Guest ShooterJay Report post Posted October 20, 2002 Being from Boston, I always find it cool when somebody from around here makes it big, like Conan O'Brien, SNL's Seth Meyers, Denis Leary, etc. However, obviously the two biggest success stories from our neck of the woods are Matt Damon and Ben Affleck, emerging from total obscurity to write the incredible "Good Will Hunting," which was a box office success, SHOULD have won the Best Picture Oscar, got Robin Williams' career revitalized, and netted Damon and Affleck screenwriting Oscars. I remember, at the time, that Damon was depicted as the glamour boy of the two and Affleck the hardworking Everyman. Since then, though, the perceptions have been completely reversed. Damon has chosen largely darker, dramatic roles that won him more acting acclaim, such as "The Talented Mr. Ripley," "The Legend of Bagger Vance," and "Rounders." Even his bigger-budget stuff has kind of a low-key coolness to it, like "Ocean's 11" and "The Bourne Identity." He's a guy who's filmography has stayed relatively true to his roots. Offscreen, outside of an admission that he smoked pot in high school (and honestly, who hasn't?) in public he's been a model citizen. Affleck, on the other hand, has been a huge Hollywood sellout. He's picked nothing but the big-budget popcorn fare since hitting it big- "Armageddon," "The Sum of All Fears," the coming "Daredevil" movie, "Reindeer Games" and "Pearl Harbor." The one exception I'll make for Affleck is "Changing Lanes" which was a fantastic movie that he was excellent in. I've also gotten this odd feeling that appearing in the Kevin Smith movies is a ploy to maintain cred with the hardcore movie geeks rather than a genuine desire to do them. Outside his films, he's run the full gamut of Hollywood cliches- alcohol rehab, a highly publicized with one huge starlet (Gwyneth Paltrow), an affair on the set with Jennifer Lopez, which is enhanced by the fact that she has the reputation for being a bitchy, slutty, snooty diva. I will give them both credit for "Project Greenlight," a fantastic concept that produced a solid, enjoyable drama in "Stolen Summer." Basically though, I identify a lot more with Damon than Affleck at this point. Your thoughts? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest CoreyLazarus416 Report post Posted October 20, 2002 I always found it funny how Denis Leary prefers to be referred to as "from WORCESTER"... And yes, Affleck sucks...but he was "da bomb in Phantoms, yo!" Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Steve J. Rogers Report post Posted October 21, 2002 This is my response to the Kevin Smith thread a while back as a response to a question about the Affleck backlash: Alot of it stems from the type of films he's done, as well as the quanity of such films. Seems like you can't go a few months without some Affleck movie coming out. Wheither its a dopey romantic flick like Bounce, a pyscological thriller like Changing Lanes, a plain old thriller like Reindeer Games and Clear and Present Danger, ect. On the other hand, the guy he is often compared with, Matt Damon choses his roles more wisley and is rarely seen that often, plus he goes for less pop-corn orientatied roles like Talented Mr. Ripley or Legend of Bagger Vance. Sure he has stuff like Oceans 11 to his credits but those kinds of films are few and far between on his resume. Basically Affleck keeps his name in circulation much more than Damon does, therefore there is more of a backlash towards him then Damon. Plus Ben Affleck has a bit of noterity with his alcholoism and his being overtly politcal without any substance to why he choses to back the democratic canadate (also taken into account is his staunch support of the "Rock The Vote" campaign in spite of his not being a regular voter untill he became famous) So Ben tends to get himself more in the public eye than Matt does. Steve Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Steve J. Rogers Report post Posted October 21, 2002 In addition to the above I should mention that due to Affleck's pennache for making too many movies, specifically mass-marketed ones, Ben Affleck has become one of the "most popular actors today" according to the mass-pop-culture media (People, EW, Entertainment Tonight, E!, Access Hollywood, ect) and therefore his name is still looked upon fondly by the mass movie going audience. "Oh he was in that Pearl Harbor movie, Oh he's the new Jack Ryan, Oh hes doing that new J-Lo movie, GOT TO SEE IT!" So his name hasn't recieved the backlash yet from that rather large segment of the audience. So basically Affleck is like a Rikishi type, where fans love to see him despite terrible matches (I wouldn't put Affleck in the Rock or Taker or Kane level just yet) mostly for things OTHER than his skills (for Rikishi its his ass, and his dancing and Affleck because people are told he still has that "IT" and the marketing blitz that his movies are usually given) While Matt is usually not in the public eye at all, I'd say more people know who Ben Affleck is more than they know who Matt Damon is. Not to mention Matt's films tend to be more artsy and don't take in much money at all, so Matt (as the lead, I'm leaving stuff like Oceans 11 out due to it being more an ensamble) tends to be looked at as an unbankable performer, he does not have "IT" Basically Matt Damon is Chris Benoit Steve Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest starvenger Report post Posted October 21, 2002 Outside his films, he's run the full gamut of Hollywood cliches- alcohol rehab, a highly publicized with one huge starlet (Gwyneth Paltrow), an affair on the set with Jennifer Lopez, which is enhanced by the fact that she has the reputation for being a bitchy, slutty, snooty diva. I'm being a bit nitpicky here, but didn't the relationship with Paltrow start before she became a "starlet" and end soon after? I agree with most of what you said - Damon tends to take more time choosing roles, while Affleck tends to do a lot more movies. And like you said, Affleck seems to have a "look" that the movie producers love, especially for the action genre. Which makes sense, seeing as they seem to love Nic Cage as well. The thing with doing Jersey Girl is probably more along the lines of Affleck feeling like he "owes" Smith something. Finally, I have to ask: haven't the big Hollywood stars ever heard of birth control?? I mean, when you think about it, Affleck has probably slept with every skanky ho that Puffy Combs has fucked. