Of all actresses from the 40's to the 50's, Lauren Bacall is among the weakest. Sure, she was great in To Have and Have Not only because of her instant attraction to Humphrey Bogart. Afterwards, she kept getting worse due to lack of theatrical training and was even overshadowed by two beauties in The Big Sleep. To make up for it is to appear as Lauren Bacall each time, and it's the sultry eyes doing the work and nothing else.

John Barrymore, Ethel Barrymore, and Lionel Barrymore...legendary thespians. But Drew Barrymore? Yeah, right. Absolutely zero talent. The last name is a major reason why she made this far in Hollywood. Then, there's her face that pedophiles loved when she was a child. Thank goodness, Drew Barrymore is the last of her family.

Famous name, sure, but was he that good of an actor? No...not really. Warren Beatty has a simple technique: stare at a wall with blank face. That's all there is to it. He does this in virtually every movie. One can snap her fingers in his face and say, "Hey, wake up!" Warren Beatty is lucky that Bonnie and Clyde happened so his overrated career could last longer.

I'm convinced that there's no such thing as a good Sandra Bullock film. She can't act, period. Romance? Love? Sex? And with men? Yeah, right...Sandra Bullock gives off strong neutral/lesbian vibes despite being paired up with handsome guys like Keanu Reeves, Ben Affleck, and Matthew McConaughey. Hence, she's never likeable and tends to ruin the show such as Speed and A Time to Kill by playing her role the wrong way.

My criticism is focused on Jim Carrey as a dramatic actor. I don't have any issue with him when it comes to comedy, especially the physical stuff and the voices. But drama? He's like Bill Murray in The Razor's Edge: blank, uninteresting, and devoid of depth. The darker the material is, the more it doesn't work. Robin Williams was better at doing the crossover.

Question...have you ever seen Charlie Chaplin's films when he worked for Keystone, Essanay, Mutual, or First National Studios? If not, I recommend you to sit through them, and there are about sixty which is two-thirds of his oeuvre. They all suck, and he's not funny but rather sadistic. No, you can't cheat by skipping ahead; you have to keep watching. There's no genius in him, either.

The most overrated actress of the 60's is Julie Christie. She won the Best Actress Oscar for Darling, but I saw nothing remarkable in her performance just like these overlong bores: Doctor Zhivago, Far from the Madding Crowd, Petulia, McCabe & Mrs. Miller, and Shampoo. Can it be that everybody got fooled by her looks back then? Julie Christie lacks theatrical training. The only time she was terrific is Don't Look Now.

Joan Crawford is weird. Often soap operatic, she plays men, not women. The caterpillar eyebrows, the chandelier jewelry around her neck, and the wire hanger thing...very bizarre stuff. I could've figured this out myself if Mommie Dearest hadn't been written by her adopted daughter. For Mildred Pierce, I thought Joan Crawford's mink coat won her the Oscar.

Penelope Cruz absolutely cannot act. She always plays herself while relying on Spanish looks. I was surprised when she won the Oscar, causing me to say the Academy would give it out to anyone for beauty and nothing else. If Sophia Loren was in her 20's or 30's lately, she could've received five Oscars. Acting used to be taken seriously back then or was even a concept. I guess not anymore.

Equipped with dead black eyes, John Cusack isn't a funny guy. He plays arrogant, self-centered pricks who cannot fucking stop talking so much. If I ever meet him in real life, I want to punch him in the face. And I hate his sister Joan, too. One thing I'll give John Cusack is he's actually decent in political dramas such as True Colors and City Hall.

There's nothing to rave about Judi Dench. You can throw fifty films in a spinning wheel and select five randomly to find no change in her. She always play herself over and over and is all about breaking balls. That's not attractive or interesting. Maggie Smith is infinitely a better actress than her, having been adept at changing it up.

Marlene Dietrich is another overrated actress with sultry eyes. Like Jean Harlow, her pencil-thin eyebrows are completely unattractive. I felt that she was a man, the emasculating type who got her way through manipulative means just like in Judgment at Nuremberg. Is it a German thing? Maybe. At any rate, acting isn't a priority with Marlene Dietrich; it's about how she looks on screen.

