Future of Movie Stars: Who Will Shine? Who Will Fade Away?

[methodwriter85]

On 9/8/2016 at 9:21 PM, Ohwell said:

Same here.  I just can't get into macho, badass Chris Pratt.   And for some reason, I also found him sexier with the beer belly like in Parks and Rec.  Don't get me wrong, I don't blame him for getting in shape to play more varied roles, but I just liked him better before.

My thought: thin Chris Pratt looks like the asshole bully. That's why he got cast as Bright on Everwood. When he's plump and affable, it hides that aspect, but when you put him back to fighting weight, he just has a-hole face.

[xaxat]

My favorite Chris Evans role is still Sunshine.

(I really wish that movie had a better third act.)

[JustaPerson]

I had a crush on Chris Evans circa Fantastic Four, but I didn't fall for him until Cap. Then again, I've always had a thing for the all-american square. It hurts to always love the nice guy in the love triangle when everyone loves the bad boy. But now the nice guy is the cool guy!

Edited September 14, 2016 by JustaPerson

[UYI]

RECENT MEG RYAN SIGHTINGS OMG:

[methodwriter85]

Chloe Grace Moretz Has Dropped Out of All Upcoming Movies, Including the Little Mermaid

I seriously agree with this. If you read between the lines, she's having a Natalie Wood circa 1959-1960 moment, where she's realizing she's made some pretty mediocre movies and she needs to "reboot", as it were. I don't think it's about Brooklyn Beckham. I think it's about the fact that her "Brain on Fire" movie isn't getting the best reviews. She could definitely use a reassessment.

Edited September 18, 2016 by methodwriter85

[DollEyes]

On 9/14/2016 at 1:27 PM, methodwriter85 said:

My thought: thin Chris Pratt looks like the asshole bully. That's why he got cast as Bright on Everwood. When he's plump and affable, it hides that aspect, but when you put him back to fighting weight, he just has a-hole face.

I totally disagree. One person's "a-hole face" is another's charming rogue. Such is the beauty of varying mileages. 

[Craphole Island]

On September 15, 2016 at 2:05 PM, UYI said:

RECENT MEG RYAN SIGHTINGS OMG:

I really wish Meg didn't do all that to her face because she was so cute but I don't think she looks all that bad in these actually. 

[Ambrosefolly]

8 hours ago, DollEyes said:

I totally disagree. One person's "a-hole face" is another's charming rogue. Such is the beauty of varying mileages. 

Maybe, but the longer he played Bright, the more layers he displayed. And he didn't gain any weight.

[methodwriter85]

That's kind of my point. When he DOESN'T play those layers (and in blockbuster movies you're often asked to play pretty 2-d characters), then he doesn't seem as attractive as he does when he's Andy or latter season Bright.

Like I said, there's a reason why he's been cast to play the bully or a-hole more than once.

Anyway, I was just going back to the point OhWell was making about how they're not responding as much to Thin, Action Hero Chris Pratt as much as they did to Chubby Chris Pratt because he doesn't seem as loveable. I think the weight "softens" his face and makes him more relatable.

Edited September 19, 2016 by methodwriter85

[VCRTracking]

Quote

Maybe, but the longer he played Bright, the more layers he displayed. And he didn't gain any weight.

Same with Andy on Parks and Rec. First season he was Ann's lazy, jerk idiot boyfriend. Next season he became more hardworking and lovable and more loveably dumb. A golden retriever in human form as I heard someone say.

[dusang]

Not to go too far into Unpopular Opinions on the wrong board, but personally I never greatly enjoyed Andy on P&R, Pratt's excessive weight gain circa S4 (?ish) was related to a movie project and he's spoken openly about how terrible he felt physically and emotionally to be that heavy, it cannot possibly be healthy for him to yo-yo as hard as he did from Zero Dark Thirty / Moneyball to Delivery Man to Guardians of the Galaxy, and I despise the double-standard evident throughout the industry that allows men to be festively plump and requires women to be no more than not-visibly-emaciated, so overall I'm quite pleased with Chris Pratt's GotG face and physique and I hope he stays that way.

[VCRTracking]

Pratt's Magnificent Seven co-star Haley Bennett, who is also starring in the upcoming adaptation of Girl on a Train with Emily Blunt. She's been working since Music and Lyrics since 2007 and has been in things like The Equalizer with her other M7 co-star Denzel Washinton. I wonder if looking like Jennifer Lawrence is a big drawback or if it doesn't really effect her career that much?

