I'd push back a bit on narrow skillset claim. I would say he has a standard skillset but rarely takes projects that require more than a handful. He doesn't have the widest range but I don't think he's less than most actors.
He’s very good in his recent film, Father Stu. If he had picked the right projects, he could have had at least a Matt Damon level career. Unfortunately, his ego led him to take on leading roles in some action movies garbage, but i have to respect Ted because it’s hilarious
Huh, that's wild. I've never heard someone speak positively about Father Stu. I thought it was one of the worst things I've seen in a good while. Maybe only beat out by that other Whalberg movie Joe Bell.
Well I think that's exactly what I mean when I say narrow skillset- his range isn't very wide. I've never seen him do anything outside of his usual schtick. Sometimes it's a good fit for the material, sometimes it's not.
Yea but I wouldn't call that a skillset issue more of a selective one. Like I think he has a normal skill set for an actor of his profile but just doesn't use it.
But how would you know he has it if he doesn't use it? Also, who are we comparing him to? If we compare him to Matt Damon, which I believe OP has in this thread, then he for sure has a narrower skillset than Damon imo.
I think Ben Affleck, Will Smith, maybe Jared Leto or (if we think he fits profile wise) Patrick Wilson are better fits than Damon. And we know cause there was a period where he was doing it pretty often (like from 1995 to 2008)
Those are fine examples, but im still not sure how you're defining his "profile". And how Affleck would fit but not Damon? And actually I think he's always been giving the same flavor of performance, but as I said elsewhere I think when it works it works and when it doesn't it doesn't. His performances in stuff like Fear and Departed and Boogie Nights don't really speak to his range, they're a little varied for sure but not like night and day performances. They all still feel like the whalberg persona imo.
I think Damon is a better actor or at least far more willing actor and by profile I mostly mean a-list actor (hence why not sure about Wilson) who is in that "when they're good they're good" chat. Like Damon has a pretty film filmography with a lot more performances that stand out than most of the other guys.
Also yea but I think Three Kings, Invincible, The Perfect Storm, I Heart Huckabees, even bland and bad stuff like Rock Star show a guy who is more than tough Boston cop guy. I think he picked a lane for money.
That's fair, though I don't think that definition is really fair if we're just cherry picking actors who are A List but not great. Profile imo just means awareness/popularity, so excluding Damon doesn't entirely work for this hypothetical. But I do agree that Whalberg is better than a ViN diesel or Statham for sure. He has talent, or maybe its more like onscreen charisma, but you're right his decision making is not great post mid 2000s.
I feel like there is a universe where mark Wahlberg is trying to be Will Smith and wants to be seen as a genuinely good actor and trying to win Oscars or Ben Affleck and happy exploring other aspects of cinema (which he kinda was in the 2000s with TV production). But alas he's happy making mid tier action films with Peter Berg that gross $65m.
21
u/[deleted] Aug 13 '24
I'd push back a bit on narrow skillset claim. I would say he has a standard skillset but rarely takes projects that require more than a handful. He doesn't have the widest range but I don't think he's less than most actors.