Home Forums Movies Better filmography #18 Hugh Jackman vs. Russell Crowe

Better filmography #18 Hugh Jackman vs. Russell Crowe

CREATE A NEW TOPIC
CREATE A NEW POLL
Viewing 14 posts - 1 through 14 (of 14 total)
Created
3 years ago
Last Reply
3 years ago
13
replies
868
views
9
users
3
3
1
  • Beyonce
    Participant
    Joined:
    Jun 29th, 2013
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #176205

    vs.

    Hugh has:

    The Fountain
    The Prestige
    X-Men franchise
    Happy Feet
    Scoop
    Australia

    etc

    Russell has:

    L.A. Confidential
    Cindarella Man
    3:10 To Yuma
    American Gangster
    Body of Lies
    Robin Hood
    Man of Steel

    etc.

    and then there was Les Miserables in which they were in together

    (01) Mia Wasikovska vs. Carey Mulligan
    (02) Brad Pitt vs. Leonardo DiCaprio
    (03) Scarlet Johansson vs. Keira Knightley
    (04) Robert De Niro vs. Al Pacino
    (05) Cary Grant vs. Bette Davis
    (06) Ryan Gosling vs. Mark Ruffalo
    (07) Meryl Streep vs. Jessica Lange
    (08) Nicole Kidman vs. Tom Cruise
    (09) Kathy Bates vs. Anjelica Huston
    (10) Ben Affleck vs. Matt Damon
    (11) Vivien Leigh vs. Katherine Hepburn
    (12) Christian Bale vs. Kate Winslet
    (13) Sean Penn vs. Will Smith
    (14) Anne Hathaway vs. Kirsten Dunst
    (15) James Franco vs. Joseph Gordon-Levitt
    (16) Julia Roberts vs. Angelina Jolie
    (17) Steve Carrell vs. Helena Bonham Carter

    Reply
    M
    Participant
    Joined:
    Aug 5th, 2014
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #176207

    Katharine Hepburn not Katherine Hepburn.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Anonymous
    Joined:
    Jan 1st, 1970
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #176208

    I dislike everything Russell does, so I’m going with Hugh. 

    I just think that Russell is too agressive-looking and annyoing for me to enjoy his roles. 

    ReplyCopy URL
    benbraddock
    Participant
    Joined:
    Nov 4th, 2013
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #176209

    Crowe has the much better filmography
    Crowe is a better actor.

    ReplyCopy URL
    babypook
    Participant
    Joined:
    Nov 4th, 2010
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #176210

    Well heck; I’m simply comparing their pecs.

    ReplyCopy URL
    ETPhoneHome
    Participant
    Joined:
    Jan 3rd, 2013
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #176211

    Well Hugh was in Les MisÄ—rables…Russell was in Les Mis… Which did I like more? I prefferred Les MisÄ—rables.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Filmatelist
    Participant
    Joined:
    Nov 19th, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #176212

    Hugh Jackman should consider himself lucky if he ever appears in a movie as good as L.A. CONFIDENTIAL.  Or THE INSIDER.  Or MASTER AND COMMANDER.  So far, he hasn’t even come close.

    No contest.  

    ReplyCopy URL
    Alisha
    Member
    Joined:
    Oct 11th, 2014
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #176213

    Russell

    ReplyCopy URL
    babypook
    Participant
    Joined:
    Nov 4th, 2010
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #176214

    Hugh Jackman should consider himself lucky if he ever appears in a movie as good as L.A. CONFIDENTIAL.  Or THE INSIDER.  Or MASTER AND COMMANDER.  So far, he hasn’t even come close.

    No contest.  

    That’s kinda harsh isnt it? Perhaps this film isnt Oscary but for a fantasy, I really thought he was terrific in Kate and Leopold, just for starters. 

    Russell has made some disasters as well, including some of those listed in his filmography.

    I’d say Jackman is close, and perhaps with as much or more potential as Crowe in the future.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Filmatelist
    Participant
    Joined:
    Nov 19th, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #176215

    [quote=”Filmatelist”]Hugh Jackman should consider himself lucky if he ever appears in a movie as good as L.A. CONFIDENTIAL.  Or THE INSIDER.  Or MASTER AND COMMANDER.  So far, he hasn’t even come close.

    No contest.  

    That’s kinda harsh isnt it? Perhaps this film isnt Oscary but for a fantasy, I really thought he was terrific in Kate and Leopold, just for starters. 

    Russell has made some disasters as well, including some of those listed in his filmography.

    I’d say Jackman is close, and perhaps with as much or more potential as Crowe in the future.

    [/quote]

    Not harsh, just honest.  I’d say the one Jackman film that is in the league of the 3 I mentioned is THE PRESTIGE (and perhaps THE FOUNTAIN).  But the question comes to body of work, and while Crowe’s had some bombs, none to my mind are as bad as AUSTRALIA or SWORDFISH or VAN HELSING, either.  

    I don’t doubt for a second Jackman is a nicer guy to hang out with and a better singer.  But even with Crowe’s overrated films (the unbearable A BEAUTIFUL MIND in particular), their filmographies are still simply in two different leagues.  

    ReplyCopy URL
    babypook
    Participant
    Joined:
    Nov 4th, 2010
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #176216

    [quote=”babypook”]

    [quote=”Filmatelist”]Hugh Jackman should consider himself lucky if he ever appears in a movie as good as L.A. CONFIDENTIAL.  Or THE INSIDER.  Or MASTER AND COMMANDER.  So far, he hasn’t even come close.

