Challenging roles??????
 

So am I. Roles that he sees as a challenge as an actor .. plus ones he can fit into his recording and touring schedules.

He's certainly had some good roles since the late 90s imo .. Focus (imo his best performance to date) Wishcraft, 51st State, Rustin, A Hole In One, and Citizen Jane .. plus others I haven't seen/haven't been released. I certainly don't think he grabs any role he's offered, nor that he takes roles that no-one else wants .. I can't think that any of those I've mentioned would have been the latter. But he's choosy, turns down roles that he doesn't see as challenging and interesting, and his other career strand probably prevents him doing some others .. though he's shot off on a tour rest day to film!

Caryl

Indeed. I am intrigued!

I agree with you. I've heard him state his position of role choice on more than one occasion. I don't think it's one of the "tales" he tells ;)

Apart from bitch tit Bob, what other roles could be seen as challenging?

I'm just going to pick one role to answer this question:

Fred, the character he played in Focus, was a gent that was far removed from Meat Loaf the man or stage persona. That was challenging for Meat....to be someone he's most unlike and absolutely unsure of how to play. IMO: I would imagine having more lines in a movie could prove to be challenging as well. That role had a lot of dialog.

So the roles he plays are challenging to him not necessarily challenging to an actor? I'll go with that :up:

Yes, there are plenty of actors that could have played Fred wonderfully as well because it isn't a stretch from their personal selves :mrgreen: so, in essence it wouldn't have been a challenge for them. IMO Knowing Meat transforms into this character makes Meat more of a talent, I'll go with that. :up:

Are you saying that there aren't any or many other actors who does that?

Meat is a good actor, but the majority of his roles I don't see as challenging, either to him or as an actor in general. And if he got the opportunity to do big movies like he says, then he should do them to get recognition for his acting, which in turn will bring more challenging roles to play.

Nope not at all. I'm only giving an example of which role "could" be seen as challenging as the original question was asked. Now if you said, what movie role do you think "I" (as in Pudding) would see as challenging. That is unanswerable by anyone but you.

:yep:

He's just that good of an actor he makes it seem easy. Then he's done his job on screen. :))

He says the role will come. I have to defer to that knowledge that he has and we don't. I can only wish him the best in his role selections and hope for a blockbuster for him. Meanwhile, it is what it is.

I believe you've completely misunderstood what I was saying. You said "Knowing Meat transforms into this character makes Meat more of a talent" I'm saying that there's a tonne of actors who do that - method acting.

As a general rule of thumb, but not 100% accurate, it's usually the films with the big budgets or the big names that get the attention and the awards. Most (not all) of the films Meat has been in are B-list films not A-list cinema experiences.

So there is no confusion: my statement made above is isolated and is taken out of context because it was to support my other statement.

This is what I'm saying: I believe it takes more of a talent (ie Meat and method actors in general) to portray a believe-able opposite of their own self on screen. I believe Meat sees this as a challenge therefore chooses roles such as these. This is not to say other actors cannot do it or Meat is the best actor in the whole wide world IMO. I believe Meat has grown as an actor over his experience and I believe that Meat is forever learning. I enjoy Meat's characterizations and I do believe certain roles were more of a challenge for him. I have seen actors play great "bad guys" and they are not quite "nice guys" in real life....I think that bad guy roles may come easier to those people who are not such nice guys in reality. Now however that gets spun in Pudding land, I can only imagine. ;)


Is a film labeled B-list film when the script comes across the desk of Sir Meat?

I said that HE sees as challenging as an actor. The character in Focus is a good example, and imo not because it wasn't like his own personality; as an actor he wants to remove his own persona from any role. But to play it in such a way as to convey more than a one-dimensional prejudiced bully, therein lay the challenge imo and he pulled that off with great subtlety. When an actor can convey thoughts/feelings that are in conflict with what he's saying and how he's behaving .. that's skill.

I've not said Meat is the greatest actor that ever walked the stage, nor that he takes on roles other actors wouldn't be able to manage. He is however imo a skilled actor, and when he says (as he has done so often) that he looks for roles which make him think "How the hell could I play that?" I believe him .. only he knows what it is about a role that makes him think that, although in the case of Fred I think I can understand. He takes his craft seriously, and I do not for a moment think he would not mean what he says about how he selects roles.

I'd also like to see him in more roles which exploited his touch for light comedy. There were moments in Everything That Rises that played to that.

Caryl

:twisted: Content moved from the witness insecurity thread.

Like who?

No need for that, I didn't insult you did I? If you can't cope with debate then don't post.

I think budget, other cast and crew determines what sort of film it will be seen as. How many films as Meat been in in recent years that has gone straight to DVD?

:wtf: Dude, you take things way to seriously sometimes. I look forward to more debate.

So, then, is a budget listed on a script which would financially lead someone to believe it is a b-list movie straight to DVD/TV? And/or is the proposted co-cast memebers of the movie also revealed on the script to lead someone to believe that a movie has a b-list tendency? And they are, does it even matter to the actor who auditions/accepts to play the offered role? Does it bother you that some of Meat's movies went straight to DVD/TV?

I'm looking forward to seeing Meat's performances in Witness Insecurity, Polish Bar, and Beautiful Boy. I'm hoping you are looking forward to it too dispite budgets and supporting cast.

The role will come where the story is there, the budget is there, the production is there, and the co-cast members are there. Have faith, he will get it.

Faith by definition is the belief in something where there is no proof. At the moment I see no proof that such a role for Meat is forthcoming.

I do enjoy some of his films, I do think he's a good actor, but if indeed he is being offered big budget roles and he's turning them down, then don't you think he's kinda short-changing himself, as surely making himself known as a serious and good actor will allow him to cherry-pick the films that will allow him not only to get recognition for his acting, but turn him from a supporting actor to a leading actor.

i reckon one of his most challenging roles was to become a rock star, (and maintain that role for 30+ years)

Deep.

I trust that if there are currently big budget roles that he is turning down, it has to be for Meat's own good reasons. Only he can answer if he's short-changing himself in his own decisions.

From a fan perspective, I'm greedy, I want him to do all he can :p