> is Shia LeBeauf always in a bad movie?
Hmm. I guess so. To tell you the truth, I'm scarcely even familar with him, because "Wall Street 2" is the only one of the movies you list that I've seen. Must be because the other ones are ... well, bad.
I didn't think he was particularly bad in this movie, though. Anyway, he didn't ruin it. That already happened before he showed up, thanks to a hackneyed misconception and unimaginative, unfocused screenplay.
Then again, he wasn't particularly good either. He wasn't unbelievable as the character or anything, but he was just sort of blandly there. I suppose that's what the part called for, being a cardboardy character. I wonder, though, what a more lively actor - or just one with a bit more personality - might have brought to the part. The younger John Cusack played some characters who were fairly blank (even one named that), but you could scarcely say they lacked personality or interest once he was done with them.
I am, however, one of the several dozen people who actually saw LeBeouf in "Battle of Shaker Heights" (in a theater, no less!). He was pretty decent, actually ... which may be the result of some combination of: (i) low expectations, (ii) Oliver Stone having mellowed into an even worse director of actors than a pair of never-weres or (iii) better material, if you can believe that.
reply
share