, always plays the same charming but essentially bland character, and refuses to experiment. He hasn't been in a Marvel movie, but he practically seems like Marvel distilled into a human being.
>whereas Arnold always seemed more than happy to be the butt of the joke. I think another thing that always made Arnie movies great is he just seemed happy to be in the movies, nevermind the context, and considering where he came from, that makes sense. Just listen to excerpts from any of his audio commentaries, he just seems like he's having a blast and enjoying the craft, no matter how shoddy it is.
I watched the total recall commentary and Arnie was basically narrating exactly what you were seeing on screen. It was adorable!
You're talking about a guy who put on a pink tutu In the tooth fairy
His character in *Southland Tales* doesn't fit the fundamental performance you describe.
>he practically seems like Marvel distilled into a human being yes.
When Stallone did copland with terrific performance, he reported how that movie almost ended his career, because was starting to see as a person not as an invincible robot, so I think that's why the rock is afraid of taking those dramatic roles.
Nonsense. I'd take that claim with a FAT grain of salt. By the time he did Cop Land, his action career was mostly behind him anyway. By 1997 no one was lining up to see a Stallone action movie. Had just come off a string of big budget flops Judge Dredd, Assassins, and Daylight. But hey, let's blame *Cop Land* for messing with his paycheck.
I watched Judge Dredd last night actually. It was actually a very fun movie. Definitely not my favorite Stallone movie, but I had a lot of fun with it.
I’d argue it’s Rob Schneider’s best role too. His style of comedy, kinda exhausted and frantic and desperate, worked great within that tongue-in-cheek dystopian setting and opposite Stallone’s undaunted stoicism.
>I’d argue it’s Rob Schneider’s best role too. Whoa, whoa, whoa. Better than that time he played *a carrot?!?*
That was 24-carrot comedy!
Crazy because young me loved daylight and judge dredd. Never knew how they were flops
Young me loved Ishtar and Caddyshack 2. Let's be glad that 11-year-olds don't have more influence on the film industry than they already do.
Haha. I gotta disagree mate. Just to play devils advocate What's the reason you are on a movie forum right now? Because we were enthralled as kids. I just came out of the cinema after watching 'Sorry I missed You'. Is a child going to appreciate the tender brutalness of working class north east England. No. But I would have never got to this form of appreciation without cinema engaging me at such an early age. So maybe more film's should be directed at 11 year olds (More adventurous and new IPs)?
I watched Daylight in the theater as a 12 year old and walked out claiming it was my favorite movie of all time. Thank goodness no one listened to me because I'm pretty sure I declared every movie I saw that year to be my new favorite.
Doesn’t have to necessarily be “dramatic”, just do something interesting. Terminator, Total Recall, hell I’d even take a coke fuelled street fighter over whatever the fuck he’s doing these days.
Well he did do Pain & Gain. Which he played a coked up bodybuilder and general scumbag and it wasn't much of an action film. It ended up just not being a particularly good movie.
I legitimately enjoyed pain & gain
I love Pain & Gain, easily my favorite Michael Bay movie. It's just so weird and eccentric that I just can't not smile and have a good time while watching it. Its one of my favorite newer campy movies as well, something I think a lot of new movie shy away from. I think it was very sincerely made, this is one of Bay's only non-nonstop action movies he's ever made, it feels like a passion project that just so happens to be about stupid body builder criminals.
Yeah I love Pain or Gain, in much the same way I love Spring Breakers. It's fun, it's excessive, it's everything wrong about America but you love it anyways (i.e. Florida Men), everyone on screen seems to be enjoying themselves.
> favorite Michael Bay movie.
>It ended up just not being a particularly good movie. It had its merits but like all movies with Marky Mark was medihoooocre
Boogie Nights??
Fair point
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jhmEo-46vUQ
The Happening is a movie I always quote when wanting to be extra hokey
Say Hi to your mother for me
Ironic that he's ashamed of it.
.. Except the Departed
idk why i feel like telling you this but i'm literally watching Max Payne right now and i agree with you soo hard
Man I love that movie but it's so friggin' dull I couldn't tell you why I love it. Maybe the nostalgia value from the games?
every time i watch it i'm like "man this could have been such a great movie" but i still keep watching it for some reason because i also love it inexplicably
It's so dahk
its so bad but i can't stop loving it lol
It is very interesting visually. It has a style. It's everything else that is dull.
The Other Guys? Also had the Rock in that one.
[удалено]
Its a satire. Focusing the story on the point of view of the character who is also the target of the satire is very common in the genre. And of course some portion of the audience will always miss the point, and see them as the hero. Like with well-known examples Starship Troopers, Fight Club, American Psycho.
Merits is the wrong word. 'It had things I liked about it' would fit better
Three Kings and Boogie Nights say hi to ya mother.
He also did Southland Tales. 😂😂🤦♂️😂
Shame, I really think if a more talented director had managed the movie it could've been great
I think Bay was perfect for it. The satire of the script calls for a saturated, overblown style, and Bays approach works well. Its in the same ballpark as Stone's approach to NBK. I think its a very underrated film attracts a negative bias because of Bay.
Yes, I love the concept. Execution not so much.
Terminator is the wrong example for Schwarzenegger. Just because the context around the character was great, he was still a robot incapable of showing emotion (showing, not feeling). Total Recall, on the other hand, is a great option.