[raezen]

13 hours ago, VCRTracking said:

Pratt's Magnificent Seven co-star Haley Bennett, who is also starring in the upcoming adaptation of Girl on a Train with Emily Blunt. She's been working since Music and Lyrics since 2007 and has been in things like The Equalizer with her other M7 co-star Denzel Washinton. I wonder if looking like Jennifer Lawrence is a big drawback or if it doesn't really effect her career that much?

If by looking like Jennifer Lawrence you mean she is Hollywood beautiful then I agree, but to be honest, other than that I don't see the resemblance. Could just be me. It also could be that in the above clip from M7 her style us like Katniss Everdeen, but apart from that I don't see it.

Edited September 28, 2016 by raezen

[Dandesun]

On 9/13/2016 at 11:07 PM, BatmanBeatles said:

Chris Evans was fun in Scott Pilgrim vs The World.

I may have taken to saying 'That's hilarious' just like Lucas Lee. I don't know, it's funny because sometimes I watch that and I'm going 'Is that really Chris?'

He played Johnny Storm spot on and I rather enjoyed him in 'What's Your Number?' as well. And I was very skeptical when he was cast as Steve Rogers for Marvel because a) he had already been Johnny Storm (although it's not the same film company so it's okay) and b) I wasn't familiar with his work to give me much of an indication of how well he'd do in the role.

I mean... it's HARD to play a good guy, a True Good Guy, without coming off as cloying and preachy. His Steve Rogers is about as tragic a character as it gets. He's earnest to the core but there is just this infinite sadness that comes out of Steve. He rocketed to the absolute top of my favorite characters in the MCU.

And my crush on the man himself is EMBARRASSING at this point. It was his love of Disney that made me absolutely ridiculous for him. My family has just accepted it at this point. "Oh, yeah, she's going to marry that guy." It's a problem.

[vb68]

Quote

  If by looking like Jennifer Lawrence you mean she is Hollywood beautiful then I agree, but to be honest, other than that I don't see the resemblance. Could just be me.

I don't see it, either.

As great as Chris Evans as has been as Cap, I will admit to a certain curiosity as to what John Krasinski would have done with the part.

[absnow54]

I've generally only seen still images of Haley Bennett where I think the resemblance between her and Jennifer Lawrence is uncanny. In video, though, not so much.

[Ruby Gillis]

23 hours ago, absnow54 said:

I've generally only seen still images of Haley Bennett where I think the resemblance between her and Jennifer Lawrence is uncanny. In video, though, not so much.

I agree.  I think they have similar slitted eyes and full lips. This site did a side by side:

http://9gag.com/gag/aVPjRWn/am-i-the-only-one-seeing-the-resemblance-haley-bennett-and-jennifer-lawrence-gentlemen

[methodwriter85]

It's definitely the eyes and the lips, I think.

[Princess Sparkle]

All the talk of The Greaf Gatsby in the UO thread reminds me that I wish it had done better, because I really wanted Tobey Maguire to have a bit of a career revival from it. I know Spider-Man 3 was panned when it came out, but it did make a ton of money, yet his career pretty much went on a downturn after that. I don't think he's the best actor in the world, but I do think he's quite charming and good at comedy (he was fantastic in The Spoils of Babylon) but he has worked so infrequently since in 2007. It looks like he's focusing more on producing, but that's a bummer to me, because as I look over the movies he's been in, I like a lot of them. I also have the UO of far preferring his Spider-man movies to Andrew Garfield's, but that's for another thread. 

[Athena]

4 hours ago, Princess Sparkle said:

All the talk of The Greaf Gatsby in the UO thread reminds me that I wish it had done better, because I really wanted Tobey Maguire to have a bit of a career revival from it. I know Spider-Man 3 was panned when it came out, but it did make a ton of money, yet his career pretty much went on a downturn after that. I don't think he's the best actor in the world, but I do think he's quite charming and good at comedy (he was fantastic in The Spoils of Babylon) but he has worked so infrequently since in 2007. It looks like he's focusing more on producing, but that's a bummer to me, because as I look over the movies he's been in, I like a lot of them. I also have the UO of far preferring his Spider-man movies to Andrew Garfield's, but that's for another thread. 