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest kkktookmybabyaway Report post Posted October 21, 2002 Seeing how both have more $$$ than I'll ever see, I dont' give a crap about either of them. However, as long as they don't plan on running for Congress, I'm happy with keeping them on the Silver Screen... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest starvenger Report post Posted October 21, 2002 Yeah, the people would never be so silly as to elect an actor as president, right? Oh, wait... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest kkktookmybabyaway Report post Posted October 21, 2002 I don't care if he's an actor or not. The fact he's a left-wing actor is another story... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest starvenger Report post Posted October 21, 2002 Well, I suppose there had to be one. Although (and correct me if I'm wrong) it's somewhat unusual to be rich and left wing, no? Well, regardless, I suppose the point remains (as pointed out by Mr. Rogers) that he's political without having clue one. Never a good thing. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest C.H.U.D. Report post Posted October 21, 2002 Seeing how both have more $$$ than I'll ever see, I dont' give a crap about either of them. Exactly. Which is why I'll never understand why people get so worked up about actors. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Banky Report post Posted October 21, 2002 Actually, Kevin and Ben are good friends in real life, and I doubt making Jersey Girl was done as a payback. Ben Affleck will always get a bad hand because he was in the ultra sucky Armageddon and Pearl Harbor. BUT, is all of this hatred for him warrented? So what if he is dating a pop star. Who cares if he is highly coveted by the teenage girls? Who cares if he has made a few stinkers? This guy has been able to mock himself, and clearly show he has a sense of humor when it comes to his indiscretions. Before you slag the guy because he comes across as a Teen People posterboy, check to see if his acting is THAT bad. Ben wasn't the bomb in Phantoms, Ben was the bomb Dazed and Confused baby. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Kahran Ramsus Report post Posted October 22, 2002 Affleck can be good (although he isn't as good an actor as Damon), but as it has already been mentioned, Pearl Harbor and to a lesser extent Armageddon completely killed his credibility among anyone over the age of 15. He's actually got it better than Beckinsale or Hartnett. They will be forever haunted by Pearl Harbor. At least Affleck won't just be known as the guy who lived from that crapfest. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest kkktookmybabyaway Report post Posted October 22, 2002 "Well, I suppose there had to be one. Although (and correct me if I'm wrong) it's somewhat unusual to be rich and left wing, no?" Not in Hollywood... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest franchise632 Report post Posted October 22, 2002 I think some of you guys have way to much free time on your hands. Seriously you have nothing better to do then rip on Ben Affleck about being a "Hollywood Sellout". Since when is it Ben Affleck's job to worry what you care about, Ben's job is to make movies and get paid, if you don't like it, he don't give a shit, he's still gettin paid. I have a question, do any of you go see a movie just to be entertained?? I loved Armaggedon and Pearl Harbor wasn't that bad. Just because Hollywood sold you all on the war shit and the movie was a love story wrapped around a tragic event your bitter. Is it a wonder why so many men have ulcers and high blood pressure, to many people stressing about little things that don't matter, just have fun and enjoy a movie. P.S. outside of an admission that he smoked pot in high school (and honestly, who hasn't?) I havent and I never will Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest kkktookmybabyaway Report post Posted October 22, 2002 "I loved Armaggedon and Pearl Harbor wasn't that bad." Actually, I wonder sometimes about all the anti-Armageddon hate I've witnessed over the years. Sure it was a put-your-brain-on-the-shelf-for-2-hours kind of film, but we all need that every now and then. But I didn't care for Peral Harbor... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest starvenger Report post Posted October 22, 2002 Actually, I wonder sometimes about all the anti-Armageddon hate I've witnessed over the years. Sure it was a put-your-brain-on-the-shelf-for-2-hours kind of film, but we all need that every now and then. Agreed. It's a Bruckheimer flim, and you should know what you're getting going in. Not a bad film, just mindless. However, Deep Impact came out the same year, with the same premise, and for my money was a better movie. Slightly better plot, a little less mindless... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest kkktookmybabyaway Report post Posted October 22, 2002 I didn't like Deep Impact for the reason that Earth still survived. I don't know -- just once I would like to see the heroes f' up and fail, thus causing the planet to be wiped out. Back when I worked at a theater this couple asked me which was better -- DI or ARM -- and I gave my honest opinion of both, much to the fright of my one manager. After they came out of DI, they agreed with me about the dumb ending, and my anal manager was with me when they said it. Ha ha -- bitch... