Jamie Foxx opened this reviewers eyes – wide and unblinking – with his Oscar winning turn in 2004’s “Ray.”
This affable comic had serious chops – dramatic range to go along with his funny bone. Heck, he could sing and play instruments, too.
In baseball, he’d be a 5-tool player. In Hollywood, his skill set puts him on a higher plane.
So what happened since “Ray?”
Let’s start with “Stealth,” a mindless actioner which probably got greenlit before the “Ray” hoopla kicked in.
“Jarhead,” his first true follow-up, afforded him a smart supporting role, but he clearly didn’t command the screen as he had in “Ray.”
The musical “Dreamgirls” gave the actor his richest post-Oscar project while “The Kingdom” let him radiate gravitas during an otherwise tense action drama – a genre none too kind to Serious Actors.
“The Soloist” turned from Oscar catnip to a missed opportunity, and the recent “Law Abiding Citizen” stands as the actor’s one true stinker.
Hard to fully blame Foxx for his meandering career. He’s chosen to work with some of the industry’s mightiest directors (Sam Mendes, Peter Berg) and some roles pushed him to the outskirts of his range.
But enduring A-listers blend remarkable talent with an eye for picking just the right projects. Think Tom Hanks. Don’t think Michael Keaton.
Even Brad Pitt, an actor with a fraction of Foxx’s talent, has aligned himself with challenging projects allowing him to move beyond his limited range.
Foxx still belongs to the A-list, but another few films like “Citizen” and he could be docked a letter grade.
(Photo: Jamie Foxx and Robert Downey, Jr. star in the disappointing 2009 drama “The Soloist.”)
Related posts:
on 
on 
{ 5 comments… read them below or add one }
“But enduring A-listers blend remarkable talent with an eye for picking just the right projects. Think Tom Hanks.”
I think people like Hanks have the added talent of being able snoop out the right projects. Perhaps Foxx doesn’t have this talent or perhaps he just wanted some spending money.
Just how many good roles are available? Modern Hollywood isn’t the place it once was. Good roles for anyone over 30 are difficult to find. Women are placated to the rom-com genre, men to contemporary har-har schlock like Will Ferrell or the Judd Apatow chain gang.
No one exemplifies this better than Russell Crowe. In historical roles, he adds a uniform and usually knocks it out of the park (Gladiator, 3:10 to Yuma, Cinderella Man, Master and Commander …), anything in a modern setting, it’s always a weight gain, make up, growing out the hair or anything to make you think the actor is anyone other than Russell Crowe.
Take Body Of Lies. Switch Leo and make him that at-home bureaucrat and place Crowe as the hero in the field, it changes the whole dynamic of the movie. It becomes something watchable. But casting watchable isn’t what actors and studios are interested in anymore. Leo, the gay man’s ideal of testosterone, gets the meaty and dirty role, and audiences are left to shake their heads.
I’m not sure what the problem is in Foxx’s case. The Soloist was obvious Oscar bait (never saw it, but judging from the reviews, he can help a overly-moralistic and hand-wringing story) but there are really no more go-to roles for men over 30 to play at the moment. He’s kind of bouncing from everything, a musical hero, action flick here, you think some studio somewhere would come up with something for Jamie Foxx.
That’s the ultimate answer, JohnFN – so very few good roles are out there and there’s a battle between actors to find them.
I can’t imagine how hard it will be this year to find 10 Best Pic nominees. Not sure I can think of five off the top of my head.
An actor today would be wise to foster his own relationships with talented writers/directors – or create material for himself/herself.
It’s the only way to really have some career leverage.
Just going to throw this out there, and will probably get hammered for it, but I think Brad Pitt is the most underrated actor in Hollywood. His pretty boy face and off screen antics overshadow his talent and turn him into the quintessential whipping boy of all film critics.
Pitt may have a fraction of the talent that Foxx possesses in term of musical ability and stand up comedy, but on the screen Pitt is formidable and he obviously knows how to pick his roles.
No argument from me, Bob. Pitt’s annoying on-screen association with Clooney and Damon, two actors I find it increasingly difficult to separate their politics from their performances, aside (at least the first Ocean’s movie was damn good), love watching Pitt work. His Jesse James role was sadly ignored (kinda like the movie) and I can’t not say “cleaning products” in anything but his stoner voice from True Romance.