I'm with you. I followed Maguire's career back when he was in the Spider-Man era and he did have some good roles. He is not talent less and I think his quiet charisma is appealing in many characters such as in Spider-Man, Gatsby, and Brothers (which no else saw but I loved the original Danish one so much I watched the American remake). I think like RDJ and some other top and rich actors, once he became a family person, he shifted to producing. He started doing that earlier than RDJ or others, but he's been in the business for a long time. I do see him more as a character actor in some ways which is why he would find it more difficult to get leading roles. I can see why he shifted gears to being more behind the scenes.

I prefer him to Garfield's Spiderman too but those recent Spider-Man movies were meh in general for me. I think the new Avengers Spider-Man with Tom Holland is good but different than the other two.

[VCRTracking]

I remember this article:

How Spider-Man lost the lead role in 'Rise Of The Apes' to the Green Goblin

It's a shame. It's not like he was asking for more money. It was script notes, but as the article states he wasn't in the position to give them like bigger stars have done. Maguire would have been way more believable as a scientist doing research on apes to cure Alzeimer's than Franco! A lot more sympathetic too.

Edited October 10, 2016 by VCRTracking

[methodwriter85]

Maguire's career actually kind of mirrors what happens to a lot of women or child stars- hot in his 20's to his early 30's, but once he grew out of his type (the sheepish young cute guy) he didn't have strong enough chops/charisma to sustain a career as a leading man like DiCaprio did, or enough versatility to branch into a character actor career. I'm glad he seems to be producing- that keeps him in the game and pays him well, and maybe he'll come across that role that makes people care about him again. Gatsby didn't really flop, and even if it had been a bigger hit, it's still basically DiCaprio's movie- Nick Carraway really isn't more than a narrator that's supposed be the viewpoint of the audience. It's not the type of role that's going to revive a career.

[katha]

Yeah, he made his name in a boatload of "cute, geeky young guy" roles and then probably aged out of them. And since he's typecast, then he gets problems finding work that transitions him into more mature ground. He's a fine actor, but IMO not spectacular enough to establish himself as character actor and permanent Oscar contender. Perhaps he'll find a nice part for himself that will re-establish him somewhat, I certainly always found him a pleasant presence (which is more than you can say for many actors...).

For someone like Maguire, I don't think it's even so much about box office. Apart from DiCaprio, who is a guaranteed money maker in the somewhat younger set outside of franchises? No one, is the answer. But you have your contingent of "manly action heroes" (your Pratts and Hemsworths and Tatums), frat guy comedy and serious Oscar bait (which has people in his age range like Redmayne, Fassbender, Cumberbatch, Gyllenhaal, Gosling etc. who IMO are just better actors), and Maguire sort of doesn't fit anywhere? He needs to find a niche for himself as an adult presence more than anything, seems to me.

[ribboninthesky1]

I read somewhere a long time ago that Maguire is (was?) married to the daughter of a NBC Universal executive, so it's interesting that he's not in more films.  But then, I also read he was a bit of an asshole to work with.  Who knows how true that is, but when a white male who headlined a franchise that made a helluva lot of money has all but disappeared from the film landscape, it's odd. Someone like Ryan Reynolds had a shitload of bombs, yet continued to get cast as a lead until Deadpool hit the jackpot.  Actors like James MacAvoy and Daniel Radcliffe have similar boyish looks, and have managed to continue their careers. Even Elijah Wood is still working, though he transitioned to TV.     

I guess it's possible that Maguire stepped back to focus on family and producing.  Assuming his producing credits on IMDB are accurate, I have my doubts. 

[Athena]

Maguire is still married to Jennifer Meyer. Her father is an exec at NBC Universal and was CEO of Universal Studios when Maguire/Meyer met and married. They had their first kid in 2006 and since then, he's barely acted in one movie a year. In the early aughts and late 90s, he was working more consistently. Maguire was a child actor which probably factored him receding into the background. I always got the impression that Maguire was quite private and coupled with him aging out and being well-off, I could see him stepping back. Not sure if he's an asshole, but I do think he was picky about his roles even in his height before Spiderman.

[SeanC]

He also apparently spends a lot of time playing poker.

[methodwriter85]

He really doesn't seem like someone's who "hungry" to keep the career going. People who last as long as Sally Field or Jamie Lee Curtis are usually willing to do whatever it takes to keep the career going during the downpoints, and take some less-than-great roles. (Hell, even Diane Keaton did a Lifetime movie.) He seems to have happily receded to the background, unless it's something that seems fun to him, like the Spoils of Babylon. (Nick was probably because of Leo and Tobey being really good friends.)

