Who was more deserving of Oscar nomination for Best Actor, David Carridine in Ki!
Question:
Who was more deserving of Oscar nomination for Best Actor, David Carridine in Kill Bill 2, or Leo in Titanic?
Opinions only from those who have seen both films, please.
Answers: Neither, but if I had to choose, it would be Carradine. It was a more complex role. Leo most definitely I think David should get an oscar for acting like a marital artist. I loved both movies but Kill Bill sticks out for me more so I'm gonna go with David Carridine. David Carradine. Leo simped his way through Titanic. David Carridine. Leo was a horrible actor back then compared to what he is now. Leo....He made me cry. :-) leo David Carradine played the same role in Kill Bill 2 that he's been playing for years. It was a one-note performance. All he ever does is play one type. I don't love Di Caprio, but at least his performance wasn't the same old stuff with different lines.
In my opinion, NEITHER of them deserved even a nomination. Leo. I would have to choose Leo. He may have not had the best acting abilities back then, but he melted all of our hearts. Since David Carridine's role was only a couple minutes long, he would have been a supporting actor and by default the nomination would have gone to Leo - between just the two.
Honestly, I think a strong argument could be made that Leo deserved a nomination for Titanic - more so than Gloria Stewart who was nominated for about 5 minutes of screen time. But I don't think David Carridine's role in Kill Bill was Oscar worthy. I know fans of the movie think it was the ultimate in cool, but I don't think that makes it Oscar worthy.
For those who are saying Leo was a terrible actor back when Titanic came out, I recommend you go watch "What's Eating Gilbert Grape". I guarantee you'll be singing a different tune. Leo was successful at making you believe that a character could have 1997 sensibilities and mannerisms despite the story line and the other characters' portrayal of a 1912 historical event. As a result, he probably would have been more believable in "Back to the Future 4" than in "Titanic".
David Carridine wins by default. I liked Kill Bill better as a movie but I would have to go with Leo. His performance had a lot more to it, and why David Carridine is great, his role in Kill Bill was good but pretty simple. Nothing extraordinary was done really.
I totally agree with Justin H about Leo's acting ability, he's no Jack Nicholson, but when I first saw him in "What's Eating Gilbert Grape" I had never heard him and I think I really thought he was retarded. He did a great job and it was a fab movie. Kill Bill was dumb or so I thought. Leo actually gave a great performance really heartfelt. I don't know I just don't think any of the kill bill movies should get any kind of award. Leo for Titanic
You really didn't see David Carridine in Kill Bill2 don't get me wrong I think he is a wonderful actor and he scares the hell out of me in that film but I got to give it to Leo . Leo acting was wonderful in the film thats why its number one in the All Time Box Office. Lassie for Lassie... Shes a girl?!! OMG!!! whats the question? oh yes, well Carradine was supporting and Leo was leading. Id say David Carradine cuz the character was more interesting.