- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Are a-list actors/actresses a thing of the past?
Posted on 2/6/21 at 9:22 am to BabyTac
Posted on 2/6/21 at 9:22 am to BabyTac
Actors can't save movies the way they used to now that people are saturated with movie reviews before they ever get a chance to watch it themselves. Put an A-List actor in a shite movie, and it will still get panned.
Now, if a movie gets reviewed well, it will probably do fine, so you look for the cheap actor who naturally fits the role instead of paying a "great actor" to meld into it.
Now, if a movie gets reviewed well, it will probably do fine, so you look for the cheap actor who naturally fits the role instead of paying a "great actor" to meld into it.
2
Posted on 2/6/21 at 9:31 am to BabyTac
quote:
As the Cruises, Damon’s, Afflecks, Pitts, DiCaprios, Hanks, etc get older, and the networks, series concepts, and movies become so saturated...
Posted on 2/6/21 at 11:18 am to jts1207
quote:This is more true of B,C and D listers than A listers. If studios are paying you 50 million to be in a movie they’re not doing it because of who your dad is.
Who cares ...it’s all mostly nepotism anyway
Posted on 2/6/21 at 11:24 am to Joshjrn
quote:It’s been clear to me that the major reviewers are bought and paid for ever since I saw Avatar. My point is that if the reviews aren’t legitimate then what’s the difference.
Actors can't save movies the way they used to now that people are saturated with movie reviews before they ever get a chance to watch it themselves. Put an A-List actor in a shite movie, and it will still get panned.
Posted on 2/6/21 at 11:31 am to Smeg
quote:
Hollywood has been over since the years of Dean Martin and Frank Sinatra.
Well Dean Martin and Frank Sinatra weren’t exactly A list actors themselves.
And while new movies worth watching are few and far between there is some good content out there. Watch The Irishman on Netflix.
But Martin Scorsesse correctly said all the money is going to superheros because that is the formula that works. Its why it took him so ling to make The Irishman and until Netflix came around to finish the financing they were stopped 3/4 of the way through filming.
Posted on 2/6/21 at 11:32 am to BabyTac
quote:
Are a-list actors/actresses a thing of the past?
They are for me.
Posted on 2/6/21 at 11:58 am to Joshjrn
quote:
Put an A-List actor in a shite movie, and it will still get panned
Denzel's new movie is getting panned. But I loved it.
Posted on 2/6/21 at 11:59 am to Martini
quote:
The Irishman
A great movie.
Posted on 2/6/21 at 12:05 pm to mikelbr
Chadwick Boseman was deservedly an A-list actor who was taken too soon.
I just saw this one a couple of weeks ago. What an amazing actor. Ma Rainey's Black Bottom.
I just saw this one a couple of weeks ago. What an amazing actor. Ma Rainey's Black Bottom.
This post was edited on 2/6/21 at 12:05 pm
Posted on 2/6/21 at 12:09 pm to UnitedFruitCompany
quote:I don’t really think that’s that out of line, even for the big budget films of the 90s.
They started demanding $20 million a picture.
Posted on 2/6/21 at 12:18 pm to SG_Geaux
quote:
WTF kind of stupid arse statement is this?
I want nothing but bug eyed sort of cartoon "actors" like Ayleila or whatever the name was of the make believe chick in that girl power movie.
As the made up shite gets better no need for real people - the made up ones never age.
Posted on 2/6/21 at 5:20 pm to BabyTac
Preface: the following has nothing to do w/acting ability or even "star quality", whatever that is.
5 or so years so I started a thread on the M/TV board, linking to an article that claimed the Age Of The Movie Star was over. I agreed with the article. As I recall virtually reply disagreed.
I define "movie star" as someone who can bring people to the theater (forget Covid for the moment). Is there anyone like that now?
I think the last mainstream movie star, who could attract large audiences was Tom Cruise. Maybe Tom Hanks (Hanks has shrewdly repositioned himself as a character actor in big budget films, so he's still highly visible). Perhaps Will Smith.
But IMHO the era when a star could guarantee a studio would get their money back on a reasonably budgeted film is gone. Actors are no longer the draws -- properties are.
I think the studios are making a terrible mistake paying astronomical salaries to "stars" who aren't really box office draws.