Another male ingenue contemporary to Maguire...Wes Bentley. You know, he'll probably never really deliver on the promise he showed in American Beauty, but it's nice to see a guy paying his dues and doing whatever it takes to re-establish himself as an actor that can be depended on after derailing his career for a decade due to his crippling drug addiction. And eh, he's still pretty hot. He might be starring in Direct-to-VOD trash, but he looks good doing it. My inner 15-year old little gay boy who lusted after Ricky Fitts is pretty pleased that he still looks good after all these years.

He's apparently got Ryan Murphy in his corner, which should keep him employed for however long people want to put Ryan Murphy's productions on air.

[slf]

On 10/10/2016 at 11:34 PM, SeanC said:

He also apparently spends a lot of time playing poker.

Oh yeah and if anything written in this article is true Maguire's a massive asshole while doing it.

[manbearpig]

DiCaprio's appeal is completely lost on me, so the fact that he can seemingly do whatever movie he wants and earn tens of millions for one role just baffles me.

[Bruinsfan]

On 10/10/2016 at 7:13 PM, ribboninthesky1 said:

 Who knows how true that is, but when a white male who headlined a franchise that made a helluva lot of money has all but disappeared from the film landscape, it's odd. Someone like Ryan Reynolds had a shitload of bombs, yet continued to get cast as a lead until Deadpool hit the jackpot.  Actors like James MacAvoy and Daniel Radcliffe have similar boyish looks, and have managed to continue their careers. Even Elijah Wood is still working, though he transitioned to TV.

James MacAvoy and Daniel Radcliffe are much better actors, and while Ryan Reynolds is probably a fair comparison to Maquire on that score he also has leading man good looks and charisma to burn, two areas in which Maguire is sorely lacking.

[absnow54]

Maguire is still married to Jennifer Meyer.

Looks like this thread jinxed it!

[Athena]

30 minutes ago, absnow54 said:

Looks like this thread jinxed it!

Ha! We should all go into business together predicting when celebrity couples divorce.

[JBC344]

Oh.  That is really sad.  They always seemed like a sweet couple.

[manbearpig]

Beauty and the Beast seems destined to be one of 2017's biggest hits, so I would like it to revive Emma Watson's movie career. Obviously she's made all her money from Harry Potter and seems genuinely interested in helping women and working with the UN, so I'm sure she has other things on her mind and maybe just wanted a break from acting, but I hope BatB opens more doors for her.

I think she made some really good choices post Potter, with her hilarious line readings in The Bling Ring and a decent, if shake-y, American accent in Perks. I liked her a bunch in Noah and This is the End, too. She's had a few missteps with movies that came and went without much attention. I mean I'm a fan and still haven't seen Regression or...that other movie she did recently.

Edited November 16, 2016 by manbearpig

[Wiendish Fitch]

I have a good feeling about Emma Watson's career. She has avoided the typical pitfalls of child stardom (as have the rest of the Harry Potter crew), she's intelligent and level-headed, has been pretty lucky in her choices, and while all her post-Potter films haven't been hits, none have been career-ending disasters, either. It also helps that she has a really solid fanbase, and while she's no recluse, she keeps her private life private, which is a must for keeping one's sanity and longevity in show business. 

My theory is that Watson's career trajectory will be very similar to Jennifer Connelly's: both started out in a beloved fantasy film (Labyrinth for Connelly, while Watson has a whole flippin' franchise behind her), have grown up gracefully (if either had a "gawky phase", God knows we never saw it), no dumb shenanigans to speak of, and they're  darlings of the camera and the critics. Connelly has her Oscar, and I won't be surprised if there's at least a nomination in Watson's future.

Edited November 16, 2016 by Wiendish Fitch

[methodwriter85]

I think she could wind up like Jennifer Connelly, but I also wouldn't be surprised if Emma Watson winds up deciding on something else once her ingenue days are done and there's less interest in casting her.

It's kind of hilarious when you think of all the child actors in the series, it's Matthew Lewis that did the whole "look at how sexy I am" former child-star photo shoot. (I know Daniel did nudity but it seemed more along the lines of art than trying to be sexy.)

Domhall Gleeson definitely has a pretty bright future, it seems. For a guy who's not conventionally handsome, he's doing pretty damn well.

