What do you think of him as a actor?? Can he leave the Mick Jagger persona and act into a character of another dimension?? He´s not Brando or De Niro, but what are your opinions!?!?
Fritzcarraldo




Perfomance





Ned Kelly





Bent





Freejack





Running Out of Luck









Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2009-04-17 14:30 by Riffbuk.

153 views and noboby have a opinion of their favorite rock performer as an actor??

Well, in my opinion Mick was pretty good in Stella Street.
Better than Keith, anyway.

Stella Street ..... Yeah Mick was good in that laugh ride ......



ROCKMAN

Mick has the quality of charisma, which many actors wish they had. He also is a supremely self confident performer, which always makes him watch-able. But his thespian chops are average at best.

Mick Jagger is soooo preceded by his persona, imo it could be difficult for the viewer to see him without the interference. Without his music fame, he would probably be quite credible.

Quote
Rockman
Stella Street ..... Yeah Mick was good in that laugh ride ......

"As we say in England, it can get a bit trainspottery"

Great in Performance. Pretty good in Elysian Fields. Forgettable in most everything else except Freejack, for the wrong reasons!

In my humble opinion,Jagger is not a great actor.In "Performance" he is good because he sort of plays himself, a rock star,but in the other movies Mick doesn't shine,"Free Jack" being the worst of all. Sorry Mick!!
Rock and Roll,
Mops

He's much too affected to be a good actor. Good actors give of themselves. Jagger doesn't. He's much too guarded and self conscious. In his prime he was effective on stage because that is a one way street. People saw what they wanted to see. And that's what he gave them. Or was it the other way around? Great actors can plumb the depths of themselves. Jagger avoids that at all cost. I've come to think there is nothing there. It's all surface and tease. Did Scorsese ultimately come to the same conclusion?

he is not judged fairly as an actor because of his superstar persona as a rock star. he is a victim of his own stardom because his acting is really not that bad

Melillo said:

he is not judged fairly as an actor because of his superstar persona as a rock star. he is a victim of his own stardom because his acting is really not that bad

I think his "own stardom" gave him the chance to get roles in films. And as far as movies go, he is lucky to be Mick Jagger,the rock star.

Mops

and the point is?

The point I wanted to make is that Mick Jagger's celebrity does not make him a victim but has instead helped him get roles in movies.

I recently read of the possibility that more of Jagger & Robards' footage shot for FITZCARRALDO circulates on bootleg -- anyone own or viewed this footage? I've only seen the very short snippet in BURDEN OF DREAMS.

where is the footage of young Mick and his dad?

[www.paulinestroosnijder.com]

It is funny that a man who is a bunch of fellows and has acted for decades convincingly different characters is such a bad actor.

- Doxa

Ciao Rolando,
Mick is a great actor, but have some priority with music and women...eheeheh
ciao
Sici

What about this movie?

>>Mick Jagger as an actor!!

Mick Jagger IS an actor!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Mr.Ed

Hi Sici!!How are you??I´ll email you soon


Jagger as an actor got the Rock Star syndhrome. He can´t be anyone else , but himself, and you can see that on his body language,his voice, his maneirisms, and its so obviuous in Freejack, Ned Kelly, etc .The exception maybe goes to the Man of the Elysian Fields, where he does an OK roll.I have to agree with some of opinions that is not a bad actor, but he could improve much more if he just could give dimension to other character then himself. I wish that he could take more chances, more risks in front of the camera,





Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2009-04-17 14:29 by Riffbuk.

I think, if you're not a skilled actor (been to an acting school) like Mick Jagger you pretty much depend on your director. And somebody like Werner Herzog cared and therefore Mick is really good in Fitzcaraldo. Mick's character was not replaced in the final version but when German legendary actor Klaus Kinski stepped in later as Fitzcaraldo he soaked up elements of the Jagger character. Compare these and you come to the conclusion that it's a pity that the two didn't play together!
Well, no complaints about Freejack. This was no Blade Runner but a simple sci-fi-action movie and all he had to do was to drive around and do a grim grin (therefore, he does his role well...).
Ned Kelly is a special case. I think this movie suffers from it's image. (Btw: Heath Ledger was a bore, his Ned Kelly film was a bore and I think it was historically incorrect in some elements). Most people just repeat the criticizm about Mick's Ned without giving it a second thought (Rockman, can you comment?): An English theatre director plus an English pop star in a genuine Australian story? So, the handicrafts of making a film were guaranteed and the actor fitted to the image of the character perfectly well. The script was by the (at least then) No. 1 Australian Kelly biographer.
What about this infamous Irish accent? I don't even hear an attempt to sound Irish, therefore why criticize Mick for failing to do so?
Elysian Fields and Bent I only have in German, Nightingale is a bit minimalistic, no dicussion about Performance (he is good in "madness" like in Fitzcaraldo, isn't he?). The cut out extras of Enigma show him sitting at a show on a table chatting and drinking. Not much to interpret out ofthat.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2009-04-18 11:33 by JJHMick.

Not saying mmuch, but Mick is a better actor than David Bowie.

Sting is probably the best musician who can act.He doesnt bring with him all the rock persona!
I dont remenber which actor said, that for accomplishing a role , you have to give up being yourself!

Quadrophenia





Dune

Quote
Riffbuk
153 views and noboby have a opinion of their favorite rock performer as an actor??

should stick to his day job.dont give it away mick

Mick is an actor on stage - not in a movie.

Has an actor or a performer been too much in a role (Mick's case as a singer in Stones) it is very difficult to change to something else - you will always combine the person to the original role.

Lot's of actors have same problem - Alan Alda in MASH. He can't play other roles.
I could name bunch of others, but too much wine to write it down here - maybe tomorrow.

I think the world of Mick. I really do.
Here's the thing... I find Performance and Running Out of Luck a hoot - he's more or less playing himself. But the others... the fact that he's Mick just pulls me right out of it. I can't watch him in any film without associating him with who he really is. Even if his line delivery was 100% convincing, he's too Mick Jagger to not be Mick Jagger! Not so with Bowie or Sting.

Sorry Mick, Roger Daltrey as an actor you are not!

[thepowergoats.com]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2009-04-18 01:25 by jamesfdouglas.

ps... HEY!

That Freejack trailer made me laugh! It takes place in the year 2009!

[thepowergoats.com]

mick is pretty good as an actor, but there is this other thing that he does, now wait a minute let me think, oh yeah he is the frontman for the greatest rock band on the planet which also takes up a bit of his time dont you think?

>I find Performance and Running Out of Luck a hoot - he's more or less playing himself.

From what I've read his performance as Turner was based on Brian.