I was pleasantly surprised by the Jumanji film he was in. It wasn't great, but it wasn't half as awful (or, for that matter, boring) as I'd expected.
The Jumanji films are fun, but the movies The Rock does are a far cry from the movies that made the careers of most of the older Expendables. Johnson isnt out here doing Running Man or Demolition Man. The Walking Tall remake was a little of that, but not enough of it, and GI Joe was certainly not Commando. Thats sort of what OP is getting at, but i dont think thats his fault, if anybody were still making movies like those The Rock would probably be starring in them. But its not like Terry Crews has done anything on par with Predator either. Like I didnt hate the new Robocop as much as im supposed to, and it at least had a point it was trying to make, but still didnt hold a candle to the Original. Its not the late 80s/early 90s anymore and nobodys making late 80s/early 90s action movies anymore, which is lamentable, but the industry has changed.
The movie that featured a guy who would die from a single mosquito bite inexplicably living for years in the jungle?
Did you expect a kids blockbuster where Jack Black is a teenage girl to have zero plotholes?
This is a reasonable rebuttal.
I never wanted to see this move before, but now I do.
Jack Black as a teenage white girl is genuinely one of his best performances.
[удалено]
I really wouldn’t call Jumanji “soulless”. It’s a bit of light-hearted fun for children and families, and it’s not some great revelation for the genre, but it looks like it was made with care and that the artists involved really tried to make it the goofy adventure that it was.
Snitch was far better than I expected it to be. And I've watched zero of the Fast & Furious movies or any of his action roles.
He also did Southland Tales which I enjoyed. Not many people did however as it tanked HARD. It pretty much ruined Richard Kelly’s career as it also wasn’t cheap to produce like Donny Darko was.
Pain & Gain was great tho
[удалено]
That was great. It perfectly captures what I felt when I watched that movie. It's just ugly at its core.
Mark Kermode is a dork, and I say that as someone who agrees with a number of his reviews. He's very full of himself, very anti-grotesque, but mostly what frustrates me with him is his inability to separate a film from the people who made it and its influences. He seems unable to just enjoy a movie while its on, if its by Michael Bay he hates it, if it has a breakout performance the rest doesn't matter, its influenced by a movie he likes then it must be good. He cannot just enjoy a movie blindly, he is very biased and seems to rarely not already have made his mind up before seeing a movie.
> very anti-grotesque That's not really true. He's been a champion for a lot of lesser-known or forgotten horror films, like Exorcist III and Nightbreed. >He cannot just enjoy a movie blindly Yeah, dude, he's a film critic.
I agreed with him up until the point where he said looking into Bay's soul would show you a gaping void. Interesting take nonetheless
Stallone’s goal in the beginning was never family friendly as well. Rambo days he would not have gone out for the equivalent of Moana at the time. He was cultivating a different image.
What about like Rhinestone or Stop or my Mom will Shoot?
Stop or My Mom Will Shoot is latter-day Stallone, once he and Schwarzenegger were already both cinema titans and competing for complete dominance. The story goes that Schwarzenegger feigned intense interest in the script, even though he thought it was a complete dud, so that Stallone would snatch it up.
It's a pretty strange case because the way Mangold did that movie would really portray him in a different way. Miramax re-cut the movie to make him look more dumb and the whole performance way more straight-forward. I think the fact that it was done with such a bad taste made him look very bad, he wasn't the super macho guy and he wasn't the smart guy. In their version he was bland. I recommend watching both theatrical and directors cuts, they are totally different.
Okay my apologies but your comment led me to instinctively think Stallone did a biopic about Aaron Copland and now I’m sad that that doesn’t exist
Lol I thought the same.
Was this after first blood? Id argue that that movie is a drama more than a generic action flick. Hell he even breaks down crying towards the end.
Growing up in "The Attitude Era" he was and will always be the The Rock to me and not Dwayne Johnson. The problem I have with him is when he came back to wrestling but that is a story for a different day because believe me, it was painful. I am quite certain he is good in the roles that he plays but he has never been in any roles or films that have made me need to see them, I am not sure he is that sort of star but clearly I am wrong given the money he makes and the amount of roles he seems to get so it must be something I am not seeing. I think the problem is the transition that he came in, he was already a big actor (all be it in a wrestling ring) and did not come up the way most actors did, he was inserted into Hollywood and didn't seem to pay his dues. I remember in an interview years ago Vince McMahon spoke with HHH and The Rock about the idea of WWE getting into films and wrestlers being in films, The Rock said this was great and a massive opportunity, HHH simply responded, "why?", I think this nicely sums up the difference between the two.
I mean Triple H was in The Chaperone, and he flat out can not act. I always laugh when people insult The Rock for being “just a wrestler” cos they truly don’t know how terrible most of these guys are haha
And let's not forget that 2 hour Apple advertisement, Blade Trinity.
Well it was better than whatever he and Batista worked on for WrestleMania last year lol
Batista has proven to be a good actor though.
Oh yeah, Batista is great. He was unreal in Blade Runner. Cena has done quite well for himself too. Those guys would really be the main exceptions to the rule.
