Peter O'Toole Retires From Acting

[Blasty]

OMG Troy - someone was just saying online at OhNoTheyDidn't about how that is the best movie to get drunk to because it is SO laughable. I don't blame Peter for trashing it all.

[cassius]

OMG Troy - someone was just saying online at OhNoTheyDidn't about how that is the best movie to get drunk to because it is SO laughable. I don't blame Peter for trashing it all.

Sure, easy movie to take potshots at, but um... Pete! It's not like you've had a steady output of hits over the last 25 years! And that was a great scene, even if it kind of stood out from the rest of the movie (since you were the only one who really tried acting in that thing.) So you finally get in a hit movie that lots of people go see and you get a lot of good notices for it... eeh, not the best move.

I liked MY FAVORITE YEAR. And BECKET. And that scene from TROY.

[Naruse]

I have some difficult time in understanding how the AMPAS treated some of the brilliant British actors.

Can never understand that Gary Oldman and Alan Bates only got one nom each. And the great Dirk Bogarde never had the luxury to be nominated even once.

O'Toole should have won in 68. Cannot believe that he lost to Charly. He really did not have any chance in any other year when nominated. I would not mind him winning for his most iconic role but peck's win was really one of the best in the Oscar history.

[RRA]

The only Oscar-nominated role that he was truely robbed for was indeed LION IN WINTER. The rest were terrific and mostly if not all worthy noms, but I can't muster up the enthusiasm for any of them as being the best of those years.

And yeah, surprise the Academy has been known to have bouts of Angophobia with acting Oscars at times. (Or just mere coincidence, but then remembering Gary Oldman just recently got his first nod, it makes you wonder.)

[Blasty]

Eh, I don't think Rex Harrison HAD to win an Oscar for My Fair Lady. I don't think the performance is all that. He's basically on auto-pilot during the entire thing. Should have gone to one of the Becket Oscar-less boys.

And certainly John Wayne never should have won an Oscar. So, if he had won for Goodbye, Mr. Chips, it may not have been his best but I could have lived with that instead of Wayne. Even for that O'Toole won a National Board of Review award for it.

I just wish he had won for something. Hell, The National Society of Film Critics gave him their award for The Stunt Man over Deniro in Raging Bull.

I mean, his iconic performance was denied in Lawrence of Arabia after all - one good turn deserves another - so if he had denied say, DeNiro or Brando for their iconic performances (especially since both had already won Oscars at that point) it would only be fair and I wouldn't be complaining.

[RRA]

I don't hold myself against the Academy over LAWRENCE because as you put it, Peck won for his most iconic part. I don't mind solid candidates usually winning over my prefered "superior" picks. Its when your Chers or John Waynes of the world win it that annoys me, as it does to you as well.

Then again, as I said before O'Toole got a honorary Oscar. I understand why he didn't initially want to accept it but those Honor Oscars are the Academy usually outright admitting that yeah they fucked up and screwed you and your resume over.

That's one thing about their changing the honor Oscars I fucking hate is that we no longer also get those 5-10 minutes of the Academy Awards publicly in front of the world blowing you, inbetween suction telling you how awesome you are and all that.

(Wasn't O'Toole talked into accepting that Oscar?)

[Blasty]

Yes, he was. He said something to the effect that he'd still like to win one outright, with the implication that accepting an honorary Oscar is akin to accepting defeat I guess, and that you'll never win one.

Of course Paul Newman disproved that notion winning like the year after he got his honorary one.

But usually they give you an honorary Oscar right before they push your career off on an iceberg.

[RRA]

Yes, he was. He said something to the effect that he'd still like to win one outright, with the implication that accepting an honorary Oscar is akin to accepting defeat I guess, and that you'll never win one.

Of course Paul Newman disproved that notion winning like the year after he got his honorary one.

But usually they give you an honorary Oscar right before they push your career off on an iceberg.

Usually, though don't also forget Spielberg receiving the Thalberg many years before he finally won his.

[McTeague]

O’Toole is many times hammy, as is Blasty acting all outraged here.

John Wayne didn’t need to open his eyes in terror at the death of his servant in quick sands. The love of his life is instead killed at the beginning of Searchers, and he just needs to glance at the horizon, his face in an almost imperceptible grimace, to express that his character won’t stop until he’s killed scar and rescued Debbie. That’s a film actor, as opposed to the diva gesturing of O’Toole. That’s why audiences fell in love with Wayne and not with O’Toole. That’s why Wayne is a FILM icon. He felt real, and cinematic.

They say the true artist is the one who can make what he does look easy to do. Like Astaire and his dancing, for instance. The art flows so naturally that you don’t see any effort at all in it.

O’Toole belongs to that kind of actors in whom you can see the effort at every moment. In fact, they underline and make clear how much effort they’re putting into it so that you are impressed and you want them to win Oscars. That’s a trick that has always worked with some, including the Academy (that’s why Blanchett has an Oscar and Daniel Day Lewis has two), and yes, it’s surprising it didn’t work for O’Toole. But it’s also good. If you really need so much effort to express things, damn, then maybe you’re not that good an actor? Choose another profession that comes more naturally to you?

As far as British actors go, yes, Rex Harrison is infinitely better in My Fair Lady. There you have an actor in whom everything springs so naturally and effortlessly that Blasty thinks he’s sleepwalking. But you can feel every ounce of misanthropy in his Henry Higgins, every self-complacency in his own superiority, and every new feeling Eliza awakens in him, and each reservation he has towards those new feelings. But since it comes off effortlessly, to Blasty that’s autopilot. Yeah when an actor does THAT so effortlessly that’s called “art”, Blasty, not “autopilot”.

