Home » Nicholas Cage: an acquired taste that very few people have acquired

Comments

Nicholas Cage: an acquired taste that very few people have acquired — 55 Comments

  1. Not a real big fan of Cage either, but he has done well in a couple of movies.

    As a teenager I thought “the Rock” was one of the best movies of all time (not as good now, but I still enjoy it). It was, IMO the best role I have seen him in by far.

    I do think that he did fairly well as Balthazar in the Sorcerer’s Apprentice, but that role fit his kinda strange/offbeat “acting” quite well.

    I guess looking through his filmography I do not see another of his movies I like so I guess I can’t really answer your question. While I liked him in those two movies I mostly didn’t elsewhere.

  2. Well, I think he has one redeeming quality…that is I have never heard him bashing Conservatives….or did I just happen to miss it?

  3. I’m not a big Cage fan but quite liked him in National Treasure. He ain’t my favorite but he’s watchable. He can act, unlike Keanu Reeves.

  4. Neo,
    I think you’re unfairly putting Cage above Kenau Reeves in the talentless competition.

  5. He’s been in some bad films and turned in some bad performances but he can act. See “Bad Lieutenant: Port of Call New Orleans,” if you don’t believe me.

  6. I’ve always referred to him as “the Man With One Face.” Have you noticed that his expression never changes? It doesn’t matter if he is a grifter or an angel in love. same face.

  7. Kind of liked the movie Con Air – but then that was also full of guy humor…lol. Also liked the National Treasure movie, but that’s about it.

  8. “Raising Arizona” is one of my all-time favorites. Not because of Cage, but because of the whole deal. I was startled when Cage became a machoman cool roleplayer, and still am. He’s cardboard in the few movies I’ve seen of that ilk.

  9. I watched him in one flick – Vampire’s Kiss, which was so loathsome that I could hardly wait for someone to put a stake through his heart and put all of us out of our misery. Don’t know why I watched it to the end, I think just to root for whatever other character was going to kill him.
    About the only other distinguishing thing about that move is that it was the one in which he ate a live cockroach.
    About his appeal … got me.

  10. Strangely, for all his bizarreness, he doesn’t seem to have much “presence”, which I tried to define in The Return of Mickey Rourke with this example…

    “Presence” is a not-easily defined quality, of an actor, that absolutely compels your attention when he shows up.

    In the 2002 movie of Tom Clancy’s “The Sum of All Fears”, Ben Affleck was tapped to take over the role of Jack Ryan (following Alec Baldwin and Harrison Ford), and had the misfortune of having Liev Schreiber playing Mr. Clark in scenes with him, about which a Houston Press review noted, “We can’t take our eyes off Schreiber, and we can’t keep our eyes open when Affleck’s around.”

    That’s a very good example of what this “presence” business is about.

    My latest post, John Hawkes – Man of Steel, brings us another who can do so much without seeming to do anything at all.

  11. Adaptation. Cage plays twins with the quirky differences twins have and does it so well one starts feeling sorry for the ant Charlie being victimized by the Donald.

  12. I don’t know what it is about NC, but I almost always enjoy his movies, Family Man, in particular. And from the way back time machine, I loved him as Randy in Valley Girl. Sue me, I was 16 then. 🙂

    I put NC in the same category as Keanu Reeves and Wynona Ryder. Talentless actors who have the good fortune to be cast in rather good movies.

  13. Nolanimrod:

    I completely forgot Adaptation (THAT would seem impossible, wouldn’t it?)

    I have to give him credit there (although working under Spike Jonze almost certainly helped a lot.)

  14. Some of his films have been entertaining, not great just entertaining.

    Neo, I bet you don’t like Kevin Costner either. 😉

    # Brad Says:
    July 19th, 2010 at 2:13 pm

    Neo,
    I think you’re unfairly putting Cage above Kenau Reeves in the talentless competition.

    That’s going to leave a mark.

  15. John:

    I have a friend who cannot stand Kevin Costner.