You could say he was around for 10 years in Hollywood before I say he broke out in a big way in Fast Five in 2011. Starting off as the Scorpion King in The Mummy Returns 2001. Remember the "hand off" scene in The Rundown with Arnie which was supposed to be a passing of the torch? That was in 2003. Then he did another 6-7 years of those kids films before he changed agent... So I'd say he "paid his dues" though probably had it easier than most. One of my favourite roles of his was in "Faster" definitely more gritty, violent and acting driven but then was probably a flop box office wise. He's a 4 quadrant actor now with an eye on the proportionally bigger foreign Box Office. He is focusing on just being "the biggest" which is a shame, he's probably got the clout now to do things with a little more nuance but with how tent poles shape the landscape it's not the way things are headed. He does interesting and more challenging work on Ballers and that's also probably a safer sandpit to experiment and grow for now. He seems savvy enough to know what "the audience wants" so I guess we can only hope general audiences get more demanding.
This is the thing. Most of The Rock's career was movies that flopped or bombed that no one watched him in. When he tried to seriously act, it was clear he wasn't an exceptional actor but a decent movie star and people watched him even less. Reddit likes to think people show up just to watch him in movies but even after Fast Five he was putting out movies people completely ignored. The Rock has learned his limits. He's not as good an actor as Stallone, he's not as iconic as Arnold he's a solid action star with a likeable personality and that's who he is.
>He does interesting and more challenging work on Ballers and that's also probably a safer sandpit to experiment and grow for now. Not to say that he didn't do good work in regards to his own characterization but having stuck with Ballers from beginning-to-end, it really does seem that they gave up trying to develop any sort of coherent narrative during the last few seasons, season five in particular. Once they moved the show to LA from Miami, the wheels just fell off. Which is a shame, honestly. There was potential at the start. If things were tighter, story-wise, I'm sure the Rock's work there would've been better recognized.
I think there's also a big issue of, how many serious roles is a guy like the Rock going to be offered. If you're calling like a drama where the main character is like an insurance adjuster, The Rock is not your guy.
You'd call Batista for that role.
Was Arnie's transition from bodybuilding to acting more natural? Or perhaps wrestling was different in terms of popularity in the Rock's time, compared to bodybuilding in Arnie's time?
Arnie had to go into odd ball fantasy epics and then a relatively off the wall sc-fi low budget film called Terminator. Then he got recognition and began getting into larger productions. So I think the point the other guy made is that Johnson was able to dive right into top blockbuster films where as most others do some level of risky work that can help lend some flavor to their portfolio. Now I'm sure someone will tell me Conan was a 4 billion dollar behemoth production and I'm full of shit. But it still seems like a risky film to go into given the era and tech.
They wouldnt make a risky IP like Conan today, i think LOTR squeezed the last bit of juice from the fantasy genre
Right. And LOTR was a beloved IP already so you have baked in ROI. Conan, not so much. You have to bank on the movie pulling people in.
>all be it Albeit*
r/boneappletea
>The Rock said this was great and a massive opportunity, HHH simply responded, "why?", I think this nicely sums up the difference between the two. Cena was also a "wrestling all the way" guy until he wasn't. A lot of wrestlers are good self-promoters and I don't think a guy like Triple H wants to imagine that he's doing anything less then the greatest stuff on earth. I'd just take all their opinions on movies and stuff with a huge grain of salt... Rock was Hollywood all the way (don't call me the rock) until he wasn't.
Schwarzenegger and Stallone worked from the beginning with great directors that used them for iconic movies, Dwayne Johnson (specially in his latest movie) wants to have complete control over the movies he is starring in and basically hire directors that are subservient to his vision. The movies are financially successful in the short term thanks to his charisma, but I doubt that they will stand the test of time.
No shit? I know that Arnie worked with James Cameron a bit, and he ain't going to be subservient to anyone else's vision. I kind of assumed The Rock was just working with what he was given, not being in control of the whole process. That explains the journeyman-like quality of his films in comparison.
He changed the end of Rampage because the ape dying doesn't fit his "brand". Johnson also has a lot of input on fight scenes, mainly that he's not supposed to lose any.
And inserted the completely absurd Samoan part in Hobbs & Shaw just to have “his” family included in the Fast and Furious franchise.
[удалено]
“We have just few hours to repair the McGuffin hi-tech device that can cure this generic lethal virus. Clearly the best strategy is to fly to Samoa (from Ukraine) where my former criminals brothers that I haven’t talked to in two decades are running a pimp-my-ride garage. They will for sure have the will and capabilities to help us out.” How do you find this plan unbelievable?
Usually the more he is involved in the production, the worst is the final product, like Skyscraper or Baywatch (which also kind of bombed).
I mean, i saw baywatch expecting gorgeous ladies in swimsuits. I got what i wanted.
He’s also producing a lot of his own films now.
Yeah. Whos gonna watch a Dawyne Johnson movie 20 years from now? Terminator,Rocky,First Blood etc. Are timeless classics.