[gator12]

Emma Watson cannot act imo but that never stop actors from having a good career

[methodwriter85]

On 12/15/2016 at 11:01 AM, gator12 said:

Emma Watson cannot act imo but that never stop actors from having a good career

It usually does when it's a mediocre actress who leaves behind her ingenue days. See: Heather Graham. Graham is definitely one of those cases of someone who worked the big doe-eyed look and was able to get into some really good roles, but ultimately didn't have the chops to maintain a sustained leading lady movie career when she got too old to be the bombshell.

I honestly lean towards thinking Emma Watson is going to do something else once she's no longer the dewy young ingenue. She's pretty much set for life, and it's just always felt like acting is something that fell into her laps. She doesn't feel like someone who's going to fight hard to stay in the game once the role offers stop coming. However, she has been pretty smart in what she's chosen. Even flops like The Bling Ring weren't disasters. She doesn't have gossip about being a pain on set, and that does go a long way.

However....people have already crowned Millie Bobby Brown as Emma's 12-year old replacement waiting in the wings. I've found tweets that refer to her as the Emma Watson of her generation.

Kinda funny how that always seems to happen.

Speaking of ingenues, good on Hailee Steinfield with her Golden Globes nomination for Edge of 17. It was a good movie, and a pretty great part. It's nice seeing her get recognized. I remember everyone was saying she was pretty horrible in Pitch Perfect 2 (which I avoided because I can't stand Rebel Wilson and her part was apparently expanded), and it's nice to see that she's not just a talented child actor who couldn't maintain the chops as an adult.

Also, her co-star Blake Jenner is getting really good mileage right now out of being blandly handsome, young, and looking good without a shirt on. I think he's steadily improved since his Glee days but I wouldn't call him a great actor yet. Kind of funny that of that cast, he's the one right now who has a legitimate shot at a movie career. Blake might just be a flavor of the month but if he has Richard Linklater in his corner, he might actually have some longevity.

Edited December 17, 2016 by methodwriter85

[katha]

I actually think that not having something going for yourself besides hype and good looks will eventually cause trouble for young male actors as well, not as drastically, but it will. So acting ability or some form of charisma/star power that shows up onscreen is necessary for long-term careers IMO. Taylor Lautner faded. RPattz does okay because he knows he's not a star and seems satisfied with his indie stuff. One of the Hemsworths, the lesser known one, he might have trouble transitioning into much else. Ryan Reynolds was struggling until he found a vehicle that actually made use of things that make him compelling onscreen.

Josh Hartnett was a big deal for a bit there, then it fizzled out. And examples of people aiming for leading man status, struggling for various reasons, but then finding their bearings again like Jude Law, Colin Farrell or Matthew McConaughey are also tied to them having acting ability beyond the pretty. So if the demand for being pretty on screen fizzles out, they can keep having careers tied to the actual quality of their performances. Though Matthew had to start a whole campaign doing indies for a few years to remind people again that he actually could act.

Edited December 17, 2016 by katha

[gator12]

I don't think Ryan Reynolds has made it just because he has one hit since the Proposal.  That why he's so thirsty for Awards recognition from the industry. I think he knows that people outside of Hollywood doesn't care about him outside of deadpool so he wants that Golden Globes winner tag.  

I wonder if the general audience will still care about Jennifer Lawrence outside of The Hunger Games franchise. Whatever the case, I think the industry see her as the young Meryl Streep.

[KatWay]

Quote

I wonder if the general audience will still care about Jennifer Lawrence outside of The Hunger Games franchise. Whatever the case, I think the industry see her as the young Meryl Streep.

her acting style is practically the complete opposite of Streep though, more similar to movie stars like Roberts or Cruise, who don't much change their mannerisms or speech patters but rely on their charisma and energy in their acting choices. Streep is a far more technical actress than Lawrence.

[Cobalt Stargazer]

2 hours ago, KatWay said:

her acting style is practically the complete opposite of Streep though, more similar to movie stars like Roberts or Cruise, who don't much change their mannerisms or speech patters but rely on their charisma and energy in their acting choices. Streep is a far more technical actress than Lawrence.

Except that Julia Roberts!Actress and Julia Roberts!Movie Star are two different entities, and that finally hit me when I watched Money Monster shortly after seeing Secret In Their Eyes. Roberts may well have limited range compared to Streep, but when she dials down the wattage from all those teeth in her mouth and actually acts, she can be fairly compelling. And a whole lot less irritating.

