Started By
Message

re: who is considered the greatest/biggest movie star of all time?

Posted on 5/28/14 at 10:51 am to
Posted by Peazey
Metry
Member since Apr 2012
25418 posts
Posted on 5/28/14 at 10:51 am to
quote:

While he probably isnt, John Cazale deserves recognition. You all know him as the guy who played Fredo Corleone, but he only starred/co-starred in 5 films, and all of them were nominated for Best Picture.


He deserves no recognition at all as one of the "greatest movie stars of all time."

quote:

The guy was one of the greatest actors of his generation and went far too soon.


Has nothing to do with the discussion.
Posted by Feral
Member since Mar 2012
12402 posts
Posted on 5/28/14 at 10:57 am to
quote:

Nobody was talking about "acting" or "greatest actress" in this thread. The character actors tend to wipe the floor with the leads in that discussion.

We're talking "movie star" - "film star" - however you want to qualify it - and Marilyn is probably it on the female side. Were Kate and Audrey Hepburn big stars? Yes. Were they great actresses? Kate was, Audrey was okay - I wouldn't say great. Is Meryl Streep a great actress? Certainly. Is she one of the greatest movie stars of all time? Certainly not.


Okay, so by that definition, Lindsay Lohan is one of the biggest movie stars of the last decade.

The "movie star v. actor/actress" hair splitting goes off the rails quickly when you start talking about star power. Yes, I understand there's a difference when you're comparing John Wayne to Humphrey Bogart, but there's a line there. I'm not kidding when I say that you can go ask most Marilyn Monroe adorers what their favorite movie of hers was and they'll be stupefied. My wife worships MM and had never even heard of The Seven Year Itch until I made her watch it a few years ago.
This post was edited on 5/28/14 at 10:58 am
Posted by Feral
Member since Mar 2012
12402 posts
Posted on 5/28/14 at 10:58 am to
quote:

Has nothing to do with the discussion.



I forgot the part about where this was a courtroom and not a message board.
Posted by Ace Midnight
Between sanity and madness
Member since Dec 2006
89504 posts
Posted on 5/28/14 at 11:03 am to
quote:

I say that you can go ask most Marilyn Monroe adorers what their favorite movie of hers was and they'll be stupefied.


And I agree that the "multimedia" star category can overlap - to a significant degree and muddy the waters quite a bit. Marilyn was not a great actress, or even a particularly serviceable one at times, but when she was on, she made the movie.

Lindsay Lohan showed some promise as a child star - so it is fair to bring her up, but she is nowhere in the same league as Monroe, Sophia Loren, Elizabeth Taylor, and the list go could on for days.

"Star power" tends to drive movie sales, more than acting ability - we tend to "discover" those great performances in hindsight - although they occasionally intersect - Hanks, for all of his goofy, regular guy charm (Jimmy Stewart, anyone?) - has logged some very good acting performances for a, primarily, leading man. But people go to see his films because he's a brand - as is Cruise, as was John Wayne - even Eastwood, to a degree, particularly from the Sergio Leone films, through the Every Which Way But Loose era.

That's where "star power" and "acting" divert.

And this thread is about movie stars - of which the Golden Age of Hollywood will likely dominate forever. There just aren't Clark Gables, Cary Grants, John Waynes, Jimmy Stewarts, or, for that matter, Marilyn Monroes (although they all try - don't believe me, watch Madonna's Material Girl video) any more.

This post was edited on 5/28/14 at 11:05 am
Posted by Sid in Lakeshore
Member since Oct 2008
41956 posts
Posted on 5/28/14 at 11:15 am to
quote:

If Marilyn isn't #1 female movie star (NOT ACTRESS) - of all time, who is? One of the Hepburns? Bette Davis? Garbo?


Judy Garland? Not sure how huge she actually was though, she sure like to hang out with the guys!
Posted by Ace Midnight
Between sanity and madness
Member since Dec 2006
89504 posts
Posted on 5/28/14 at 11:18 am to
quote:

Judy Garland?


Not hardly. She's not in the same league with Kate, Audrey or Bette - probably behind Garbo,too.
Posted by Sid in Lakeshore
Member since Oct 2008
41956 posts
Posted on 5/28/14 at 11:26 am to
Lucille Ball?

Shirley Temple?

Jerry Lewis?