    No contest.  

    That’s kinda harsh isnt it? Perhaps this film isnt Oscary but for a fantasy, I really thought he was terrific in Kate and Leopold, just for starters. 

    Russell has made some disasters as well, including some of those listed in his filmography.

    I’d say Jackman is close, and perhaps with as much or more potential as Crowe in the future.

    [/quote]

    Not harsh, just honest.  I’d say the one Jackman film that is in the league of the 3 I mentioned is THE PRESTIGE (and perhaps THE FOUNTAIN).  But the question comes to body of work, and while Crowe’s had some bombs, none to my mind are as bad as AUSTRALIA or SWORDFISH or VAN HELSING, either.  

    I don’t doubt for a second Jackman is a nicer guy to hang out with and a better singer.  But even with Crowe’s overrated films (the unbearable A BEAUTIFUL MIND in particular), their filmographies are still simply in two different leagues.  [/quote]

    I agree with a lot of what you say, but, I dunno. Hugh is terrific in X-Men and The Wolverine, but we’ve (or they’ve tried to) been conditioned to  feel that these fantasy/sci-fi roles have no real gravitas or meaning. Unfair, and not true. I guess we’ll see if this kind of thinking takes any kind of arc in terms of change.

    I also thought he was terrific in Prisoners; not “one-note”, not OTT, but terrific.

    I dont blame him for trusting Baz and I think Crowe was lucky in finding that role with Hanson. His filmography could have been a huge front runner here, were it not for his lazy, phoneitin performances. Although lately, I believe Crowe is hungry again. Imo, a performance can elevate a filmography a lot.

    Jmho. I understand that your pov is probably the majority, but I had to put in props for Hugh.

    Wow the poll is closer than I imagined. Lol

    ReplyCopy URL
    Filmatelist
    Participant
    Joined:
    Nov 19th, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #176217

    [quote=”Filmatelist”][quote=”babypook”]

    [quote=”Filmatelist”]Hugh Jackman should consider himself lucky if he ever appears in a movie as good as L.A. CONFIDENTIAL.  Or THE INSIDER.  Or MASTER AND COMMANDER.  So far, he hasn’t even come close.

    No contest.  

    That’s kinda harsh isnt it? Perhaps this film isnt Oscary but for a fantasy, I really thought he was terrific in Kate and Leopold, just for starters. 

    Russell has made some disasters as well, including some of those listed in his filmography.

    I’d say Jackman is close, and perhaps with as much or more potential as Crowe in the future.

    [/quote]

    Not harsh, just honest.  I’d say the one Jackman film that is in the league of the 3 I mentioned is THE PRESTIGE (and perhaps THE FOUNTAIN).  But the question comes to body of work, and while Crowe’s had some bombs, none to my mind are as bad as AUSTRALIA or SWORDFISH or VAN HELSING, either.  

    I don’t doubt for a second Jackman is a nicer guy to hang out with and a better singer.  But even with Crowe’s overrated films (the unbearable A BEAUTIFUL MIND in particular), their filmographies are still simply in two different leagues.  [/quote]

    I agree with a lot of what you say, but, I dunno. Hugh is terrific in X-Men and The Wolverine, but we’ve (or they’ve tried to) been conditioned to  feel that these fantasy/sci-fi roles have no real gravitas or meaning. Unfair, and not true. I guess we’ll see if this kind of thinking takes any kind of arc in terms of change.

    I also thought he was terrific in Prisoners; not “one-note”, not OTT, but terrific.

    I dont blame him for trusting Baz and I think Crowe was lucky in finding that role with Hanson. His filmography could have been a huge front runner here, were it not for his lazy, phoneitin performances. Although lately, I believe Crowe is hungry again. Imo, a performance can elevate a filmography a lot.

    Jmho. I understand that your pov is probably the majority, but I had to put in props for Hugh.

    Wow the poll is closer than I imagined. Lol

    [/quote]

    And I guess this highlights what’s confusing about these polls.  The title always says “Better filmography” which simply means “Who has made more good films?”  That particular phrasing has nothing to do with how good they were in them, or who is a better actor in general, though clearly some people take it that way (including you, by your comments).  

    Is Jackman good as Wolverine?  Absolutely.  Are any of the X-Men films any good?  To these eyes, not really (not bad, mostly so-so).  So no matter how good he is in them, the end result is that the films themselves (even solid ones like K&L and PRISONERS) don’t measure up to Crowe’s cumulatively.  But it’s interesting to see where other people are coming from with the question.

     

    ReplyCopy URL
    Anonymous
    Joined:
    Jan 1st, 1970
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #176218

    If we are talking the last 5 years it goes to Hugh, but overall Russell kicks his ass because he was on a hotstreak at one point.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Noé
    Participant
    Joined:
    Feb 20th, 2014
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #176219

    Better filmography? Yeah, Crowe. But I don’t enjoy almost any of his films. He tends to work with directors I really, really dislike (Ron Howard, Ridley Scott).

    So my vote is for Hugh. Not so much consistency and yet not a greatest performance but he have The Prestige and Prisoners and one film I truly love, The Fountain.

    ReplyCopy URL
Viewing 14 posts - 1 through 14 (of 14 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Similar Topics
Andrew ... - Nov 18, 2017
Movies
Chris B... - Nov 17, 2017
Movies