    I’m kinda indifferent when he plays good guys, but think he’s actually pretty good when he loosens up and does something like 3000 Miles to Graceland. I also liked him in Open Range.

  16. There are a lot of folks out there who don’t like K.C.

    Paul you have good taste. Open Range was a great movie and a better book. And Costner did bad well in 3000 Miles to Graceland. I also thought he did a good job in A Perfect World. He was a good bad guy.

    But I do think Costner and Cage are better actors than Kenau Reeves. And I really liked The Matrix.

  17. Cage was aweome in leaving Las Vegas, for which he won an Oscaryang. I attribute that to Elizabeth Shue’s ying to Cage’s yang. Given that he has starred in a couple of dozen flicks, we can safely assume he can’t act his way out of a wet paper bag.

    I also think he has pics of Jerry Brukenhiermer with a goat and teenage girls, because Cage keeps hamming his way through Brukenhiemer’s high budget, but bad movies.

  18. I totally agree with you, Neo. Cage seems to play the same person in every movie–not that I go out of my way to see them. His expression reminds me of someone whose nose is stopped up. His lower lip is slightly drooping. Ben Stiller is another actor who always plays the same character. That stuff worked for John Wayne, but he put more into being John Wayne.

  19. Bad acting! Does anyone remember Leonardo DiCaprio in “The Man in the Iron Mask”. I’m surprised John Malkovick, Gerard Depardieu, Gabriel Byre and Jeremy Irons didn’t take him aside and break his legs to get him out of the picture.

  20. To me Cage is a very good actor who can do a solid job, but only in those rare movies with roles just right for him. Usually you wonder if Cage’s gigs were assigned by some tone-deaf prankster.

    His best movie, IMO, is 8MM. 8MM is dark and disturbing and definitely not for many people, but if you have the self-control to look the most sordid evil in the eye, you can watch Cage disappear into his role as a detective trying to get the facts about a custom-made snuff film.

    Intimate contact with the deepest levels of human depravity tends to change people for the worse, regardless of their inner resources. Cage’s character is a scruffier man at the end of this film, and so believably that one wants to ask Cage if he himself was altered by what he learned here.

    Perhaps Cage would have made less money, but have a higher reputation and more fans, if he had refused any but roles where he could shine. If you’ve felt like you really wanted to respect Cage but just couldn’t, watch 8MM. You might want to check with a reviewer you trust, first. The film can leave marks.

  21. Out of all the movies mentioned here I’m ashamed to say I only recall Adaptation and Leaving Las Vegas, and both were not bad. Not incredibly good,too much schmaltz for my taste – but hey, on typical Hollywood mass production background they stood out rather favorably.

    Moonstruck…funny that Cher proposed him to play her love interest : both are completely wooden there, like lifeless marionettes. Well, I guess they made a good match…

  22. I liked Raising Arizona.

    I don’t see the appeal, either. However, my wife’s college roommate once had a date with him. Or so I was told.

  23. Cage does kinda suck. But we have to remember playing convincing characters sometimes demands it. I know real people who seem to be poorly acting out their own lives.

  24. I also liked Raising Arizona, but then again I’m a big Coen Brothers fan.

    I don’t see many movies, so I don’t remember whether I’ve seen any other Nicholas Cage film.

  25. Cage is only palatable when he has somebody great drag him around. Holly Hunter in “Raising Arizona”, Elzabeth Shue in “Leaving Las Vegas”.

    (Say a line, drag Nic Cage. Say a line, drag Nic Cage.)

  26. Let’s not forget NC’s best movie ever – Fast Times At Ridgemont High! However, he wasn’t NCage back then, he was NCoppola.

    I never got that emotional about NC, but you have to give him at least a little credit for LLVegas and that Oscar. He apparently became a complete drunk in the months preceding the filming of the movie to get into the role.

    I do have a soft spot for Raising Arizona and Valley Girl I must admit. The Con Airs and the Rocks are the types of movies that I might find mildly enjoyable, but can’t get too into them. I’d probably need more than a NC cookie cutter performance to get emotional about such movies.