[methodwriter85]

5 hours ago, katha said:

I actually think that not having something going for yourself besides hype and good looks will eventually cause trouble for young male actors as well, not as drastically, but it will. So acting ability or some form of charisma/star power that shows up onscreen is necessary for long-term careers IMO. Taylor Lautner faded. RPattz does okay because he knows he's not a star and seems satisfied with his indie stuff. One of the Hemsworths, the lesser known one, he might have trouble transitioning into much else. Ryan Reynolds was struggling until he found a vehicle that actually made use of things that make him compelling onscreen.

Josh Hartnett was a big deal for a bit there, then it fizzled out. And examples of people aiming for leading man status, struggling for various reasons, but then finding their bearings again like Jude Law, Colin Farrell or Matthew McConaughey are also tied to them having acting ability beyond the pretty. So if the demand for being pretty on screen fizzles out, they can keep having careers tied to the actual quality of their performances. Though Matthew had to start a whole campaign doing indies for a few years to remind people again that he actually could act.

The thing about guys is that they tend to get a chance to actually develop decent chops. Bradley Cooper's a good example- he had the good looks but he also had a chance to develop decent chops. He kind flew under the radar for awhile, and then proved he could lead a movie with Limitless, a decade after he started acting in shows/films. It's the pretty boys who are hyped hard but can't really deliver just yet that tend to get screwed, especially if they proved difficult. See: Alex Pettyfer, who can't get a role to save his life now.

I do think Ben Affleck took awhile to develop into a better actor. Matt Damon was/is ahead of him. Ben fell into the action movie/romantic comedy trap of the late 90's and early '00s and wasn't doing much to dispel the notion that he was just a good-looking guy. He wisely got into directing behind the scenes with The Town, and that seems to be what led him back onto his current upward trajectory. Argo played to his strengths, and Gone Girl couldn't have possibly been a better role for him. He's definitely a better actor in his 40's than he was in his late 20's/early 30's.

Women don't really get that chance because few ladies over the age of 30 actually get a shot at the leading lady tag. People like Jessica Chastain who broke big AFTER hitting 30 are rare, while it seems like it's more the rule than the exception that leading men tend to start hitting their stride in their 30's and 40's.

I remember reading Natalie Wood's biography called Natasha by Suzanne Finstad, and it basically lamented the fact that Natalie's acting had become better and more nuanced in her late 30's/early 40's than it had been when she was the ingenue, but she wasn't getting movie roles anymore as they were going to then-young actresses like Meryl Streep, Dianne Keaton, and Sissy Spacek. I still really, really wish she had played Daisy in the Great Gatsby. I bet she would have been so much better than whatever weird thing that Mia Farrow was doing in that movie.

[gator12]

11 hours ago, KatWay said:

her acting style is practically the complete opposite of Streep though, more similar to movie stars like Roberts or Cruise, who don't much change their mannerisms or speech patters but rely on their charisma and energy in their acting choices. Streep is a far more technical actress than Lawrence.

I don't think he acting style is like Meryl at all, I'm talking about the industry nominating her for awards if she anywhere near a film with award contention or as some people like to call Oscar bait.

Her first Academy Award nomination was in 2011, her fourth was in 2016

[Trini]

14 hours ago, katha said:

Taylor Lautner faded.

8 hours ago, methodwriter85 said:

It's the pretty boys who are hyped hard but can't really deliver just yet that tend to get screwed,

I feel bad for this kid. He seems so sweet in interviews, etc., and while he may never be a great (or good?) actor, he seems to have enthusiasm and talent for action-type roles, but he may not get any more chances to breakout. I mean, there have been others with about the same acting skill who have managed to eke out careers in action films, so why not him?

[aradia22]

Quote

Speaking of ingenues, good on Hailee Steinfield with her Golden Globes nomination for Edge of 17. It was a good movie, and a pretty great part. It's nice seeing her get recognized. I remember everyone was saying she was pretty horrible in Pitch Perfect 2 (which I avoided because I can't stand Rebel Wilson and her part was apparently expanded), and it's nice to see that she's not just a talented child actor who couldn't maintain the chops as an adult.

I haven't seen any of her movies but I wanted to jump in to say I like her music. It's typical pop stuff influenced by the sound that's popular now but it's hard to write a good pop song and she's got a few of them considering she only released a few songs on that album/EP.

Quote

And examples of people aiming for leading man status, struggling for various reasons, but then finding their bearings again like Jude Law, Colin Farrell or Matthew McConaughey are also tied to them having acting ability beyond the pretty. 