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Kahran Ramsus Report post Posted October 22, 2002 I didn't like Deep Impact for the reason that Earth still survived. I don't know -- just once I would like to see the heroes f' up and fail, thus causing the planet to be wiped out. Back when I worked at a theater this couple asked me which was better -- DI or ARM -- and I gave my honest opinion of both, much to the fright of my one manager. After they came out of DI, they agreed with me about the dumb ending, and my anal manager was with me when they said it. Ha ha -- bitch... You should watch Dr. Strangelove. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Choken One Report post Posted October 22, 2002 That's too much responsiblity...MAKE YOUR DAMN MIND and stop asking Mr. "I could care less what you watch, I'm still getting paid" and make your own damn decision. Sorry, Used to work at N.I and people ask what to watch... One time we were doing a Halloween theme where for $1.00 you could watch various Horror movies...Idiot fuck asked me "What should I watch? Halloween or H20" Seriously. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest kkktookmybabyaway Report post Posted October 22, 2002 "That's too much responsiblity...MAKE YOUR DAMN MIND and stop asking Mr. "I could care less what you watch, I'm still getting paid" and make your own damn decision." That was one of the few times I gave my opinion. It always pissed me off because I wasn't getting paid by the studios to pimp their movies -- they had well-paid PR/Marketing people to do that. Of course, I always got the "But you work here" line from stupid customers, then I countered by saying "I'm a full-time student, spend 20+ hours a week doing school activities, work here 40+ hours -- they don't pay us for watching the movies." I would then make some crack like "Would you hire someone who would always sneak out from their job to watch movies? It'd be like hiring a vampire to oversee a blood bank." Ahh, the good ol' days... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest El Satanico Report post Posted October 22, 2002 Not all "popcorn movies" are good. Just because you should expect less doesn't mean you have to think all "popcorn movies" are good. I didn't like Armageddon because it was a boring movie. That and it had the bloody pointless sappy love story that did nothing besides bring the movie to a screeching halt. I hated Pearl Harbor on every single level. I can't stand anything about it. As a war movie, as a love story, as a popcorn movie or anything else you want to label it as i just totally hated that pile of shit. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest starvenger Report post Posted October 22, 2002 I didn't like Deep Impact for the reason that Earth still survived. I don't know -- just once I would like to see the heroes f' up and fail, thus causing the planet to be wiped out. Back when I worked at a theater this couple asked me which was better -- DI or ARM -- and I gave my honest opinion of both, much to the fright of my one manager. After they came out of DI, they agreed with me about the dumb ending, and my anal manager was with me when they said it. Ha ha -- bitch... Well, it happened in Armageddon as well, don't forget. At least SOMETHING hit the Earth in DI. Gotta agree about the ending though. Bad, yet really just another variation on the Hollywood ending... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest C.H.U.D. Report post Posted October 23, 2002 Well, it happened in Armageddon as well, don't forget. At least SOMETHING hit the Earth in DI. Actually, NYC and Paris were destroyed on screen in Armageddon. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Vern Gagne Report post Posted October 23, 2002 I'm indifferent to Damon, and hate the cokehead asshole Affleck. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest kkktookmybabyaway Report post Posted October 23, 2002 "Actually, NYC and Paris were destroyed on screen in Armageddon." I know Asia got hit, too. I'm talking about hemisphere-destroying fun -- not some puny city... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Some Guy Report post Posted October 23, 2002 Well, I suppose there had to be one. Although (and correct me if I'm wrong) it's somewhat unusual to be rich and left wing, no? Well, regardless, I suppose the point remains (as pointed out by Mr. Rogers) that he's political without having clue one. Never a good thing. Take a look at the Clintons, Kennedys, Gore, Dascle, Striesand, Leno, Ted Turner, Jane Fonda, Rather, Jennings, and Brokaw, the list goes on and on. All Leftists and all unbelievably rich. Affleck may not have a clue but his "boy is wicked smaht." How do you like 'dem apples? Affleck and Damon tend to show up at the Red Sox games in LA or where ever they may be and get invited into the booth fo an inning or 2. Damon always is a gentleman and a little bit funny, Affleck showed up tp a game in TO shitfaced and managed to piss off half of the Sox roster by mocking the players, it was a reasonably big story here in Boston. He came across as a drunken, arrogant dickhead. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest RavishingRickRudo Report post Posted October 23, 2002 You guys should see 'Last Night'. The world ends in the end. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest starvenger Report post Posted October 24, 2002 Well, I suppose there had to be one. Although (and correct me if I'm wrong) it's somewhat unusual to be rich and left wing, no? Well, regardless, I suppose the point remains (as pointed out by Mr. Rogers) that he's political without having clue one. Never a good thing. Take a look at the Clintons, Kennedys, Gore, Dascle, Striesand, Leno, Ted Turner, Jane Fonda, Rather, Jennings, and Brokaw, the list goes on and on. All Leftists and all unbelievably rich. Point taken. I guess I'm still used to Canadian Politics, where the NDP is pretty far left and the nominally left party, the Liberals, are pretty much sitting in the middle. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
