Movies: Denzel vs Hanks

[NyQuil]

Denzel Washington won an Oscar for Training Day, a perfectly fine crime thriller that would have been lost to time if not for his substantial presence.

Tom Hanks won an Oscar for Forrest Gump, a treacly Oscar courting prestige project that ages worse by the day.

Philadelphia is an interesting film because both actors played large roles against one another. Hanks won an Oscar for that movie as well.

Personally, I think Washington had the meatier role, in that he got to play the obnoxious bigot lawyer while Hanks played more of a victim.

But Hanks was definitely more out of his element than Washington.

 

[NyQuil]

In the Equalizer of all things, he does play more of a quiet and unassuming character.

I haven't caught his entire filmography so there may be others out there.

 

[Chili]

Not really a fair comparison, they both do different types of characters in different types of movies. Reminds me I gotta download Bridge of Spies though thanks.

Good movie for fans of spy films. Enjoyed it.

Liked Hanks in Sully too. Liked most of DW's films.

Enjoy both actor's work.

 

[KallioWeHardlyKnewYe]

He's always the same persona.

I mean, Jack Nicholson is JAAAAACK but then you see him in something like About Schmidt and he's playing a completely different person.

I asked earlier if Denzel ever played a passive role and I'm still waiting. I mean, even in St. Elsewhere he was the same cocky guy.

In that vein, it's interesting that Washington and Hanks are being compared because they both fill a need without a lot of variation.

It's not common, but he can be more subdued ... Devil In A Blue Dress and Courage Under Fire come to mind. Hell in Philadelphia I'd say he has the more passive part in a movie with Hanks. Definitely variations on a theme but not quite as big as some of his other performances. Malcolm X runs a broad spectrum. The big, firey parts are what you remember, but there's some quiet there too.

I do think Hanks vs. Washington is a really interesting comparison. I wouldn't describe either one as being particularly versatile. They're both more classic movie stars playing variations on a few comfortable personas than they are "actors" in that showy Christian Bale I'm going to "disappear" sense. Hanks can be funny. Washington really can't (at least in a traditional way). Washington can do action in his sleep. Hanks really can't. Drama v. drama is a bit of a wash. Hanks tends to play more even-keel. Washington tends to be volatile.

With best-for-best being fairly even, I stand by my initial distinction. I think Washington makes bad movies better. I don't think Hanks does (Larry Crowne, A Hologram for the King, woof). I'd further argue that there are movies where Hanks' persona actually hurts the movie. I think Road to Perdition is an all-time casting snafu (Tom Hanks as a hitman, come on!) and I think his very Tom Hanksness is also a drag on The Bridge of Spies. I fully concede I am probably in a minority on those two takes.

But I am struggling to think of a movie I left thinking Denzel Washington was the WRONG person to be in it.

 

[Hammettf2b]

My 2 favorite actors. I give the edge to Denzel.

 

[beowulf]

Love much of the work both have done but I'd have to pick Hanks by a hair.

 

[NyQuil]

With best-for-best being fairly even, I stand by my initial distinction. I think Washington makes bad movies better. I don't think Hanks does (Larry Crowne, A Hologram for the King, woof). I'd further argue that there are movies where Hanks' persona actually hurts the movie. I think Road to Perdition is an all-time casting snafu (Tom Hanks as a hitman, come on!) and I think his very Tom Hanksness is also a drag on The Bridge of Spies. I fully concede I am probably in a minority on those two takes.

But I am struggling to think of a movie I left thinking Denzel Washington was the WRONG person to be in it.

I can definitely agree with this take.

I saw both Larry Crowne and A Hologram for the King and they were basically unwatchable.

I was decidedly unimpressed with Bridge of Spies and Road to Perdition had some great moments (from Paul Newman in particular) but was ultimately uneven.

Bridge of Spies just wasn't an interesting enough perspective on the Powers-Abel drama IMO and Hanks was miscast.

Meanwhile, a film like Virtuosity which was a real clunker still had great Denzel moments in it.

 

[KallioWeHardlyKnewYe]

I can definitely agree with this take.

I saw both Larry Crowne and A Hologram for the King and they were basically unwatchable.

I was decidedly unimpressed with Bridge of Spies and Road to Perdition had some great moments (from Paul Newman in particular) but was ultimately uneven.

Bridge of Spies just wasn't an interesting enough perspective on the Powers-Abel drama IMO and Hanks was miscast in the latter.

