he's really cute, yeah, but his characters are so boring. In this movie and sixteen candles I thought he wasn't a very good actor, you just don't care about him. looks aside, anyone agree?
I haven't seen Sixteen Candles (I know - a travesty among some folks), but I agree with you. Michael Schoeffling was great looking, but he lacked presence or something - he seemed really rigid. In Mermaids, I didn't really care that his character left town. There was no real connection to his character - at least not for me.
Cheers
I can agree to an extent. He was also in the movie Wild Hearts Can't be Broken and I thought he did a pretty good job. I felt connected to his character and the story but maybe I'm being biased because I've been in "love" with him since the first time I saw sixteen candles.
shareThere's a reason Michael Schoeffling isn't in movies anymore. Last I heard, he was living in Pennsylvania (I think he owns his own business). He was a decent enough actor, and I really liked him as Matthew Modine's mohawked sidekick in Vision Quest. But let's face it: he had no charisma. He was a real product of the 80s. I can't say I miss his presence in films.
shareYour right Michael Schoeffling was awesome in Vision Quest, as for serious acting that may of been one of his best roles as a thespian....I think he lost trail though and he knew it, so suddenly slipped away in that Hollywood rabbit hole!!!
shareMichael was totally wrong for this film. He was also horrible for Sixteen Candles. He just can't act... at all. He was completely stiff in this film and in Sixteen Candles there's no reason at all why Molly Ringwald's character should like him. But I've seen him in interviews and he's a nice down to earth person... acting just wasn't his thing.
I don't like so much freedom down there. It makes me tingly in my giblets.
he is an intense actor, a very serious one, but i would not consider him boring. if you get into the movie and realize the type of person he is portraying, i think youll agree with me.
shareHe was likeable but had no presence. He was very rigid and stiff in Sixteen too. Mermaids I think it worked a little better just for the character. I haven't seen Wild Hearts in the longest time just because I haven't been able to find it, damned Blockbuster, but I liked that movie a lot.
share[deleted]
He is cute enough but yeah he does seem like a pretty flat character in both Sixteen Candles and Mermaids. I never saw Wild Hearts can't be broken so I can't comment. He now owns his own furniture business. He puts together chairs for a living( a boring job for a boring actor, LOL). Anyways I love both movies but I wasn't too impressed with him.
-Can I have a look at Uranus too, Lavender?
Ron, Goblet of Fire
I don't know about sixteen candles but in mermaids,he was supposed to be an offtrack character.Let me tell you something about Cher.I am almost positive that it drove her crazy that Winona Ryder had a role that seemed to upstage her .She rarely does a movie where she is not the biggest name there.In that respect,he was perfect for the movie and probably handpicked by cher herself.
sharei agree that michael was gorgeous but as an actor, he was pretty wooden, especially in Sixteen Candles. Maybe it was because acting wasnt his passion or he didnt have the training or whatever.
shareI'll admit that Michael Schoeffling is not a very good actor, but he's so damn pretty, you don't care. As I mentioned on another thread, you'll probably be happy to know that Schoeffling has retired from acting and works as a carpenter.
shareI bet he's a hot carpenter!
I don;t know how charismatic he was, but frankly, I think he was meant to be Charlotte's dream boy/object of her teenage lust. I know they talk a little about their childhoods (his character's mom's dying and her character's life), and I think it was supposed to be that way. Anyone else think he was supposed to be a little too pretty to be real, or to be further developed?
BTW, I think he had an emotional side in Wild Hearts. His wife is blind, he's estranged from his father, and then he;s afraid that his wife won't dive or that they'll loose the show and it's the great depression and all. I think he showed his character's emotions in that movie...
... Puh-tu-wheet? ~ Slaughterhouse 5 ...
Michael Schoeffling was definitely too pretty to be real.
shareI think what everyone else says is why he was so well cast in this movie and in 16 Candles. He's that generic boy we lust after when we're 16, but eventually falls into an abyss after you meet someone meaningful. You know the one, he wasn't very intelligent or very talkative, but you still wanted to roll around with him. Then as you grew up, you thought "what on Earth? He was boring!". Perfectly cast as throw-away boyfriend.
shareI agree with your analysis as it pertains to the "throw away" boyfriend. Let's face it, what happens when you get used to someones great looks? I have to say that I think he was perfect in both Mermaids and Sixteen. People already talk about how "unrealisitc" Jake Ryan is...imagine if he had a wonderfull witty and winning personality. Jake Ryan reminded me of the very few rich guys at my high school that were actually really good looking. Its like they're so rich and so attractive they don't want to attract any more attention to themselves with their personality. Jake was kind of introverted, observational, and awkward. He made the character more real to me than if it was some exciting, funny guy bursting with personality. His own awkwardness made it more realistic that he would even give Sam a second look. In Mermaids it was the same....of course he's boring....he drives the school bus and works at a convent for God's sake!!!!!! I think hat Schoeffling is a good actor for those type of roles. But since he can't play those forever, he had to fade to black.
share