I think the substance abuse/addiction issues probably played a factor with Colin Farrell. But with all three of the guys you mentioned, I think it's also relevant that Hollywood likes its leading men to play romantic leads or action heroes (the current flavor is superheroes) and that's not what everyone is meant to do, or at least the type of romances. 

Quote

The thing about guys is that they tend to get a chance to actually develop decent chops. 

THIS. White actors, particularly white male actors, seem to get a lot of chances. I think this is part of the reason actors are still graduating from theatre to mainstream success. They get time to figure out what they're doing on stage, sometimes playing a wide range of roles (ensemble, supporting, leading... drama, comedy, musical), unlike the young people who have to make their mistakes on screen and get less time for things like rehearsing and finding their characters. But still, white male actors seem to be allowed more flops (critical and/or financial) before being labeled box office poison. And they certainly continue to get cast regardless. Hugh Jackman and Ryan Gosling don't have the most impressive resumes if you really go movie by movie and also factor in the box office. 

Quote

I feel bad for this kid. He seems so sweet in interviews, etc., and while he may never be a great (or good?) actor, he seems to have enthusiasm and talent for action-type roles, but he may not get any more chances to breakout. I mean, there have been others with about the same acting skill who have managed to eke out careers in action films, so why not him?

Apparently there's something going on with his dad even if Taylor himself isn't difficult to work with. I don't know the particulars. 

[Dejana]

Isn't Taylor Lautner on Scream Queens? He'll work for a few years if he becomes a Ryan Murphy favorite.

La La Land was originally announced with Emma Watson and Miles Teller as the leads. I doubt it would have turned out as well with them but I wonder if they are kicking themselves for not ending up in the project. Beauty and the Beast is bound to make a lot of money, but it would be a much bigger deal for Emma Watson's career to get nominated for real awards (not to mention the tizzy that would've ensued among Potterheads if she'd been the first of the "kids" to get an Oscar nod).

[methodwriter85]

41 minutes ago, Dejana said:

Isn't Taylor Lautner on Scream Queens? He'll work for a few years if he becomes a Ryan Murphy favorite.

La La Land was originally announced with Emma Watson and Miles Teller as the leads. I doubt it would have turned out as well with them but I wonder if they are kicking themselves for not ending up in the project. Beauty and the Beast is bound to make a lot of money, but it would be a much bigger deal for Emma Watson's career to get nominated for real awards (not to mention the tizzy that would've ensued among Potterheads if she'd been the first of the "kids" to get an Oscar nod).

Speaking of Ryan Murphy's stable, I swear to god I think him and Chris Colfer had a falling out. Chris hasn't done anything with him since Glee, it looks like. Chris honestly doesn't really have much of a chance anyway because his high-pitched voice really limits the kind of roles he can do. Especially if he doesn't want to play variations of Kurt. He seems like he might be more behind the scenes as a writer, and honestly that might be the best thing for him.

He does seem to like Finn Wittrock. I've liked Finn ever since he was on the pilot of Cold Case back in 2003, so I'm glad that he's probably got an anchor in Murphy-land. I'm a sucker for the All-American preppie look.

Taylor Lautner does seem like a sweet guy. He might pull a Brandon Routh and find a steady television career.

Miles Teller has been deflating since the failure of Fantastic Four last year, and he hasn't done much to regain his momentum. He probably will get many more chances, but he does have a LOT of gossip about how he's an ass to work with, which might not make Hollywood so eager to keep trying with him. His Esquire interview didn't do him any favors.

I don't think it quite burned as many bridges as Jennifer Lopez's Movieline intervew in 1998, but man.

[katha]

I just wanted to say, with people like Pettyfer and Teller, there's also the rumours of being difficult on set. If you don't have much box office or critical success (obviously that's not totally true for Teller), you better not have a cloud of diva gossip following you around as well. With Lautner, there have been rumblings about his dad I remember now that the other post mentioned it.

Actors aiming for action/romantic leads is what I'm talking about in general, people going solely for niche character actor parts aren't really aiming for Hollywood leading man status. And of course white men are given more chances if they play it right, but I don't think in that category you're given endless room for error. Jackman has to stumble into a critical or commercial success at some point (namely X-Men), to keep that train going. Gosling has to be a critical darling, even if most of his movies don't make that much money, now his latest one might. Brits like Cumberbatch and Redmayne seem to have leveraged critical success into franchises with good box office, cementing a sort of leading man status for them even though neither is the classical mainstream Hollywood star (I think that they both seem to know this and chose roles accordingly helped them here).