  27. An entertaining move is entertaining unless the actors playing the main characters are so bad the audience laughs at them.
    Entertaining movies sell. Cage makes (and apparently spends) lots of money.
    So he’s a lousy actor. He’s adequate for the vehicles.

  28. I must say I have usually liked Nicholas Cage. Con Air is one of my favourites, and I have liked him in other movies. Moonstruck stands out as another very good performance. He might not have a broad acting range, but he has a quirky style well suited to certain roles.

    In comments Keanu Reaves takes a few hits. I have never thought him to be a particularly good actor, and yet he was very good in the Matrix and sequels and solid in Speed. He also happens to star (and do very well) in two of my favourite movies, “Constantine” and “The Replacements”.

  29. Watch Kenneth Brannagh’s Much Ado About Nothing. Watch brilliant, magical, endearing and entertaining performances by every actor and actress (Brannagh, Emma Thompson, Denzel Washington, Michael Keaton, Robert Sean Leonard) and watch Keanu Reeves bring everything to a screeching halt–despite the opportunity to really chew the scenery.

    Okay, all Kate Beckinsale had to do was look very cute. But she did that quite well.

    According to my wife, Denzel Washington in a cavalry officer’s uniform is worth the price of the Blu-Ray edition all by himself.

  30. After some talking with my boss today about it (he is, by far, a bigger film buff than I am) my conclusion is that how you define “acting” also plays a large role. His wasn’t totally in line with it, but not too far off either.

    For instance both of us agree that two of the better actors today are Liam Neeson and Robert Downey Jr. It is tough to find a role that they didn’t excel at no matter the movie. Further they have done such a wide role of movies and roles it shows a depth of ability to be something they are not – they have to be to do that range – and that is what many call acting.

    Those two come to mind because of recent movies that were … not really in character as far as past roles that they nailed. Downey as Iron Man and Neeson as Hannibal in the A-Team. Indeed, had those movies been “oscar” material I think their performances in them would have justified it, but those movies were not made to do that. However their acting ability took those from roles that would have normally been made fun of and made not only those roles work but the movies as well.

    Both Cage and Reeves – neither of which are worth a flip in that regard – can still perform quite well in specific roles. Their talent (and lack thereof) is shown in what roles they choose to play. When their character fits their “acting” then they – well – act. If one considers acting to be convincing in said role then they can certainly do that – indeed could anyone see anyone other than Reeves as Neo in the Matrix?

    There is also a third type in my opinion and that is stage presence. Recently mentioned actors like Glen Close and Bernadette Peters exemplify that type. It usually doesn’t translate well to movies and stays in live plays. Though people like Glenn Close can do more than just that and can cross genre’s easily.

    As much as I like the a fore mentioned Denzel Washington the vast majority of his characters are the same. He seems to be one that cares for what he can and can’t do and chooses movies wisely – I think I have yet to see any movie he has starred in that I didn’t like his performance. But unlike Neeson his roles are all pretty much the same character in a different setting with a different name. That is – IMO – just as much acting (he truly can bring me to the point of immersion), but it isn’t really showing a range of ability as much as good judgment on which jobs to take.

  31. I’ve never really understood the appeal of Cage, either, though I did really enjoy Adaptation.

    A friend of mine who went to film school once remarked that he thought Cage was the most talented actor of his generation. I didn’t ask why he thought that, but I suspect he was impressed with Leaving Las Vegas–which I never had any interest in seeing.

    Regarding Keanu, I’d echo Beefeater’s comments about Speed and the Matrix. Even though I know Keanu is not a very good actor, I don’t mind him for that. I think that at this point in his career he has learned what he can and cannot do and chooses accordingly. I’d also like to add that Keanu was also good in Parenthood, and I like some of his lesser known films such as A Walk in the Clouds.

  32. I think much of his appeal is (to me) an inherent likability that shines thru his characters. I watch him and I want to like him, even if I cringe at some of his acting.

