VIGGO STOLE THE SHOW
He was awesome massively upstaged Walken in this film
shareNo way.
This was/is Christopher Walkens movie. Viggo couldnt carry this like Chris. Chris carried the movie from start to finish on his shoulders, making us believe he was a being with irresistable strength and intensity. People infatuated with Viggo's role are probably caught up in the fact that he played a more important angel than Chris did. But picture Viggo carrying the weight of this movie on his shoulders from beginning to end. You can't, and this because Viggo doesnt have the range of emotion and personality that Christopher Walken does as an actor.
^^^This. I saw this a few times before Lotr but when I saw Viggo as Aragorn, I did not remember him from The Prophecy. He was ok in the role but the ones I remember here were Walken & Stoltz. This was Walken's film imo.
shareHave to disagree with you on this one. Chris owned every scene he was in during this film. Even the ones with Viggo - who I honestly didn't even think twice about until I saw LOTR and thought "Who is that guy? I know him from somewhere." to myself. Took a few days to remember it was Satan from Prophecy. Shows how unremarkable his performance was in it. Not that he was BAD as Satan, he just didn't really impress me.
shareTo be honest, Viggo's scenes are the only ones I enjoy from this movie. As much as I love Walken, here he really hammed it up and I just couldn't take anything he said seriously.
Don't blame someone else for setting the trap that you were stupid enough to walk into.
Viggo's depiction of Satan in this was brilliant and I love those few short scenes with him. Completely awesome and menacing.
But Walken did the same when he was on screen, he was awesome as Gabrial.
They each owned their respective parts they played. Both awesome in their own way and I wouldn't put one above the other.
And I am primarily a Walken fan.
But of all Devi parts actors have played, Viggo's in this movie has stood out as the best for me personally.
Agreed, but the movie is still ridiculous. I can't believe people can take this movie seriously. Maybe it's just dated? I wanted to like it so much more than I did. Viggo was the best, though, and Walken amazing in his own over-the-top way. Everyone else was awful, including the girl that played "Mary". Oh, and Stoltz was good. Just ridiculous dialogue.
shareI Agree.
The movie is terrible. I don't even think it was bad acting, so much as it was just bad writing. I don't think that most of the actors understood their roles, or motivations. I think Walken and Mortenson both understood their parts, but really didn't have all that much to play off of. Walken got the brunt of it, since Lucifer only has a couple of scenes. The only character with any good lines was Lucifer. Well delivered, timed, and clearly, very in tune with the scenes. Viggo is one amazing actor.
I agree, Viggo was awesome here. He had more screen 'appeal' than Walken in a way, but Walken did well and was actually scary in his own right. He did ham it up a bit, but it didn't detract from his character much. The writing needed to be a bit better in spots, but it was OK.
Stoltz was very convincing as an angel too. The other actors were...OK. The girl who played Mary did pretty well I thought. Elias Koteas and Virginia Madsen were not so great, they tried too hard.
"I'd say this cloud is Cumulo Nimbus."
"Didn't he discover America?"
"Penfold, shush."
The movie is pretty mediocre but Viggo is *beep* amazing in it
shareThat's funny, I've probably seen this movie more than 10 times since it's release in 1995. Had I not seen this thread, I totally forgot he was in this movie.
Watching it right now on Netflix, and comparing notes with this message board.
_
Every person that served can be called a veteran, but not every veteran can be called a Marine.
Viggo was great, no doubt. But no way did he upstage Christopher Walken.
share