Meanwhile, a film like Virtuosity which was a real clunker still had great Denzel moments in it.

I am reconsidering my Philadelphia point after your post too. I think you're right that Denzel is the more active character in that movie. Hanks' is more memorably showier because of the physical aspects, but you're right Washington is really the one with the journey there.

 

[Nemesis Prime]

I think Denzel is the better of the two. I feel like Tom Hanks kind of plays the same character in every movie, but Denzel steps outside his comfort zone a little more.

Can't go wrong with either, though.

 

[montreal]

Hanks, he's killed it in so many movies.

Joe vs the Volcano
the burbs
tuner and hooch
big
dragnet
volunteers
a league of their own
sleepless in seattle
philadelphia
forest gump
apollo 13
toy story
that thing you do
saving private ryan
cast away
green mile
catch me if you can
the da vinci code
charlie wilson's war

 

[Tkachuk4MVP]

In the Equalizer of all things, he does play more of a quiet and unassuming character.

I haven't caught his entire filmography so there may be others out there.

The Little Things (which just came out) is another example, and I'd argue Book of Eli is another. He does subtle/quiet very well, despite probably being remembered more for roles like Training Day and Glory.

 

[Fantomas]

2 Oscars and a shit ton of memorable films but sure.

Yeah, just like James Stewart.

 

[HanSolo]

Personally I don't think either actor has terrific range. For the most part both of them play slight variants of the same character every time with a few exceptions.

Hanks' strength is consistent everyman likeability and generally being believable in every role while Washington's is superb screen presence and gravitas in his line delivery.

Maybe a slight edge to Denzel but to be honest, I see it as about even.

 

[NyQuil]

The Little Things (which just came out) is another example, and I'd argue Book of Eli is another. He does subtle/quiet very well, despite probably being remembered more for roles like Training Day and Glory.

Book of Eli is a fairly pedestrian movie that is made very watchable on the strengths of the three leads.

That’s a good example.

 

[Puck]

I like both but I suppose it's Denzel. Denzel also made the NYTimes best actor of the 21st century so far (@ #1).

 

[Puck]

Found the NYT list

The 25 Greatest Actors of the 21st Century (So Far)

 

[Pranzo Oltranzista]

Found the NYT list

The 25 Greatest Actors of the 21st Century (So Far)

That page's design is pretty cool. I won't say anything against the rest of the list because I like Isabelle Huppert at 2.

 

[Baby Punisher]

Hanks did comedy better

Agree. You stole my thunder. Beyond that Denzel by a country mile. I just watched Philadelphia last week. I had not watched in many years and both of their performances were just as striking and powerful as they were when I saw it in the theater. They played well off of each other.

I can't recall a film that Hanks made where he was the crazy bad guy. Road to Perdition doesn't count. Denzel has played those roles in fantastic Academy Award-winning manner.

As I write this I am trying to envision Denzel as Forrest Gump and Hanks as Creasy. I could definitely see Denzel playing Gump, but not Hanks playing any of Denzel's roles.

Winner= Denzel!

 

[Baby Punisher]

Found the NYT list

The 25 Greatest Actors of the 21st Century (So Far)

Oscar Isaac surprised me.
A Most Violent Year is a good film that could have been so much more.
The funny thing about Standard Heating Oil was that they got put out of business for doing exactly what Abel was being accused of doing and their owner, (who has a family member that I know) pretty much walked away with little to no jail time, a multi-million dollar fine and almost $100 million in the bank.

 

[ArGarBarGar]

I think both are incredibly engaging actors for completely different reasons. Don't know if I can really say which actor is better or worse because of that.

 

[Mickey Marner]

They both generally play a version of the same character, but Denzel at least takes risks and plays flawed characters. Hanks has played it safe for a quarter century.

 

[GlassesJacketShirt]

I slightly prefer Hanks' films, but Washington is one of the all-time presences in cinema.

 

[kmart]

Hanks has only gone out of his comfort zone a handful of times (e.g. Philadelphia, Road to Perdition) to mixed results and has carved out a career with fairly safe leading roles as all-around American good guys.

of all comparisons u can make between hanks and denzel, i think hanks wins by default if we rate by range or the out of comfort roles... washington plays solely confident personalties, the good/bad guy theme is irrelevant.

 

[cupcrazyman]

For me it's Denzel.

 

[chicagoskycam]

One of my favorite Denzel movies is Pelican Brief, I think I like him when he is a bit more subdued. Training Day - he's amazing in and it's almost like that's too easy for him.