Denzel Washington vs Daniel Day Lewis

Leaving aside the fact Washington has made many more films & based purely on how good they are as actors. Who you got?

 

Also, if you think anybody else of that generation is better, who?

 

I have a feeling if DDL was in as many movies as Denzel he'd have a lot more detractors.

The fact he does so few movies, actually helps his rankings from a "critical" standpoint.

Personally, I don't think there's any point in choosing who's "better".

They are what they are and it would be difficult to improve on either of their styles of acting.

 

Everything's pointless on a long enough timescale, mate :scared:

 

day lewis. denzel doesn't get into that very upper echelon of great hollywood actors imo.

 

DDL, but Denzel is a legend as well.

 

I think Denzel has been somewhat typecast because people really enjoy seeing him as an exasperated man confronting various ills in whatever role he is in. I don't think that is his fault, and I think he is a terrific actor. Measured against a chameleon like DDL, he's going to look one-dimensional, but I think that is down to his large scale appeal than it is down to ability. I also think DDL could be roundly criticized if one were to be as rigorous with him as they are with other, busier actors. Is Bill The Butcher strikingly different from his character in "There Will Be Blood"? I don't think so. The same brooding violence is there.

They are both outstanding.

 

Thanks for smacking my nihilism in the ass Hut.


I see the world for what it is now. Endless lists of apples, oranges and tangerine pies.

:bears:

 

Exactly. DDL is picky as hell, so he's not taking the risk of carrying a movie on his shoulders, even though he is, in essence doing that............especially with "There Will Be Blood".

However, that had just as much to do with Paul Thomas Anderson being a skilled director and DDL trusting him to be a skilled director.

"Book Of Eli" I think is an example of two very skilled actors (Denzel and Gary Oldman), taking a movie which should in all honesty be a putrid shitpile, and elevating it into an eminently watchable movie.

 

DDL

 

DDL benefits from not having done too many roles. Denzel's done alot of shit roles which dilutes his overall standing as an actor.

It's close when you consider Denzel's very best performances:

Glory
Malcolm X
Hurricane
Crimson Tide
Training Day

 

As a weird example of exactly how non-prolific Daniel Day-Lewis is. He's 55 years-old and has 29 credits on IMDB.

Dakota Fanning is 18 years old and has 46 credits already.

 

Daniel Day Lewis is a freaking chamaleon. He becomes the character. I mean when I first saw him in "My Left Foot" I thought that he was truly handicap until he showed up perfectly healthy at the Oscars. He was mesmerizing in "Gangs of New York" and "There will be Blood". Denzel is great too, but his best roles are no match for the roles played by Day Lewis (who like Denzel, also has done some shitty movies too).

 

I think I'll go with Zel. I'll take his charisma over DDL's versatility.

Denzel is so good, that you could put him in The Happening, in place of Mark Whalberg, and it'd probably be a good movie.

 

Yeah, but it wouldn't be as funny. :nono:

 

:laughing:

 

You left out Cry Freedom one of Denzel best performances ever. :nono:

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/yo4aX2veRVY" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

Denzel is a great actor, but DDL is on another level

 

Anthony pressed the wrong button so that makes it 7-0 Lewis. What a shitty poll topic ::

 

I still say if Denzel cherry-picked and got to concentrate on one role every 3-4 years or so, He'd probably be thought of just as highly.