Welles is great. Don’t know much about dunaway
Welles is great as a director, don’t particularly like him as an actor (6/10)
I don’t like Faye Dunaway (5/10)
Welles in his great roles clearly a 10. There were also some “what the fuck am I doing here” roles in his career, especially in the later days.
Dunaway was so cool in Bonny and Clyde.
Welles 5 out of ten…as an actor…he usually does not hold my interest for long.
Dunaway 8 out of 10…her role in Doc is one of my favourite.
Both did some very good work but not enough to make them real favourites of mine.
Dunaway was good in Bonnie and Clyde, Doc, The Thomas Crown Affai and Network but my favourite performance of hers for me was her cameo in Little Big Man as Miss Pendrake. 7/10
I like Welles best in his Noirs, Lady From Shanghai and especially Touch of Evil. 7/10
As an actor I like him best in The Third Man, probably because it’s basically a cameo
I have often the feeling his films would’ve been (even) better had he chosen another actor to play ‘his’ roles. He’s too dominant, the film becomes too much a Orson Welles show. I have the same feeling about Woody Allen. Good comedies (at least several of them) but too much Allen in them.
Welles was one of these very, very charismatic actors with an amazing screen presence. Hard to imagine another actor for Citizen Kane, The Stranger, The Lady from Shanghai, Touch of Evil, Chimes at Midnight …
One of the few times I completely agree with Stanton! 
No offense. It’s just that your opinions are often quite radical.
BAN HIM!!!
I agree with Korano agreeing with Stanton. Orson Welles takes over the screen in his earlier performances. His presence is CK & Third Man is undeniable.
Orson Welles - 10
Faye Dunaway - 9 … like her best in Network and Mommie Dearest, haven’t seen Bonnie & Clyde or Doc yet
Ahh… what? Radical? Now that’s interesting! Where and when?
In the last weeks I get the notion that there are probably 2 Stantons in the forum. Me and a mhytological being of which quite strange ideas begin to grow in some people’s heads.
Seriously, I think that my opinions are quite differentiated (and sophisticated) and far from being radical. To say here and there something about films I don’t like very much, doesn’t make my opinions radical. Or does it?
I doubt that I have more strange opinions than most of the other Forum members about SWs, or films in general. So how comes that I got the unwelcome fame of having radical, extreme ot whatever opinions?
It seems the inner and outer perception are not in accordance!
In this country, being radical is somewhat of a badge of courage (unless it is followed by the word Muslim). On that note “watch what you say…”. I would say that of all of us here, you go against the grain more than most. Not such a bad thing. Every group needs one to spark debates.
I hadn’t understand the word “radical” in this context as an affront or something negative. I’m aware that it is maybe more something like a compliment.
But still I’m curious about my “radical opinions”. Are they really more radical than other member’s opinions? I don’t think so.
And which of my opinions about SWs was radical (or made a radical impression)?
Yes. I have sometimes a bit exaggerated to get an interesting discussion going, but not very much and also not too much. And yes, not a bad thing if no one gets offended.
I don’t mean radical in a serious way. It’s just that you like and stirdily defend Spaghettis most people hate and visa versa. You defend Boot Hill wich most people hate. Defend Return of Sabata which people hate. But you offer dislike to what most consider a classic being Death Rides a Horse.
Its not a bad thing in the least. On the contrary. Its a very good thing so don’t worry (which I know you weren’t)
Radical may have been the wrong word to use perhaps ?
[quote=“korano, post:55, topic:1910”]I don’t mean radical in a serious way. It’s just that you like and stirdily defend Spaghettis most people hate and visa versa. You defend Boot Hill wich most people hate. Defend Return of Sabata which people hate. But you offer dislike to what most consider a classic being Death Rides a Horse.
Its not a bad thing in the least. On the contrary. Its a very good thing so don’t worry (which I know you weren’t) ;)[/quote]
Of course, but we all have our beloved outsider babies, which we maybe even love a bit too much, because so many others detest 'em. And we all have our share of “classics” we don’t care for.
And if I look at my Top 20, it contains apart from Boot Hill only consensus films.
I don’t dislike DRaH by the way, I only don’t think it’s anything special. It’s a good western but not more. The most overrated of the forum’s Top 20 for me. Would make my top 100, bur surely not my top 50. And I would rate it just like Return of Sabata with a 6/10. I haven’t said that RoS is a masterwork, only that I’m wondering why it is rated so much lower than Sabata (also 6/10). (still wondering)
I’m sorry to disappoint you all, but I don’t deserve the praise. I’m overestimated, but I know what I’m worth for the forum. (no false modesty)
(funny discussion btw)
off topic banter alert
UUUUUUUHHHHHHHH
Quick!
Yeah, If there is anything that Welles’s acting possesses, it’s charisma. Only in Tepepa does he seem totally disinterested. Probably because he wanted to hurry, get paid, and go on making his failed projects. Too bad. Fuck you film industry for surpressing such a genious. A man who is now considered one of, if not the best director in the history of cinema. Not my own words either!
Faye Dunaway, never seemed like a bad actress but not one that caught my interest.
Marlon Brando
Vivien Leigh