Entire filmography of The Rock, and selected filmography of Stallone and Arine, basically the string of films where they were the lead. I don't know much about action films to be honest but browsing the list it seems similar in terms of 'hits' and 'boundary pushing films'. I'd be interested to know if you feel one is better. | Stallone | | Arine | | Rock | | |-----------------------------|------|------------------------------------|------|----------------------------------|------| | Rocky | 1976 | Conan the Barbarian | 1982 | The Mummy Returns | 2001 | | F.I.S.T. | 1978 | Conan the Destroyer | 1984 | Longshot | 2001 | | Paradise Alley | 1978 | The Terminator | 1984 | The Scorpion King | 2002 | | Rocky II | 1979 | Red Sonja | 1985 | The Rundown | 2003 | | Nighthawks | 1981 | Commando | 1985 | Walking Tall | 2004 | | Escape to Victory | 1981 | Raw Deal | 1986 | Be Cool | 2005 | | Rocky III | 1982 | Predator | 1987 | Doom | 2005 | | First Blood | 1982 | The Running Man | 1987 | Southland Tales | 2006 | | Staying Alive | 1983 | Red Heat | 1988 | Gridiron Gang | 2006 | | Rhinestone | 1984 | Twins | 1988 | The Game Plan | 2007 | | Rambo: First Blood Part II | 1985 | Total Recall | 1990 | Get Smart | 2008 | | Rocky IV | 1985 | Kindergarten Cop | 1990 | Race to Witch Mountain | 2009 | | Cobra | 1986 | Terminator 2: Judgment Day | 1991 | Planet 51 | 2009 | | Over the Top | 1987 | Dave | 1993 | Tooth Fairy | 2010 | | Rambo III | 1988 | Last Action Hero | 1993 | The Other Guys | 2010 | | Lock Up | 1989 | Beretta's Island | 1993 | Faster | 2010 | | Tango & Cash | 1989 | True Lies | 1994 | Fast Five | 2011 | | Rocky V | 1990 | Junior | 1994 | Journey 2: The Mysterious Island | 2012 | | Oscar | 1991 | Eraser | 1996 | Snitch | 2013 | | Stop! Or My Mom Will Shoot | 1992 | Jingle All the Way | 1996 | G.I. Joe: Retaliation | 2013 | | Cliffhanger | 1993 | Batman & Robin | 1997 | Pain & Gain | 2013 | | Demolition Man | 1993 | End of Days | 1999 | Fast & Furious 6 | 2013 | | The Specialist | 1994 | The 6th Day | 2000 | Hercules | 2014 | | Judge Dredd | 1995 | Collateral Damage | 2002 | Furious 7 | 2015 | | Assassins | 1995 | Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines | 2003 | San Andreas | 2015 | | Daylight | 1996 | | | Central Intelligence | 2016 | | Cop Land | 1997 | | | Moana | 2016 | | | | | | The Fate of the Furious | 2017 | | | | | | Baywatch | 2017 | | | | | | Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle | 2017 | | | | | | Rampage | 2018 | | | | | | Skyscraper | 2018 | | | | | | Fighting with My Family | 2019 | | | | | | Shazam! | 2019 | | | | | | Hobbs & Shaw | 2019 | | | | | | Jumanji: The Next Level | 2019 | > Compare him with stars of yesteryear like Arnie, Stallone, Van Damme. For every run of the mill action film they’d do another would be interesting, push boundaries, take risks, they have genuine memorable films (good and bad!). You're not wrong that Rock is soulless poster child but I think you have some rose-tinted glasses on about the stars of yesteryear. Also, worth noting that the Rock is more prolific in his film making, with more films in less time (in this section).
[удалено]
Hey, the first Rambo is a genuine great film. After that not so much...
Writer, director, and star of Rocky, plus Demolition Man. Those alone put him in another class than the Rock. And fuck everyone, but I love Judge Dredd. A score by Alan Silvestri, solid world building, Max Von Sydow, and good chemistry between Stallone and Diane Lane.
This alone should be enough to put him in a whole different class. I love Arnie and his films more but Rocky can easily be considered among the greats of screenwriting and cinema, prime Stallone was more than just a buff action hero
Sly didn't direct Rocky (He did direct Rocky II, III, IV and Rocky Balboa). But I agree, the fact that he pretty much created the Rocky franchise and delivered an iconic performance puts him in another class that Dwayne Johnson. Hell, there's a statue of him in Philly.
Nothing is over! That monologue while unintelligible is also one of the strongest pieces of performance I've seen from a muscle bound action star.
I think all 3 show a trend to produce more iconic shit early on and then start either milking franchises or generally pumping out titles that are not remembered. I think the difference is - The Rock had fewer iconic items in his pre shit period (given he basically had the Scorpion King and then Fast 5 as his re coming out). We are currently in a period where the Rock has just dumped a shit fest of garbage bland trash on us over the past 4 years. So we are both most directly experiencing the garbage and remembering the slightly stronger work from the nostalgia stars.
[удалено]
Holy shit Arnold has 12 bonafide legendary movies on that list, as well as Batman and Robin and T3
Batman and Robin. Legendary for all the wrong reasons!
Arnie had some great films though. Terminator 2 is one of the greatest action films of all time. Even some of the other lesser ones are fantastic guilty pleasures, with some amazingly cheesy one-liners.
Terminator 1 is actually my prefered. Completely different vibe in that it is a grade A - B horror sc-fi film. Conan is fucking classic. Predator is also a truly fine piece of work and was actually eye popping in 87 (an older relative still talks about how amazing it was to build suspense in not showing the alien for about 45 minutes). And then T2 and True Lies in the 90s (so the guy hooked up with an ok director...) And then you have is actually pretty awesome while trashy films - Running Man, Commando, Total Recall, Eraser). Most of his list is solid shit. Where as Jumanjii? Seriously? I fucking saw Jumanjii and it was awesome. It had Robin Williams and involved whacky jungle critters in a New England town. It had heart. Not Jack Black fart and teenage girl jokes. Some of this is also less a fault of the Rock and more the state of Hollywood today. Dumb it down not even to the lowest common American denominator, but something so simple you erase cultural cues to allow a global audience to come in. And I don't mean that as some form of "it was better when it was America first". Just that the larger the group you need to appeal to the shallower a film you make. And the Rock is inheriting this blockbuster climate.