Sally Field is never convincing. Whenever her face appears, all I see is...Sally Field and hypocrisy. It's the same every time. I hate her characters in films like Sybil, Absence of Malice, and Punchline. If a movie is well-made, it's not because of Sally Field but the ensemble cast such as Places in the Heart, Soapdish, and Forrest Gump.

If I'm forced to think of an actress I can't stand, it's Jane Fonda. It has nothing to do with the Vietnam War. There's no way she would've made into Hollywood if her father wasn't Henry Fonda. Every movie I've seen her in, she's either pretentious or a hypocrite. When she gives a fine performance like Comes a Horseman and Coming Home, I'll be honest and say so, but it's rare.

I hate Jodie Foster. She sucks in everything. Rape victim in The Accused? Ha! Not believable. How about Bugsy Malone when she got outacted by two kids who saw their Hollywood careers die afterwards? She doesn't know the art of comedic timing as evidenced in Freaky Friday. Forget The Silence of the Lambs. This isn't a real actress but a yuppie from Yale.

Tom Hanks is a decent actor, but two Oscars? I don't think so. He's an easy choice to lavish all the praise because he's "safe" just like James Stewart. You'll never find him doing something risky or experimental. I actually liked Tom Hanks more when he did comedy films during the 80's, and he was funny. It's too bad he gave all that up for a career in "drama."

Women love Audrey Hepburn because of her cute looks, but I hate her. She's ridiculous in every movie...always about the clothes. She isn't an actress but a fashion model. When Audrey Hepburn showed off her extremely thin frame, I wanted to tell her to eat. She must have weighed 80 pounds. I won't be surprised to learn if she was anorexic on top of chain-smoking three packs a day.

It's very tough to watch a Katharine Hepburn movie because she keeps giving an overdone performance and isn't all that as she seems to think. Many times, she won't fucking stop talking so much. As a result, I stay away from her stuff despite them being enduring classics. Katharine Hepburn has never been beautiful or remotely attractive and can be spotted as a lesbian from a mile away.

If anyone must describe Angelina Jolie quickly in five words, it'll be "slutty eyes and puffy lips." Every film has her looking and acting this way as a major selling point. No training or research is needed; just show up and say the lines. Her characters are impossible to take seriously, especially in a position of authority. I'm pretty sure that Angelina Jolie would've become a porn actress if she failed to make it in Hollywood early on.

Strip away the blond hair, the clothes designed by Edith Head, and the makeup, and you'll find a very bad actress in Grace Kelly. She's shallow every single time. Don't be tricked by the rich colors in Hitchcock films. She was never good in them such as Dial M for Murder and To Catch a Thief, having been largely helped out by her male co-stars. Grace Kelly knew this and had to get out of Hollywood ASAP, leaving behind a very small body of work.

I don't get the public's infatuation with Nicole Kidman. There's nothing interesting about her. With the exception of Days of Thunder, she's vacant and blank in every movie and can't develop chemistry with anybody to save her own life. The best way to describe Nicole Kidman is "porcelain." Mess up her makeup the slightest bit, and she'll shatter into pieces.

Don't be suckered in by Sophia Loren's looks. She was never a strong actress. Because of producer-husband Carlo Ponti and the ability to speak at least several foreign languages, Sophia Loren struck gold all over the world. But let's not kid ourselves: when it comes down to acting ability, she fails the test big time and is just another Audrey Hepburn.

I hate, hate, hate Shirley MacLaine. She isn't even a good actress and has the face of a snooty bitch. Nearly every movie starring her is awful like The Trouble with Harry, Steel Magnolias, Postcards from the Edge, Guarding Tess, and The Evening Star. I don't want to hear a word she says. Her brother Warren Beatty is a lot more tolerable despite his notorious reputation of a creep.

Marilyn Monroe couldn't act despite her stunning looks. Why did numerous esteemed thespians do a film with her? She was a proven moneymaker. Her films did very well, box-office-wise. No matter how many I've seen Marilyn Monroe star in, she has the depth of a shot glass. The only fine performance she gave is Don't Bother to Knock, and that's because she was mentally unstable just like her character.

Edward Norton is the Peyton Manning of Hollywood. Everything he does is phony with a capital P. That much is clear in American History X. I actually thought he was going to win the Oscar for it, but the Academy Awards surprised me by not going that way. Edward Norton never made a believer out of me with his ridiculous performance in Primal Fear. He's so phony, phony, phony!