Of course some in Hollywood realize this. About 10 years ago Warner Bros circulated a memo saying they would no longer produce "female-driven" movies, b/c they had no box-office appeal. Needled to say the howls of protest from SJW feminists forced them to retract that policy. Eventually a campaign was begun to work more women into the various comic book and sci fi franchises -- the real "stars". This is the H'wood equivalent of Title IX.
I'm not sure what is meant by the term "A List". It seems you're on the A List if people say you're on the A List and put you in A List movies. But I don't think that makes you a movie star, at least not in the classic sense.
5 or so years so I started a thread on the M/TV board, linking to an article that claimed the Age Of The Movie Star was over. I agreed with the article. As I recall virtually reply disagreed.
I define "movie star" as someone who can bring people to the theater (forget Covid for the moment). Is there anyone like that now?
I think the last mainstream movie star, who could attract large audiences was Tom Cruise. Maybe Tom Hanks (Hanks has shrewdly repositioned himself as a character actor in big budget films, so he's still highly visible). Perhaps Will Smith.
But IMHO the era when a star could guarantee a studio would get their money back on a reasonably budgeted film is gone. Actors are no longer the draws -- properties are.
I think the studios are making a terrible mistake paying astronomical salaries to "stars" who aren't really box office draws.
Of course some in Hollywood realize this. About 10 years ago Warner Bros circulated a memo saying they would no longer produce "female-driven" movies, b/c they had no box-office appeal. Needled to say the howls of protest from SJW feminists forced them to retract that policy. Eventually a campaign was begun to work more women into the various comic book and sci fi franchises -- the real "stars". This is the H'wood equivalent of Title IX.
I'm not sure what is meant by the term "A List". It seems you're on the A List if people say you're on the A List and put you in A List movies. But I don't think that makes you a movie star, at least not in the classic sense.
Posted on 2/6/21 at 5:29 pm to Kafka
I agree.
There are no Cary Grants, John Waynes, Bette Davises, Audrey Hepburns.
Tom Cruise tried to make himself that way, but he’s mediocre compared to the greats.
TV ruined that to an extent. And this woke stuff didn’t help.
Everyone has to find meaning in something - they just can’t be entertained. And for heavens sakes I studied philosophy and I over analyze everything but sometimes I just want to laugh
There are no Cary Grants, John Waynes, Bette Davises, Audrey Hepburns.
Tom Cruise tried to make himself that way, but he’s mediocre compared to the greats.
TV ruined that to an extent. And this woke stuff didn’t help.
Everyone has to find meaning in something - they just can’t be entertained. And for heavens sakes I studied philosophy and I over analyze everything but sometimes I just want to laugh
Posted on 2/6/21 at 5:30 pm to GreenRockTiger
quote:Again, I am not talking about acting ability or charisma or anything like that.
There are no Cary Grants, John Waynes, Bette Davises, Audrey Hepburns.
Tom Cruise tried to make himself that way, but he’s mediocre compared to the greats.
I'm strictly talking about box office draw.
Posted on 2/6/21 at 5:31 pm to GreenRockTiger
Well, for one, you could argue that television isn’t really the future of entertainment. Same with sports. Sports and sporting events have been on a consistent descent for a while now, like over a decade.
Posted on 2/6/21 at 5:35 pm to Smeg
CGI superheroes. CGI action movies. CGI fantasy movies. Rinse, repeat.
Posted on 2/6/21 at 5:36 pm to Kafka
quote:
Again, I am not talking about acting ability or charisma or anything like that
Yes - I know. John Wayne made some boring movies - but he was a box office draw.
Charade with both Cary Grant and Audrey Hepburn is kinda awful - but it was watched.
Instead of people being the draw - brands are - ppl will rush out to a Marvel movie or something by Pixar. No one is going to necessarily run out to see Felicity Jones.
Posted on 2/6/21 at 5:38 pm to GreenRockTiger
quote:Say what???
Charade with both Cary Grant and Audrey Hepburn is kinda awful
Charade is great -- and I'm not even a big Audrey Hepburn fan
Posted on 2/6/21 at 5:38 pm to BabyTac
Because of social media anyone can become famous and this has greatly impacted the mystique of “A List” celebrities
Posted on 2/6/21 at 5:46 pm to Kafka
quote:
Charade is great -- and I'm not even a big Audrey Hepburn fan
I would watch it when it came on when I had cable - but not one of my faves
Kinda boring and a little predictable??? And not their best.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News