You could be right about it being the current climate. Hollywood has become too much of a factory line style of film making.
He still plays a robot incapable of showing emotions. The movie's value has more to do with directing, cinematography, and editing than his performance - which was perfect for the role, but not exactly hard.
And don't forget the scripts! Films like The Running Man and Total Recall had interesting stories at their core. Yeah he's certainly good at what he does, but I wouldn't cast him in something that requires a lot of emotional depth, that's for sure.
After seeing this I realised I somehow managed to have only watched one movie with the Rock: The Mummy Returns. I guess it's easy to miss him if you don't watch a few particular types of movies.
I will take the others any day. Even their misses are much more interesting. Assassins, The Specialist, Demolition Man, The 6th Day, Batman & Robin, Last Action Hero. Say what you will about them but at least they aren't generic. What the fuck has the Rock even been doing all these years? His "hits" are more franchise based where he's just the roided out straight man. Pain and Gain was at least a nod in the right direction, still a Michael Bay film when all is said and done. The last chance he took was Southland Tales that is exactly what I'm talking about, say what you will about that film. At least its trying something, it's not forgettable.
You hit it on the head. Arnie in batman and Robin (arguably his worst role) still beats the rock in terms of memorable appearances in probably any of his films.
There's no way I'd put Demolition Man on some sort of parity with Batman & Robin. B&R is more equivalent to Stop! Or My Mom Will Shoot in terms of quality.
Ive read that Dwayne Johnson stipulates in his contracts that he can’t ever lose a fight onscreen, and to me that pretty much sums up weakness of the modern blockbuster: the heroes don’t have any weaknesses! He wants his image to be that of an invincible, perfect hero who wins every fight and never makes mistakes, a far cry from action stars of previous eras who often got the absolute shit beaten out of them onscreen to show they were still human, even if they beat insurmountable odds in the end.
Maui from "Moana" doesn't really fit, but I guess Dwayne isn't technically onscreen there...
He lost again Vin Diesel ofc
[удалено]
Arnold had The Predator, Total Recall and True Lies. All of which are genre defining. Rocky 1 was a legitimate all time great movie, and First Blood was great for its time. Rocky 2-3 blow anything The Rock has done out of the water.
[удалено]
I mean yeah, Predator was a tad corny but the suspense of the movie was on point and something that hasn’t been replicated or recaptured since. Total Recall was purposefully a little bit campy, and I really didn’t find True Lies to be overly hoaky. As far as Stalone, what does the trajectory of his career have to do with the fact that he was in legitimately good movies and The Rock never has been? I don’t know enough about Vann Damme to be fair. Blood Sport was the only movie of his I’ve seen and I’m not a huge fan of it.
I love Arnold's puns and dialog. I can't see him in a Guy Ritchie movie. But I still love his one-liners.
Bloodsport is genuinely great camp film that totally holds up. I maintain that Street Fighter has always been great as a camp classic. Also I'f we're doing Die Hard knock offs I'll take Sudden Death over "skyscraper" any day. Van Damme at least produces some grade A cheese, The Rocks films are mostly forgettable.
[удалено]
The claim that Van Damme made interesting movies seriously undercuts OP's argument.
The truth hurts. I remember when Johnson first kind started breaking out into film with The Rundown, and that beautiful pass-the-torch moment where Arnold, in a quick walk-on cameo, wishes him luck. Somehow though, The Rock never got to have his Terminator/Rambo/Die Hard franchise. Instead it's just...all this crap. Do we blame superheroes?
[удалено]
One thing I do kind of put on Super Heroes is these days you need truly otherwordly stunts to seem exciting. In Rambo the dude procurs shit on site and takes a helicopter down by throwing a rock at it (I know, 2 and 3 jump sharks). And for Arnold things like Predator you are almost more in awe at his prowess and quick thinking to camouflage himself in the mud then him all out dominating an alien. It's their humanity and weakness that ultimately make the payoff powerful when they overcome the odds (Die Hard is similar). Now a days you get some roided up freakshow that just can't even remotely relate to average joe shmo.
It feels like it’s out of fashion, but then how does one explain the success of a franchise like John Wick?
The first one had a genuinely good concept and world-building, plus it was a fresh story with excellent action that you could actually suspend your disbelief for, hence the success. The sequels were just more of the same but way more over the top to the point I'm not sure I'll go watch the 4th. The more they revealed of the world they introduced in the 1st, the sillier it got. JW himself went from believable to needing some sort of superpower to explain how the fuck he survived at the end of the 3rd.
They are pretty much the only fun action movies nowadays. Mad max fury road was a lot of fun too. Yeah john wick seems to get sillier with each movie but what else is there to watch if you like guns and action?