    I watched him in Captain Corelli’s Mandolin the other night (based on a bestselling book is one of my favorites, and one I expect that many readers here would enjoy, not least because of its exposure of the viciousness of Greek communism). He’s just terrible is several scenes, but still fits the role well in an odd way.

    Summary: His persona is great, his acting is bad.

  33. “Nicholas Cage is the most talentless major film actor I’ve ever seen”

    Madam, you certainly have a flair for the obvious : )

  34. While I did list a couple of movies I enjoyed and thought NC did well in, I have to agree that there are far more movies in which his acting sucked.

    Perhaps it is a matter of the role he plays and he should do a better job of screening which movies he participates in.

    Think in terms of John Wayne playing Ghengis Khan…just doesn’t fit.

    However, the roles the Duke played – and played well – were all basically variations of the same character and it worked for him.

    Perhaps NC should take a lesson from that.

  35. Saw him in City of Angels – how any man can play the romantic lead opposite Meg Ryan looking like a stunned ox is beyond me. OTOH, I thought he was very effective in National Treasure – playing an academic who quite properly wanders through chaos looking like a stunned ox.

  36. I’ve visited this site for about two months now. I find it refreshing. Now I find it right on target. Nicolas Cage and Kevin Costner are talentless. Costner did a terrible job in the “Untouchables”. He was unconvincing. A wimpy tough guy! If I discussed Cage’s lack of talent I would use too many expletives that would need to be deleted.

  37. Most actors don’t act as much as people think they do. Instead, they’ve adopted two or three variations on their personality and are quite convincing at it. Cage and Reeves have one variation and when they are properly case it works, otherwise it doesn’t.

    On the other hand, as someone who has made educational films, there is huge value in an actor who shows up on time, knows their lines, hits their marks and doesn’t give you grief. This creates such joy it’s hard to describe. I don’t know about Cage, but by all accounts Keanu Reeves is such a man.

    (The number of actors who really can and do act is small, though even they can slip up terribly sometime.)

  38. I can’t call myself a Keanu Reeves fan. But I haven’t seen him ruin quite as many movies as Cage; he’s more innocuous. And he was excellent in “Parenthood,” which played to his strengths.

    Kevin Costner, on the other hand, is a no-no in my book. I hated, positively hated, “Dances With Wolves”—it felt like an endless, violent, propagandist assault. And that was back in the days before my political odyssey.

  39. I’ll just timidly state that I sort of like Cage and have enjoyed many of his movies. If you’re accepting nominations for least talented actor, I’d like to submit Hugh Grant, who is painful in every role he’s ever played. (imho, of course….)

  40. If you’re looking for a movie that provides some sort of profound insight into the human condition — and, though I’ve seen a bunch that try that, I can’t offhand think of any that have succeeded — then Cage is not your boy.

    But he is better than halfway decent at most action-adventure stuff: think of Gone In 60 Seconds, Ghost Rider, Next, National Treasure, Con Air, Windtalkers and Face/Off.

    And if you’re looking for sort of odd-ball Brooklyn-type anti-heros, he does a decent job with them to, a la, Snake Eyes, Matchstick Men, Bringing Out The Dead, Bangkok Dangerous and World Trade Center.

    It’s a fairly limited range, but our greatest movie actor ever — John Wayne — and the best one now going (more or less) — Clint Eastwood are also pretty limited in the kind of roles they excel at.

  41. OK, I’ll have to admit that Ghostrider was pretty good. Windtalkers wasn’t that bad as a war movie either.

    Still, the fact I had forgotten about them kind of lends credence the idea – at least for me – that NC is not really all that great an actor.

    Still, those roles were often similar characters so that likewise reinforces the idea that he should be pickier about the roles he plays to those he can play well.

  42. NC s watchable BECAUSE he is weird. Although not big stars, I can’t not watch Amanda Plummer, and Julliette Lewis, who I also think are pretty good actors.
    Chris Walken also compels you to watch because you just know he’s really twisted.

    One movie I think Nicolas Cage did a good job in, which also is a GREAT representation of pre Guilani New York, is “Bringing Out The Dead”. About NYC Paramedics living in the throes of madness and PTSD.

