"I’ve been surprised by the intensity of the Meryl Streep loyalty."

[Alma]

The NY Times two critics decided to pick the 25 best actors of the 21st Century so far and didn't include Meryl Streep. Actors you've never heard - one, frankly, I never had - made it, but Streep - with 10 Academy Award nominations since 2000? Not good enough.

I like both of these critics' work. But they're freakin' idiots for this. And cowards, too - given the chance to say something about her acting - OK, let's hear it - Dargis says: "I'm not going to say anything bad about Meryl Streep — we love her!"

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

The lame explanation for why no Streep (there really isn't one): Meryl Streep Isn't on Our List of Greatest Actors. Here's Why.

 

[DanOregon]

Arts critics are an insufferable lot. They seem more interested in being the only one touting an obscure film or artist than offering cogent analysis of things people actually watch or listen to. And I read all the arts coverage in the New Yorker, if for no other reason than to find the paragraph explaining WHY this artist or work is so great or worthy of note - and too often, I can't find one.

 

[Mngwa]

The exclusion of both Streep and Tom Hanks is inexcusable hubris and, frankly, negates the entire list. The writers went out of their way to avoid convention.

 

[Dyno]

Keanu Reeves at #4? They're being deliberately provocative.

 

[Alma]

Arts critics are an insufferable lot. They seem more interested in being the only one touting an obscure film or artist than offering cogent analysis of things people actually watch or listen to. And I read all the arts coverage in the New Yorker, if for no other reason than to find the paragraph explaining WHY this artist or work is so great or worthy of note - and too often, I can't find one.

I love art critics. I like these two critics.

But you ask around - and I'm sure they did - and there are 3/4 under-the-radar names that come up pretty quick that aren't on this list. Adam Driver is one - doesn't matter who you ask.

And it's pretty forkin stupid to act like Keanu Reeves is the 4th best actor of the last 20 years.

And you have to really explain Streep's absence. Denzel Washington is indeed a great actor, love him, but there's a difference between the actors in Fences and Flight and the actor in The Equalizer.

 

[zufer]

If you're not in big-screen features, you're not a great actor?

 

[Azrael]

Stipulating that lists are insupportable nonsense, bad faith clickbait and reductive spacefillers and always have been, Streep and Hanks transcend the premise altogether.

But there's an interesting comparison hidden inside it: 20th century Streep vs 21st century Streep. 20th century Hanks vs 21st century Hanks.

Agree on Driver.

 

[Songbird]

Not sold on Driver but he's fine on screen.

 

[DanOregon]

Stipulating that lists are insupportable nonsense, bad faith clickbait and reductive spacefillers and always have been, Streep and Hanks transcend the premise altogether.

But there's an interesting comparison hidden inside it: 20th century Streep vs 21st century Streep. 20th century Hanks vs 21st century Hanks.

Agree on Driver.

20th C. DeNiro v. 21st C. DeNiro - I have no problem leaving him off such a list. Glad he's cashing in now - but he's pretty much just done reprises of earlier, superior work - or outright parodies of those roles for the last 20 years, probably longer than that, but still....

 

[Azrael]

DeNiro, Pacino, hossenpfeffer incorporated.

I certainly wouldn't include Streep in the group guilty of self-parody, but there are other giants not on this list.

Hopkins. Freeman. I don't think Nicholson has done the work since 2000 you'd need to see to put him on a list like this.

But where's DiCaprio? Tom Hardy? Theron?

 

[Songbird]

Bale, DiCaprio, Day-Lewis, Waltz (just for Landa) are in the pantheon of 21-c male actors.

I'm inclined to put Pitt up there too.

 

[sgreenwell]

Arts critics are an insufferable lot. They seem more interested in being the only one touting an obscure film or artist than offering cogent analysis of things people actually watch or listen to. And I read all the arts coverage in the New Yorker, if for no other reason than to find the paragraph explaining WHY this artist or work is so great or worthy of note - and too often, I can't find one.

I like the combination of this and your avatar. Works great together!