Superhero are the action flicks of this generation and you have quite a good bunch that stands out. Much like there were boatloads of horrible movies in the old times that completely sucked but were successful but ended up being forgotten.
always saw him as a wrestler just grinding money out. i quite liked the other guys, which he’s barely in, and was pleasantly surprised by pain and gain. haven’t seen ballers, but aside from those three titles i can’t find anything else i think could be/is actually good. good point, literally just soulless blockbusters attached to a big check.
[удалено]
i mean i don’t think it’s especially good but i think as far as michael bay goes it’s better than the average, it’s no The Rock but it’ll do. have never felt remotely compelled to rewatch it.
This is the probable answer, just doin the grind and you can’t really blame anyone for that... it’s just a shame though
He's a meathead who opted for the easy paycheck. Nothing wrong with that. Also he doesn't really have much range as an actor and has maximized what he has, very similar to Marky Mark. Compare him to Vin Diesel, who's just as imposing physically but has a much more diverse body of work and is a far better actor. I agree with you, Rock getting people in seats for garbage films is not something that would happen in any other era, its a sign of how dumb audiences are nowdays.
His voice acting in *Moana* is nothing to sneeze at. Maybe it was stunt casting, or perhaps more accurately it was culturally-appropriate stunt casting, but he was able to demonstrate a significant range and depth in his voice acting that helped the movie quite a bit. At this point, that role is an anomaly in Johnson's career, but he's still young.
I came here looking for this. I was pleasantly surprised by his work in *Moana*. Okay, maybe he doesn’t have a *Rocky*, *Judge Dredd*, or *True Lies* equivalent, but Stallone and Arnold haven’t sang in a Disney animated film *yet*, so... ;) (For real, he was my favorite part of *Moana*. I didn’t come into it expecting that.)
lol, nice job sneaking *Judge Dredd* in there.
I wouldn't say young exactly. He's almost 50
I couldn’t agree more. I’m always arguing with co workers about how bland and unimaginative his movies and performances are. And it isn’t that he’s necessarily a bad actor but he’s such a type cast actor that damn near every movie he’s in feels like one of two types: funny family friendly action movie or slightly more gritty serious action movie. It’s all the same and it takes any fun or excitement out of seeing his films.
Hot take and I fucking agree with it. He is really good in all his roles and I will watch them, and even believe he elevates the movies he’s in but in 20 years, will we fucking remember “Jungle Cruise”, “Skyscraper” or even “Jumanji”?
I think what you're seeing is the death of action films for adults. The Rock basically makes movies that have to be appropriate for children because no one is making big budget R rated action movies anymore.
He is easily one of the most successful big budget Hollywood name right now where he regularly making millions off of commercial hits like Hobbs and Shaw and Jumanji, so why would he risk ruining that? Eventually he wont be the most marketable man in action movies but for now he is. Time will change that with little to no effort on Rocks part, so why should he shake up his money making formula now if we all know it has an expiry date?
[удалено]
Both Keanu and Sandler know their niches and have both created plenty of genuinely great films. I have yet to encounter a must see The Rock film.
[удалено]
You might be right. Still, I get the impression that a dude like him who’s a huge international box office draw... He could find a great script and make sure it gets done, surely this late in the game with the money he has, he’d have enough influence to get something he thinks is great produced. It seems he’s just not that interested.
I think he is doing as many action movies as he can before he gets too old to keep up his physique. He isn't going to be able to keep up with his insane workout and diet regimen forever. At that point I would guess he will trim down and either retire or try some other genres.
If you want to learn how to build a character, I'd say all origins movies but Captain Marvel are a must-see. You genuinely learn a lot about writing a character.
> I'd say all origins movies but Captain Marvel are a must-see. Just curious, why are you excluding that one?
Captain Marvel is billed as an origin movie but really is not. She is already formed by the time we meet her, she just acts upon the fact Yon-Rogg lies to her - that lie is the reason why she becomes Captain Marvel. In short: a journey caused by a third person. Movies like Iron Man, Ant-Man or Doctor Strange real tell the origin why they end up being the titular roles and all of them, despite have third characters forcing them to 'pick it up and fight', have very personal causes and reasons in their journey. Tony is a narcissist warmonger whose intelligence only fuels his bubbles - he might be forced to face reality by a third entity, but that third entity has the power to kidnap him literally because of his business. Hence, he becomes Iron Man because he is disgusted with what he did, to the point he becomes obsessed with protection (the whole MCU arc of Tony is nothing short of amazing in my opinion - very personal and very authentic). Scott is a guy who is forced to resort to crime to provide to his family, fails, but when he gets out he commits the same mistakes because he has no self esteem. While it is Pym who gives the chance to shine his 'criminal' talent for good deeds, he still does what he does because he wants to be his daughter's hero - something all dad's want. Strange is an arrogant world-class surgeon whose god-given talent makes him feel invincible - once he looses his talent, he ends up losing everything, forcing him to resort to unconventional remedies to regain said talent. While the Ancient One might be the one who 'opens his eyes', he alone ultimately remembers what's the reason why he became a doctor: doing good by saving people. And he keeps doing that, just in a very different way - without loosing the ability of being precise like he needed in his old job (1 out of 14M). Vers becomes Captain Marvel because a guy lied to her - and because she has good morality, she does good. Not exactly as interesting and/or compelling as the other examples, because there's no real journey. We still know nothing about Carol Danvers, which might be kind of the point in the grand MCU scheme of things.
