Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
A major reason why I go to very few movies for the last 6 years.
Few stars that I want to see. I am nostalgic for the stars born in the 70's and earlier.
and so many retired, like Nicholson, Hoffman.
There's much more to the answer than we know, depending on the actor's salaries, movie revenue and control over the movie production, etc. If studios hire less known actors (not famous) they are paid less
and it is easier for them to control or mold the actors, I think. Big stars want their own way. This is also true with recording studios.
This whole post is confusing to me. Do you even know what a millennial is?
At first it was unclear too, but for me, OP is illustrating the 'decline' in memorable and bankable stars. The ones chosen from the 90s onwards seem to be lacklustre, and thus OP is just trying to find any name under a rock.
Quote:
Originally Posted by carnelian
A lot of truth to this thread
A major reason why I go to very few movies for the last 6 years.
Few stars that I want to see. I am nostalgic for the stars born in the 70's and earlier.
and so many retired, like Nicholson, Hoffman.
There's much more to the answer than we know, depending on the actor's salaries, movie revenue and control over the movie production, etc. If studios hire less known actors (not famous) they are paid less
and it is easier for them to control or mold the actors, I think. Big stars want their own way. This is also true with recording studios.
I agree. I was born in 79, so classified as a Xennial. Ever since the millenium, the dispersion of media due to the internet, youtube, etc, it has been hard to make those big stars matter the way it used to. Stars like Schwarzenegger and Stallone.
The kind of closest was Vin Diesel, and even he really can't hold up a candle to them. I guess the Rock has emerged as the biggest name, but his path was different, and more later too, and still not that mega star.
I worked at a megaplex starting in 98 during my first year in university. The business model changed around this time to studios needing to make up a bulk of their spending in about 2 weeks (remember "passes are restricted" during this time) as the size of theatres and seating exploded. VS longer, drawn-out movie runs.
This has led to today's Big Bang approach, which is less reliant on stars, but on ADHD inducing techniques. Made more possible by tech advances.
Then you have the hunt for looks. It's no wonder the biggest star in recent times is Ryan Gosling which is eye candy to many, esp in this instagram era. Before the rise of superficiality (this extends to HGTV design living, nice boutique coffee shops, craft beers, nice new dorms for college students, name it), there were many stars that were cast for their acting ability or ability to really fit a certain character. Or Directors really sticking by their choice like Al Pacino in GodFather who was not considered universally good looking.
Today, it's about casting generically good/pleasing looking people. For me, an example is the casting of Sarah Conner (Terminator lore) or even Lois Lane in later Superman Films as well as Superman himself (Christian Bale is also a last of that non-conventional actor). Generic, unmemorable but pleasant actors vs that unique trait. Then because of that business model, they're going with more sure fire bets that are mega move franchises and less effort on specific "the One" talent.
Finally, I think also the decline of casting stars with more theater or stage experience in lieu of the 'look' leads to less memorable performances/acting versatility like originally a model, Ashton Kutcher, who I noticed even 10+ years ago, epitomizes the newer generation of actors chosen.
At first it was unclear too, but for me, OP is illustrating the 'decline' in memorable and bankable stars. The ones chosen from the 90s onwards seem to be lacklustre, and thus OP is just trying to find any name under a rock.
Because the OP just chose random actors for millennials. Of course it seems lackluster when you put Shia LaBeouf and Taylor Lautner up against Gene Kelly, Tom Hanks, Marlon Brando, etc... No one would name those two as top millennial actors.
I think millennials will be the first generation to not have a Movie Star type of actor or actress. There are just so many ways to get entertainment these days that there's no need for them to go to theaters anymore.
Personally I'm not into all these new movies and television shows. Far and few new movies/tv shows I actually like. Give me a classic movie or telvision show any day. I'm 27 (millennial age) for reference.
I wonder how many of the movie actors attend acting schools and study method acting.
Some big stars are graduates, such as Meryl Streep who was taught by Jean Arthur, a big star in her time but many movie stars had no formal education and if you have the talent, it is not necessary.
Yes it is more about looks but it was usually about that (especially for actresses) with some notable exceptions. Edward G. Robinson, James Cagney, Bette Davis for example were not eye candy.
Robert Redford is and was eye candy for the ladies and a boring bad actor IMO.
Went to a movie and before it began, the producer actually thanked the audience for coming.
Then you have the hunt for looks. It's no wonder the biggest star in recent times is Ryan Gosling which is eye candy to many, esp in this instagram era. Before the rise of superficiality (this extends to HGTV design living, nice boutique coffee shops, craft beers, nice new dorms for college students, name it), there were many stars that were cast for their acting ability or ability to really fit a certain character. Or Directors really sticking by their choice like Al Pacino in GodFather who was not considered universally good looking.
I definitely believe this is a huge factor. And it hurts women much more than men. You will still see the occasional not-so-attractive actor like Eddie Redmayne, Miles Teller, Jesse Eisenberg, etc. get big roles, but young actresses today are almost universally hot. There's not much space for the next Streep or Streisand because of the hyper-focus on women's looks.
Because the OP just chose random actors for millennials. Of course it seems lackluster when you put Shia LaBeouf and Taylor Lautner up against Gene Kelly, Tom Hanks, Marlon Brando, etc... No one would name those two as top millennial actors.
Who are all these millennial actors who have a better body of work than Shia LaBeouf? Regardless of your opinion of his work, you'd be hard pressed to come up with 5 actors who are currently in their 30s who have been the leading man in a major studio release.
With the internet and social media today we have to able to step outside the box and realistically look at things differently.
The two biggest stardom platforms are acting and music. Both of these are influencing today’s public tremendously through social media, reality television and other forms of mass marketing.
Today stardom is judged dramatically differently than yesterday’s stars were.
I am 59 and for my generation for the most part we witnessed movies that were the launch vehicles to many great actors and actresses careers. The God Father, American Graffiti, are just two movies off the top of my head that launched many careers. While Tom Hanks, Bruce Willis we’re lucky enough to jump from TV series not as many were able to make that leap.
Is there a Harrison Ford, Glenn Close, Tom Hanks in the millennials future? We shall see. In an age where You Tube and reality TV can boost rappers like Post Malone and sex tape participants like Ms. Kardashian anything is possible.
Will there ever be actors that have the staying power as my generations actors and actresses have had or will there be bands that will able to fill stadiums and play real instruments like those of my generation currently on their Geritol tours (Def Leppard, Journey, The Stones, Guns and Roses, etc.)? Only time will tell.
The decade a star was born in has little to do with his popularity later on.
One good breakout role usually makes all the difference as to whether or not an actor becomes a star. That breakout can come early, late, or not at all, and an actor can still make acting a career that is long-lasting.
Many of those stars you mentioned were nobodies for the first decade or more of their careers, but during their time, the Hollywood system allowed them enough roles that a good one finally came along.
Not all actors start out young, either. Many stars began acting after decades spent in other careers, and as soon as they began acting, they became extremely popular.
Whether any actor becomes a star is a matter of chance. It's not a matter of age- it's mostly a matter of opportunity.
There are always a few actors from every generation that are such good actors that sooner or later, their ability will be recognized and they'll be given good roles that lead to stardom.
But most actors only want one thing; to keep working steadily in an occupation where steady work is very difficult. There have been lots of very long careers that lasted longer, and were more stable, that those the famous stars enjoyed.
Ironically, steady work often means the good breakout roles often go to the actors who are available at that time.
So the actors who work steadily can't get their shot at future stardom because they're already acting full time.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