    I think Angelina Jolie, and Leonardo DeCrappio are excellent actors and you can see Leonardo’s brilliance even back when he was playing a mentally handicapped boy in “What’s Eating Gilbert Grape” also starring another weird watchable guy, Johnny Depp, who cooincidently was talked into trying acting by Nick Cage, even before he ever thought about it.

  43. Can’t believe it took so long for anyone to mention what I thought was NC’s best role, along with “The Rock”: “Face/Off”.

    And I think that the rest of tedjoy’s comment pretty much spells out the rest of my thoughts on the matter as well.

  44. You are completely correct about Nicholas Cage.

    He has no talent. None whatsoever.

    To me, trying to watch a Nicholas Cage movie is actually a painful experience, largely because I cannot suspend disbelief . . . it is always like watching a Cher movie.

    They both always get that stupid look on their face that projects the following:

    “Okay, look everybody . . . I’m acting now!

    See?

  45. Years ago, I saw/read an interview with Michael Caine. The interviewer mentioned that Caine had been in a lot of really bad movies (he didn’t phrase exactly that way, of course) and then asked Caine why he made so many. Caine responded that some people drive trucks for a living, but he made movies. His approach to movies was strictly blue collar: time to go to work, punch the clock and make a movie.

    How is this related to NC? Cage has been in a lot of movies, many of which have sucked. A lot. And yes, he’s been at least somewhat responsible for the suckitude of said movies. However, he’s been in some movies that I’ve greatly enjoyed: Valley Girl, Family Man, the National Treasure movies, Moonstruck, The Rock, Face Off, Racing With the Moon. It’s kind of difficult for me to NOT like someone who is the lead in movies that I’ve enjoyed so much. Do I think that Cage is a great actor? No, but I do think he’s a decent actor who at times has (a) tried to go beyond his limited ability or (b) made some really bad script choices. The second error is made by Hollywood types on a routine basis, so I don’t see it as a real problem.

    I’m purposely trying to not mention some of the awful movies that NC has been also been dreadful in. Someone mentioned Vampire’s Kiss and I’d like to thank that person for making me want to huff glue so as to forget about it again. However, I do like Cage up to a point. He just needs to make better career choices so as to stay in his limited comfort zone. No one ever accused Ahnuld of being a great actor, but his movies were consistently successful. Cage should take note of that.

  46. I think you are right in so many ways, but also wrong in the larger sense. The mystery is not how he can be so bad in so many movies and succeed, but how can an actor be so uneven in talent and chose so many bad roles. First, let me defend my statement that he has talent – in Raising, Moonstruck and Leaving LV, three movies where he played three different characters and in all three he was compelling to watch and carried the movie. If you think it is a quirk, then look at Face-off (I know, a terrible movie) and pay attention to the parts where the actors have to act like the other guy because their faces are swapped. This is not easy. Many actors go through an entire career without ever acting, they play themselves over and over (Denzel , Cruise) and never have to adapt the mannerisms, voice patterns, attitude of a character written by a writer and directed by a director. They show up, put on a costume and be themselves. In Face-off Cage is a pretty convincing Travolta — that took some talent.
    I think he has some talent but overreaches. he seems to be the kind of actor that is looking for a challenge and he picks a lot of bad roles because he thinks they will be fun or challenging and no one tells him it’s an overreach. I give him credit for trying.

    What you should ask is how an actor like cruise can play the same damn arrogant overachieving jerk over and over and be considered talented. Every time I see a Cruise movie I think”gosh, When did Maverick become a lawyer? Why is Maverick tending bar,…
    And Denzel is just a black Tom Cruise with a big laugh.(although he was perfect for the Training day role)
    Either they, their managers, or the producers seem to understand that they have no talent and they only get roles that fit their narrow range.

  47. physics geek: “Peggy Sue Got Married” is a good movie in which Cage sucked. He almost ruined the movie, but it escaped his near-fatal clutches.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>