I’d nominate O’Toole here and there (especially for Lion in Winter), but… Glad Peck won in 62, glad Harrison won in 64, haven’t seen 1968’s “Charly” but it sounds terrible. Maybe I’d give him the win in 1968, although the un-nominated Lee Marvin in “Hell in the Pacific” sweeps the floor with him. As did Katharine Hepburn in his same movie.

Coincidentally, I just watched him in Lord Jim last night.

And your review?

[Aldo]

Saw him in Cristiada. Peter OToole in a Mexican film, wtf. The movie is awful but its impossible not to feel moved by his grandpa look. Or maybe it's just me. I never had a grandpa.

[Blasty]

Well, clearly, we love different things about acting, McSubtle, which is fine, as I love the Streeps and Day-Lewises and Blanchettes of the world and am bored to tears by what you call "natural" acting (I call it "breathing") but to each his own! (TSO reference there )

[McTeague]

Well, clearly, we love different things about acting, McSubtle, which is fine, as I love the Streeps and Day-Lewises and Blanchettes of the world and am bored to tears by what you call "natural" acting (I call it "breathing") but to each his own! (TSO reference there )

Yeah and some people like rubbish and collect it, it’s called Diogenes Syndrome! But there’s one thing that’s objective: if something is taking you a lot of effort when someone else does the same thing with ease, the one that does it without effort and with ease is more talented for such activity. You may still admire the one that still does it no matter how much he suffers to get it done, though, so enjoy all your divas! Just don’t call them “artists” (and for the record, Meryl Streep doesn’t belong in the Blanchett – Day Lewis group, she’s almost always effortless).

[RRA]

Yeah and some people like rubbish and collect it, it’s called Diogenes Syndrome!

And then there is just Snobery.

[Markku Palo]

I'm currently watching a terrible 80s miniseries Masada just because it supposedly contains one of O'Toole's best performances. And yes, he is easily the best thing about this hoary dreck, bossing people around as a badass Roman general, but man, I don't think I can go through all six hours of this. There's a limit even to a fan's affection.

[Blasty]

Yeah and some people like rubbish and collect it, it’s called Diogenes Syndrome! But there’s one thing that’s objective: if something is taking you a lot of effort when someone else does the same thing with ease, the one that does it without effort and with ease is more talented for such activity. You may still admire the one that still does it no matter how much he suffers to get it done, though, so enjoy all your divas! Just don’t call them “artists” (and for the record, Meryl Streep doesn’t belong in the Blanchett – Day Lewis group, she’s almost always effortless).

I shall call them whatever I like!



And I don't care what you say, I shall stan forever for Daniel Day-Lewis' ARTISTIC performance in The Age of Innocence!

[Triviachamp]

I don't think I can go through all six hours of this. There's a limit even to a fan's affection.

Well it's only half as long as TDKR.

[coolinout1]

Saw him in Cristiada. Peter OToole in a Mexican film, wtf. The movie is awful but its impossible not to feel moved by his grandpa look. Or maybe it's just me. I never had a grandpa.

Is it worth rooting for some Supporting Actor award notices for it?

[Shy_Hallaman]

O’Toole is many times hammy

As are other great actors like Olivier, Nicholson and Hopkins. Their being hammy is the exception, not the rule.

John Wayne didn’t need to open his eyes in terror at the death of his servant in quick sands.

That's because he was never in Lawrence of Arabia.

God forbid that an actor might go for emphasis and stylization, because of course, "subtlety" is the ONLY way of acting.

Give me a break.

The love of his life is instead killed at the beginning of Searchers, and he just needs to glance at the horizon, his face in an almost imperceptible grimace, to express that his character won’t stop until he’s killed scar and rescued Debbie. That’s a film actor, as opposed to the diva gesturing of O’Toole. That’s why audiences fell in love with Wayne and not with O’Toole. That’s why Wayne is a FILM icon. He felt real, and cinematic.

Thanks for sharing an opinion. But I don't think anybody needs you to define what a film actor is.

They say the true artist is the one who can make what he does look easy to do.

YOU say.

And I say differently.

O’Toole belongs to that kind of actors in whom you can see the effort at every moment. [yada yada yada] If you really need so much effort to express things, damn, then maybe you’re not that good an actor? Choose another profession that comes more naturally to you?

Again, working from the assumption that all non-subtle acting is not really acting.

As far as British actors go, yes, Rex Harrison is infinitely better in My Fair Lady. There you have an actor in whom everything springs so naturally and effortlessly that Blasty thinks he’s sleepwalking.

Naturally and effortlessly indifferent, bland and unmemorable.

But you can feel every ounce of misanthropy in his Henry Higgins, every self-complacency in his own superiority, and every new feeling Eliza awakens in him, and each reservation he has towards those new feelings.

Don't assume what I can or cannot feel.

But since it comes off effortlessly, to Blasty that’s autopilot. Yeah when an actor does THAT so effortlessly that’s called “art”, Blasty, not “autopilot”.

What about effortless autopilot?

[Gregory]

Hmmm...... Saying one agrees and disagrees with both sides of an argument practically guarantees hostility from both sides. So please feel free to fire away. Given my druthers, O'Toole would have won the Oscar for Lawrence of Arabia and Wayne would have won the Oscar for The Searchers. These performances involve different approaches to acting, but both work brilliantly at conveying who their characters were to a degree that astonishes me no matter how many times I see them. There is more than one way to act well and it probably would be best not to be tuned into only one approach. Among other things, this flexibility makes both art and life more fun.

[Blasty]

Well, if John Wayne had to win, at least if it had been for something like The Searchers, there would be less arguing.

But I must say, I mostly just don't like his voice or presence as an actor. I mean, I'm usually not biased about actors that way and try to give all of them a chance, but his personality is grating for me. I'll admit he certainly towered on screen though in an indelible and powerful way.