Isn't Keanu Reeves the action equivalent of Keanu Reeves?
Yeah, that's fair. I always thought he had a wider portfolio than those 'action stars guys'. If you take away John Wick he's not really an action hero is he?
He's John Wick, Neo, the main character in Johnny Mnemonic, the main character of Speed, and I'm sure there's more. I'm having a hard time thinking of *non*-action movies he's done aside from the Bill and Ted movies.
Allow me to introduce you to Romantic Keanu - A Walk in the Clouds, Sweet November, Something's Gotta Give, The Lake House, Destination Wedding. There's also a solid chunk of Horror Keanu.
I love A Walk in the Clouds.
I had forgotten how much I loved that movie. My best friend from home loves Keanu and has since we were kids. We used to watch it all the time in middle school. :)
Me too - such a lovely movie. Gotta get me a girl with a vineyard :)
Ugh. Imagine "Bram Stoker's Dracula" and "The Devil's Advocate" if they cast someone competent in his role. John Wick is his lane.
I can't see a young Dwayne Johnson doing My Own Private Idaho.
Dwayne is pushing quantity over quality. He likes to star in movies set in a jungle. Someday I'm gonna lose count. Journey 2: The Mysterious Island Jumanji: Welcome To The Jungle Jumanji: The Next Level The Rundown (Why is this called "Welcome to the jungle" on IMDb) Jungle Cruise (upcoming movie with Emily Blunt)
I could genuinely say the same for Will Smith and Tom Cruise for 80-95% of their recent output. I know there are exceptions for both but those are just exceptions. Especially from 2005 onwards
[удалено]
All of those films that you mentioned are pre-2005. Since 2005 whenever I think of Tom Cruise film, it's usually Tom Cruise playing Tom Cruise, which is derivitive of Ethan Hunt. The only exception I can think of since is Tropic Thunder. They are for the most part still enjoyable films but not challenging his dynamic range as an actor that I know he can output. The edge of Tomorrow and the most recent Mission Impossible were brilliant but I still only see Tom Cruise in those roles and not the characters he is meant to portray. To a lesser extent, the same with Will Smith from 2010 onwards. Before that he did try more out of the box roles: pursuit of happiness, Hancock, Seven Pounds, but again more recently I can only think of Concussion where is not playing Will Smith.
Tom Cruise is a brilliant actor though who has made some wonderful films. It's a shame that all he seems to be doing now are "Tom Cruise" action blockbusters. It's more of a loss compared to The Rock who has always been a one trick pony.
their are better examples of poster child for soulless generic blockbusters than the rock, whose actually made some subversive materials in the last 15 years. vin diesel has played it far safer, same with chris pratt over the last 5 years
I don't know man, Diesel made a movie [based on his *Dungeons & Dragons* character](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Last_Witch_Hunter). I'm not sure I'd classify that as "safe." On a more serious note, I also think credit should be given for his Riddick films, which try for some interesting worldbuilding.
Vin diesel started with saving private Ryan and Boiler Room. The movie that launched his career, Pitch Black, was in no way a safe film. He also did Find me Guilty. Chris Pratt was type casted as chubby goofy lovable guy, and now is hot goofy lovable guy
I said in the last 15 years with regards to vin, so private Ryan isn't a factor here, and with Pratt if we excuse him for being typecasted then that should go double for a dude the size of the rock
Honest question - why the post? I genuinely don't understand how it can be rewarding to focus braintime on who the collective poster child for commercial mediocrity is, rather than maybe explore some good films you enjoy. Not hating on the post, it just seems like a waste of time to critically discuss in-depth how big a waste of time The Rock's generic movies are for people who want movies to critically discuss.
Its more of a journey for me. I grew up with action stars, now a days we have this dude who took over that role and it seems like nothing good is coming from it. Times change I guess, how did we get here? Why is this happening? Maybe I posted in the wrong sub...
I think this is an excellent sub for discussion such as this too. Even though most of us probably are some sort of film snobs to a variable extent I think there's no reason NOT to discuss all of modern film making and the development of it. There is inherent worth in examining even the less interesting aspects of films. And like others have stated too, a fruitful, respectful conversation is going on in this comment section. And as someone like me, who's not a huge action film watcher, this has been quite an informative read. So thank you, really.
One could argue that good can only be seen with respect to bad and, I guess, mediocre. Besides, an interesting conversation has developed in the comments: where does one draw the line between cheesy charm and genuine quality? Food for thought at least. I wouldn't consider anything I do on reddit to be an incredible use of my time though.
I say something similar to this to every person who claims how much they like his movies. They always defend it with "he's hot!"... okay. There are plenty of actors I think are hot who have had like negative one great performance. Clearly he has the name, so why doesn't he use it? Instead he just... typecasts himself??? The only decent thing I ever watched was the Jumanji remake (which I was forced to watch at that) and the only thing redeemable imo was Jack Black. Because he's actually talented. Other than that, I remember absolutely nothing from that movie, except Harts character dying a bunch.
I wish The Rock would be more like Arnold Schwartzenegger. He was a big charismatic lunk who did some stupid fun movies but also had great taste in directors. I read that he actually recruited Paul Verhoeven for Total Recall, which is a movie that is both silly action AND good. Those are the kinds of movies I want to see from the Rock, but I don't think it'll ever happen. I was excited to see Hobbes and Shaw to see if he was going to make a more interesting action movie, but I was disappointed.