A Lee Harvey Oswald lookalike, there are times Gary Oldman can act, but his résumé is littered with hammy performances. His technique is so overdone, causing him not to be believable for once. If I have to think of somebody who can do it better and more spontaneously, it's Nicolas Cage. On top of that, he's British, but there have been many, many better actors than him from that country.

Whenever somebody calls Sean Penn the "greatest living American actor," my eyes just roll. I respect his work, he gives competent performances, and I'll gladly watch his movies. But enough with the overpraise. He isn't in Mickey Rourke's league. The difference is Sean Penn is unable to dig deep to give an extraordinary performance. To make up for this shortcoming, he'll break down and cry. I have my stopwatch ready for it.

Don't be tricked by Michelle Pfeiffer's eyes. She's a lightweight actress who got lucky to be paired with many A-list stars. The only time she was passable is Dangerous Liaisons, thanks to John Malkovich. The more serious the material is, the worse her acting is. It's only because looks can go so far; she has no theatrical training to make up for it. There are very strong rumors of Michelle Pfeiffer being a former call girl before she made into Hollywood.

Many times after seeing Julia Roberts in a movie, I say, "Her brother is far better." It's true. Eric Roberts has an unbelievable range while Julia Roberts is the type who will say, "I can cry on cue!!! And make faces!!!" Eeek. It's worse when she has an attitude and wants to take it up with whoever crosses her path. Eeek. Run, run, and never look back.

Go ahead...count them all. Mickey Rooney has been in over 300 films. Every time I see his name in the opening credits, I always groan because I know what's going happen. He'll give a hammy performance and make the movie worse than necessary. If Mickey Rooney could play it straight and be normal for once, then he wouldn't be on this list.

Why do you like Meg Ryan? Is it the hair? But that's not acting. I give props to the Academy Awards for not bestowing a single nomination on her. They probably knew she was never a good actress despite being a big moneymaker. Her characters have a shelf life of two minutes, and then, it's Meg Ryan all the way to the end. Chemistry with any of the male leads is virtually nil.

Adam Sandler is funny? He has never ever made me laugh once. Billy Madison, Happy Gilmore, and The Waterboy are terrible comedies. Before I started to play The Wedding Singer, I knew it would be a waste of time and was proven correct afterwards, deciding once and for all to stop bothering with his stuff. When I think of Adam Sandler, I think of Going Overboard. That's who he is.

Quick! Name a film starring Susan Sarandon other than Dead Man Walking. You can't because she wasn't outstanding in anything else with the exception of Lorenzo's Oil. Her acting range is small. To get away with it, she'll use her almond eyes. When that doesn't work anymore, she'll take off her clothes. Ka-ching! Thank you very much, and come back again. I prefer her ex-husband Chris Sarandon.

I can't stand Will Smith and refuse to watch his movies. Granted, he wasn't bad in The Fresh Prince of Bel-Air, but never did I ever think of him more than a TV star. He takes acting back by 100 years. It's so bad, corny, and shallow that Marlon Brando would feel compelled to cry. This isn't a black thing. Will Smith simply has nothing on Sidney Poitier, Louis Gossett, Jr., Morgan Freeman, Denzel Washington, and Forest Whitaker.

Oscar-nominated 21 times and winner of three...were the voters fooled by Meryl Streep's sultry eyes? Hello *waving my hand over their faces* come back to Earth. It may be the lack of competition as leading roles for women are very hard to come by. Anyway, I never thought much of Meryl Streep, no matter how many films I had seen her in. She's not somebody I would equate with Jessica Lange or Vivien Leigh.

Somebody thought Marky Mark could act? *laughing* I'm falling down on the floor and pointing at him. I just can't stop. Seriously, Marky Mark is one of the worst actors I've seen in my life. He's cheesy in everything. If there's anyone who can challenge Will Smith in this department, Marky Mark is your guy.

Remember Robert Wagner? How about Tab Hunter? Or Troy Donahue? That's Owen Wilson in a nutshell. I'm constantly left clueless about what makes him special. He's never been funny or interesting and has no range. I'm always looking at his nose and can't believe how much it resembles a witch or a penis. Hollywood can do better than Owen Wilson.