I guess it all depends on the criteria or your frame of reference.
This post was edited on 5/28/14 at 11:33 am
Posted by Tiger1242
Member since Jul 2011
31901 posts
Posted on 5/28/14 at 11:27 am to
Clark Gable
Posted by 632627
LA
Member since Dec 2011
12738 posts
Posted on 5/28/14 at 11:33 am to
quote:

Lucille Ball?

Shirley Temple?


biggest tv start of all time, biggest child star of all time. not biggest movie stars of all time.
Posted by biglego
Ask your mom where I been
Member since Nov 2007
76264 posts
Posted on 5/28/14 at 12:40 pm to
Ronald Reagan got pretty big
Posted by Peazey
Metry
Member since Apr 2012
25418 posts
Posted on 5/28/14 at 12:45 pm to
quote:

I forgot the part about where this was a courtroom and not a message board.


No, you forgot the subject of the conversation.
Posted by Freauxzen
Utah
Member since Feb 2006
37257 posts
Posted on 5/28/14 at 12:51 pm to
So little support for Chaplin:

quote:

During 1915, Chaplin became a cultural phenomenon. Shops were stocked with Chaplin merchandise, he was featured in cartoons and comic strips, and several songs were written about him.[86] In July, a journalist for Motion Picture Magazine wrote that "Chaplinitis" had spread across America.[87] As his fame grew worldwide, he became the film industry's first international star.[88] When the Essanay contract ended in December 1915,[89][note 9] Chaplin – fully aware of his popularity – requested a $150,000 signing bonus from his next studio. He received several offers, including Universal, Fox, and Vitagraph, the best of which came from the Mutual Film Corporation at $10,000 a week.[91]


quote:

A contract was negotiated with Mutual that amounted to $670,000 a year, which Robinson says made Chaplin – at 26 years old – one of the highest paid people in the world.[92] The high salary shocked the public and was widely reported in the press.[93] John R. Freuler, the studio President, explained, "We can afford to pay Mr. Chaplin this large sum annually because the public wants Chaplin and will pay for him."[94]

Mutual gave Chaplin his own Los Angeles studio to work in, which opened in March 1916.[


quote:

and his popularity continued to grow worldwide. Harper's Weekly reported that the name of Charlie Chaplin was "a part of the common language of almost every country", and that the Tramp image was "universally familiar".[107] In 1917, professional Chaplin imitators were so widespread that he took legal action,[108] and it was reported that nine out of ten men who attended costume parties dressed as the Tramp.[109] The same year, a study by the Boston Society for Psychical Research concluded that Chaplin was "an American obsession."[109] The actress Minnie Maddern Fiske wrote that "a constantly increasing body of cultured, artistic people are beginning to regard the young English buffoon, Charles Chaplin, as an extraordinary artist, as well as a comic genius."


quote:

One journalist wrote, "Nobody in the world but Charlie Chaplin could have done it. He is the only person that has that peculiar something called 'audience appeal' in sufficient quality to defy the popular penchant for movies that talk."[


quote:

In 1998, the film critic Andrew Sarris called Chaplin "arguably the single most important artist produced by the cinema, certainly its most extraordinary performer and probably still its most universal icon".[403] He is described by the British Film Institute as "a towering figure in world culture",[404] and was included in TIME magazine's list of the "100 Most Important People of the 20th Century" for the "laughter [he brought] to millions" and because he "more or less invented global recognizability and helped turn an industry into an art".[405]

The image of the Tramp has become a part of cultural history;[406] according to Simon Louvish, the character is recognisable to people who have never seen a Chaplin film, and in places where his films are never shown.[407] The critic Leonard Maltin has written of the "unique" and "indelible" nature of the Tramp, and argued that no other comedian matched his "worldwide impact".[408] Praising the character, Richard Schickel suggests that Chaplin's films with the Tramp contain the most "eloquent, richly comedic expressions of the human spirit" in movie history.[409] Memorabilia connected to the character still fetches large sums in auctions: in 2006 a bowler hat and a bamboo cane that were part of the Tramp's costume were bought for $140,000 in a Los Angeles auction.[410]