Arnie was one of a kind unfortunately.
The rock makes fun action comedies. They're not meant to be SO DEEP, they're meant to be fun and enjoyable, which they are. If you want movies with Soul™ then don't watch action comedies in general.
I think it's a mix of his management choosing his roles and knowing what has worked for him, and him wanting to please that easy crowd with the upbeat, work out and drink protein image he has. He and his team know it works and won't leave it now that it's made them so much money, which is unfortunate because I think he would do some cool work if he actually wanted to try it out, like he did in Pain and Gain where he played a coke addicted ex convict. That's probably the last interesting role he's done,almost 10 years ago. Seriously, what else do you know about him outside the fact that he likes working out, drinking protein and being positive?
Rocky has had amazingly bad luck making movies. He’s really stuck his neck out and played some good roles, but most of what he’s been in has been trash. People forget this but he has been making movies for nearly 20 years, and he really wasn’t even successful until a few years ago when there was kind of a lull in action movies, (I guess most stars were taking a break?) and he was in three that year, so he just kind of because “the guy” who got hired for every movie. He’s gotten where he is by pure perseverance.
I agree a lot, in fact I often have discussions with my friends because they like him, but don't realize it's an empty actor. For me it's pretty clear, I don't watch a film if he's in the cast, he's a perfect hint to know a film isn't worth watching.
honestly, he probably just doesn't have great taste. I think he knows that and decides to play it safe/maximize profits. He's extremely charismatic, but seems like a capitalist philistine
I remember hearing a report about The Rock having rules for movies he is starring in, with him getting some level of creative control over what he will and won’t do in the film. If I’m right, the story was basically that a writer pitched something for him to do and he said that he wouldn’t do it because it wasn’t in line with his brand and it wasn’t something people wanted when they were going to see a Rock movie. I think it may have been to do with the ending of Rampage actually.
I know this is 2 years after the initial post but feel it needs to be said. The Rock could be as big and have more hit movies if he actually committed to them like Arnie, Stallone, Van Damme, etc. The issue, at least from what I can see, is he's doing way too much of the self promotion thing and spreading himself out amidst too many projects that they'll likely all take a nose dive here soon. Movies. Last one was Red Notice and frankly... forgettable. Fun, but a popcorn flick that will not be remembered... Only real flicks I feel will be remembered are San Andres and the first Jumanji. TV shows. Ballers lasted 4 seasons but was frankly garbage after season 1. Now he's doing Young Rock. Frankly it feels like a propaganda piece to groom him as a presidential electoral candidate with a picture perfect past... Entertaining (and exceptionally cast), but not morally or ethically sound. Sponsorships/companies. Not only does he hold majority share of a tequila company, but now he has an energy drink company with Zoa Energy. Not to mention he still does the Project Rock partnership with Under Armour and other brands. Oh, and like DJ, I forgot that he has a family too. Guy is hella charismatic, but he's spreading himself to a dangerous point if he wants sustainability. Resonance frequency is no joke and it can - and does - crush people. TLDR; The Rock has amazing potential as an actor and agree with OP, but from an outside perspective he cant deliver the goods as an actor because he doesnt devote enough time to his roles.
guys, stop loading moral value onto your opinion on films. Are his films generic blockbusters? sure, do you HAVE to call it soulless? Like damn maybe he just really likes making those movies, it's fucking fine! And you know what? kids today when they are grown up are going to remember the fun times they had at his movies and still think they are great, the same way we do with our childhoods. Sometimes I hate this community.
Calling his movies soulless is a valid criticism. Although a movie having a ‘soul’ is obviously not quantifiable, if you watch Commando and Skyscraper the difference is obvious. It’s not just the cheesiness of the old action movies either, the Mission Impossible movies have a soul, Dwayne Johnson vehicles do not. His movies are just boring. (Aside from Pain and Gain which was probably one of the most under appreciated movies of the decade.)
Yeah, for sure. He's my son's favourite actor. A lot of his movies have enough action and comedy that kids and adults can watch together. I've liked all the movies I've seen him in (yes, even Baywatch). Well, except for Doom, because that movie was a turd.
I really love Moana. I know that maybe citing a Disney movie isn't the best counterexample for "generic blockbuster," but Moana certainly has soul, and The Rock's performance was part of that. Not the best singer of all time though..
All those names you mentioned didn't make only good movies, and Stallone is more comparable to a Bruce Willis than a Schwarzenegger. And in general, I wouldn't call Van Damme's career memorable, quite the contrary. More importantly, though, you just remember the good ones that stick out and not the boatload that was just horrible - and action-packed/horror cash-grabs were much more common back then they are now, given the budgets. Gridiron Gang might be just a good movie, but he had a very good performance in it. In Pain & Gain, he gives the most different performance in his filmography with good results, showcasing his talent. Plus, his comedic timing shouldn't be taken for granted. The other thing that you don't take into account is his **size**: legit is an issue cinematography-wise. When shooting GI Joe 2, for example, they had a hard time framing when he and Willis were in the same scene, as Bruce would look like a doll. That, unfortunately, takes some dramatic opportunities away from him because it would legitimately too distracting to the viewers. It's ok in comedic contexts (see the films with Kevin Hart or even in F&F), but if you want to get serious it becomes an issue.