I chose McConaughey, Farrell and Law as examples because these are also three who clearly aimed for action hero/romantic lead status and for a time there succeeded and then it's interesting to watch what happens when for whatever reason it gets bumpier and straightforward action hero/leading man stuff doesn't fly anymore. McConaughey had annoyed everyone and their grandmother by starring in 2 million obnoxious romantic comedies, so he had to basically take a break, wait for better scripts (that weren't coming for a long time, he talked about this) and take massive pay cuts in the beginning to get more interesting smaller parts that put him on the radar again as an actor. Law wanted to make himself happen, but then he oversaturated the market (to the point that Chris Rock was making cracks at his omnipresence) and none of his efforts took off. His good looks faded a bit as well, what do you do? Because the industry seemed to respect his acting abilities, he could go on with supporting player parts, character work, or being RDJ's sidekick. Things that aren't tied to only his looks. Farrell had addiction issues, so his struggles are tied to that, but once he wasn't a hot commodity for blockbusters anymore, there was also a fallback to more interesting smaller movies. Then his good work in smaller movies got him other work in interesting movies and parts in bigger productions as well. Perhaps not always as lead anymore, but still with parts where he could make an impact.

The trajectory of those three, as examples, isn't possible for everyone. Because IMO when hype and good looks aren't working in your favour so much anymore, the industry will drop you if you can't offer anything beyond that. If you're bland and forgettable in every role. So then talent and abilities, as well as perseverance of course, start to matter and determine if you'll keep on getting work.

[aradia22]

Quote

Actors aiming for action/romantic leads is what I'm talking about in general, people going solely for niche character actor parts aren't really aiming for Hollywood leading man status. And of course white men are given more chances if they play it right, but I don't think in that category you're given endless room for error.

Chris Hemsworth? 

Quote

McConaughey had annoyed everyone and their grandmother by starring in 2 million obnoxious romantic comedies, so he had to basically take a break, wait for better scripts (that weren't coming for a long time, he talked about this) and take massive pay cuts in the beginning to get more interesting smaller parts that put him on the radar again as an actor.

Haha. I still like How To Lose a Guy in 10 Days. I haven't seen it in years but I didn't mind that it was about 2 monsters. I wasn't taking it seriously as a love story. But yeah, he was taking some terrible projects in those bad years. Not everyone can do the Michael Caine/Samuel L. Jackson, etc. strategy of taking whatever comes along and being an actor that works. 

Quote

Law wanted to make himself happen, but then he oversaturated the market (to the point that Chris Rock was making cracks at his omnipresence) and none of his efforts took off. His good looks faded a bit as well, what do you do? Because the industry seemed to respect his acting abilities, he could go on with supporting player parts, character work, or being RDJ's sidekick.

I've never really liked Sienna Miller (Or Michelle Williams. Not that it's relevant. I just get them confused sometimes.) but I don't think the scandal/affair/whatever was going on helped his career. It wasn't a Jennifer Aniston 'how dare you do that to America's sweetheart' situation but I remember it being popular tabloid fodder and a lot of jokes at his expense. 

Quote

The trajectory of those three, as examples, isn't possible for everyone. Because IMO when hype and good looks aren't working in your favour so much anymore, the industry will drop you if you can't offer anything beyond that. If you're bland and forgettable in every role. So then talent and abilities, as well as perseverance of course, start to matter and determine if you'll keep on getting work.

It's not that I disagree exactly. It's just that I think we're in a weird era where that's not as true. Maybe it's because the machinery has gotten so big and needs to be fed (so many movies, TV shows, etc. plus nonsense like reality TV competitions like Dancing with the Stars). I feel like people aren't getting their proper 15 minutes of fame anymore. If you really want it and you have the resources and opportunity, you can claw your way back into relevance, forgiveness, etc. Justin Bieber, Miley Cyrus, Mel Gibson, Joe Jonas, etc. Not that they're movie stars but I think it's harder for people to completely fade into obscurity. They can all of a sudden leap back into the spotlight. I don't know how you'd investigate it but you know all those movies with relatively famous actors that don't get released in theaters but show up on Netflix? That's weird, right? I don't know. It just seems like there's a way of staying afloat if you can just get enough people to be paying attention to you. I guess more positive examples would be Robert Downey Jr. and Winona Ryder.