As a filmmaker, Chaplin is considered a pioneer and one of the most influential figures of the early twentieth century.[1] He is often credited as one of the medium's first artists.[411] Film historian Mark Cousins has written that Chaplin "changed not only the imagery of cinema, but also its sociology and grammar" and claims that Chaplin was as important to the development of comedy as a genre as D.W. Griffith was to drama.[412] He was the first to popularise feature-length comedy and to slow down the pace of action, adding pathos and subtlety to it.[413][414] Although his work is mostly classified as slapstick, Chaplin's drama A Woman of Paris (1923) was a major influence on Ernst Lubitsch's film The Marriage Circle (1924) and thus played a part in the development of "sophisticated comedy".[415] According to David Robinson, Chaplin's innovations were "rapidly assimilated to become part of the common practice of film craft."[416] Filmmakers who cited Chaplin as an influence include Federico Fellini (who called Chaplin "a sort of Adam, from whom we are all descended"),[329] Jacques Tati ("Without him I would never have made a film"),[329] René Clair ("He inspired practically every filmmaker"),[328] Michael Powell,[417] Billy Wilder,[418] and Richard Attenborough.[419] Andrei Tarkovsky praised Chaplin as "the only person to have gone down into cinematic history without any shadow of a doubt. The films he left behind can never grow old."


LINK
Posted by Ace Midnight
Between sanity and madness
Member since Dec 2006
89504 posts
Posted on 5/28/14 at 1:23 pm to
quote:

So little support for Chaplin:


Part of it was the era - D.W. Griffith barely gets mentioned when it comes to great directors or auteurs.

But, fair enough Chaplin, Mary Pickford, Douglas Fairbanks should have gotten more play in this thread as reps of that era.

(ETA: And I inadvertently named all 4 of the founding stars - and only those 4 - of United Artists in this post - I may be smarter than even I realize. I left out the lawyer who held the 5th 20% chunk at founding.)

This post was edited on 5/28/14 at 1:28 pm
Posted by SportsGuyNOLA
New Orleans, LA
Member since May 2014
17005 posts
Posted on 5/28/14 at 1:31 pm to
In no particular order:

John Wayne
Humphrey Bogart
Marlon Brando
Clark Gable
Jimmy Stewart
Posted by Feral
Member since Mar 2012
12402 posts
Posted on 5/28/14 at 1:37 pm to
quote:

No, you forgot the subject of the conversation.


No, I ventured off topic.

You mad?
Posted by Tchefuncte Tiger
Bat'n Rudge
Member since Oct 2004
57199 posts
Posted on 5/28/14 at 2:05 pm to
quote:

I just don't see Monroe as much of a movie star.


Are you serious? Marilyn is the epitome of a "movie star." She was even banging the president of the United States!
This post was edited on 5/28/14 at 2:08 pm
Posted by Jamohn
Das Boot
Member since Mar 2009
13544 posts
Posted on 5/28/14 at 2:41 pm to
So Monica Lewinsky is a movie star?
Did you not read the rest of my post?
Posted by DivotBreath
On the course
Member since Oct 2007
3503 posts
Posted on 5/28/14 at 3:16 pm to
quote:

This is tough because of time, modern media saturation, dilution (modern stars simply don't have the cachet of a Cary Grant or Frank Sinatra, for example - and can't achieve it, regardless of what they do).


I agree to the extent that you almost have to break down what constitutes a "movie star" before and after the introduction of internet/social media. Stars from the golden age were really only known outside of Hollywood when fans saw them in a movie, thus, they seemed bigger than life. Stars today are known more for their off-screen antics, politics, talk shows, etc... than they are for their actual work. It's really more of a movie star vs. celebrity comparison when you start trying to consider how actors from different eras rate against each other.
Posted by MetryTyger
Metro NOLA, LA
Member since Jan 2004
15589 posts
Posted on 5/28/14 at 3:17 pm to
Paulie Shore
Posted by DallasTiger11
Los Angeles
Member since Mar 2004
11808 posts
Posted on 5/28/14 at 3:33 pm to
quote:

Feral

You keep saying people today don't know Marilyn's filmography, but the title of this entire thread says "all time". Nothing about our current views on stars. The fact that she is that famous without some of her fans ever seeing one of her films is a further testament to her stardom. She transcended the medium. Obviously, the Marilyn mystique has grown since her death, but she was already an icon at the time. She was (allegedly) having an affair with the President. Does it get much bigger than that?

To compare Lindsey Lohan to her is absurd.

I also like the suggestion of Chaplin and I think with him, John Wayne, and Marilyn that is a pretty solid top three.
first pageprev pagePage 4 of 6Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram