In the past, I have written two articles on what was Van Vicker’s nonexistence acting skill. I was unable to get over his abysmal portrayal of characters, and his reluctance to abandon his swagger and commit fully to a character.  As a result, his movies along with a host of others became my ultimate bête noir.

However, his recent performances are a far cry from the wooden depictions I became accustomed to. His switch from ridiculousness to brilliance from scene to scene in his previous performances was a complete turnoff. But over time his acting has improved immensely. However, can he hold his own with the veterans? Not yet I am afraid.

It appears Van took all criticisms in good stride and really worked hard at improving, proving his critics (myself included) wrong. His response to his critics is admirable.  He seems to have soaked it all in and not take it personally; instead, he looked at it objectively. I tip my hat off to him for what appears to be his matured approach toward criticisms.

However, he still has a long way to go. He still doesn’t possess the ability to wholly portray a character realistically-there is always something lacking. He cannot rise above even the worst of storylines by relying on subtext and passion. In terms of emotional expressions, he seems to have graduated from wooden to somewhat flexible.  As for what appears to be his carefully orchestrated- nonchalant-sometimes- dragged-out delivery of lines, it has gotten to a point where it’s just mind-numbing.

Viewers are still enamored by him and he seems genuine in his quest to give viewers their money’s worth. Nonetheless, I still find people’s reverence for him utterly cynical especially given the fact that it is based on looks and not talent. For a while, I was under the impression that he used that as a shield against his critics, but as stated earlier he has proven his critics wrong by improving. However, he is still OVERRATED as far as I am concerned.

By Cassie Johnson(Editor In Chief,Ghanacelebrities.com)