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

[katha]

That's probably true about there being more avenues to keep yourself relevant now. Though I guess there's shades to that as well. I think Law, Farrell and McConaughey have good careers now, full stop, no qualifications. Not A-List, but solid. Christian Bale is also someone who clawed himself out of child star trappings and into relevance. RDJ made it back. Ryder to some degree? Though it remains to be seen if it holds. Though I'd also argue that Ryder might not be a master thespian, but she has a quality on screen that seems appealing. RDJ is talented and charismatic. Chris Hemsworth has that Marvel stuff keeping him going for now, who knows how it will work out afterwards (Is there an afterwards? Will these franchises ever end?).

[gator12]

10 hours ago, Dejana said:

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).

If Emma Watson was in La La Land instead of Emma Stone oscar nominated actress, she wouldn't have gotten award attention for the simple fact that imo she cannot act.

[ribboninthesky1]

I'm not at all objective, as Colin Farrell has appealed to me for a long time, but going by interviews, Farrell has some qualities that McConaughey and Law don't seem to convey: self-awareness, humility, and an eloquent way of speaking about the work.  Granted, I've only seen/read a few interviews of each, so it's not exactly a comprehensive review.  In any case, I have always rooted for him. He's one of the few non-American actors who isn't classically trained and seems to have cultivated his raw talent into versatile performances. 

Jude Law has come across as frustrated if not slightly bitter at times, at least in written interviews, that his personal life usurped his work. Now that he's full on balding and lost the "pretty boy" looks, I guess he's taken more seriously.

Something about McConaughey has always bugged me, even though I can objectively see his appeal.     

Edited December 18, 2016 by ribboninthesky1

[gator12]

2 hours ago, katha said:

(Is there an afterwards? Will these franchises ever end?).

No, they will stayed as long as they keep making Disney, Fox and WB money. These franchises is the only thing that seem to keep these big studios afloat, while everything else, the audience seems to reject. The only other thing the industry has is cartoons (which Mickey Mouse is the King of) and Leonardo DiCaprio, I think most of his films have cross the 100 million dollars mark.

[methodwriter85]

8 hours ago, aradia22 said:

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. 

Hallmark, Up, and Ion Christmas t.v. movies are employing a lot of former t.v./B-list movie stars. I'm watching Denise Richards in a Christmas Ion t.v. right now. Then, of course, you've got the old staple of Lifetime.

BTW, Julia Roberts is deigning to do television now. I guess she's gotten the memo that t.v. can be a great place for women over 40? Hell, the stigma really does seem like it's not around anymore. Matthew McConaughuey and Woody Harrelson did well with their stint on True Detective.

Netflix and Amazon Prime have done a lot to resurrect sagging careers- Winona Ryder recently. Then you've also got Taylor Schilling, who was kind of a failing movie star before Orange Is the New Black, while Laura Prepon and Natasha Lyonne were has-beens. Gael Garcia Bernal, Kevin Spacey, Robin Wright, etc etc.

Edited December 18, 2016 by methodwriter85

[Cobalt Stargazer]

12 hours ago, katha said:

 Chris Hemsworth has that Marvel stuff keeping him going for now, who knows how it will work out afterwards (Is there an afterwards? Will these franchises ever end?).

According to information I saw elsewhere on these forums, the Marvel juggernaut will be rolling along at least 2020, if not longer. The next Avengers movie is filming now, but it won't be released until 2018.

Which brings me to Elizabeth Olsen.

I think she's an actress who does and will do interesting things outside of franchise work, if only because she's the Olsen who can actually act. I don't know if she'll be a huge draw box office wise, but I do believe she'll have a steady career given her age and the attention she's garnered from the Marvelverse fans.

[Athena]

1 hour ago, Cobalt Stargazer said:

Which brings me to Elizabeth Olsen.

I think she's an actress who does and will do interesting things outside of franchise work, if only because she's the Olsen who can actually act. I don't know if she'll be a huge draw box office wise, but I do believe she'll have a steady career given her age and the attention she's garnered from the Marvelverse fans.

I like her. Before she got the Marvel work, she was doing indie films. I've seen interviews with her and however kooky the twins' fashion and taste in older men are, in general, all the Olsens seem to have low drama personal lives that don't seem to leak into the tabloids too much. This makes me think they were pretty well raised all things considered. Elizabeth has spoken about it and she really made her own personal decision to go into acting. She's serious and committed to it too. She has a screen presence that can be very sensual. I hope she keeps getting more interesting work.

I'm not a fan of Emma Watson, but I don't think she'll quit acting anytime soon. I think there was a better chance with that she attended Brown briefly. Reading her interviews about that time seems to indicate she felt alienated and out of place because of her celebrity status. She threw herself into being a non-celeb, but did not adjust as well as she thought. From all accounts, she is bright and maybe she'll get into fashion or business or something else, but I think a lot of child actors especially really famous ones like her become use to living as a public figure. That does not mean the money or the status, but more the job and lifestyle of being in the business and being recognized as an actor. I have read that she appears very normal from most fan accounts. I think it'll take her a long time to figure out what she could do other than acting.

[SeanC]

1 hour ago, Athena said:

I'm not a fan of Emma Watson, but I don't think she'll quit acting anytime soon. I think there was a better chance with that she attended Brown briefly. Reading her interviews about that time seems to indicate she felt alienated and out of place because of her celebrity status. She threw herself into being a non-celeb, but did not adjust as well as she thought. From all accounts, she is bright and maybe she'll get into fashion or business or something else, but I think a lot of child actors especially really famous ones like her become use to living as a public figure. That does not mean the money or the status, but more the job and lifestyle of being in the business and being recognized as an actor. I have read that she appears very normal from most fan accounts. I think it'll take her a long time to figure out what she could do other than acting.

This wouldn't really constitute a departure from the entertainment world, but I could maybe see Watson becoming more involved in producer-type work eventually.  She strikes me as having the temperament for that sort of job.

[raezen]

6 minutes ago, SeanC said:

This wouldn't really constitute a departure from the entertainment world, but I could maybe see Watson becoming more involved in producer-type work eventually.  She strikes me as having the temperament for that sort of job.

This would be a big gain for the industry at a time when people have been so critical of the lack of women behind the camera creating the material films . 

[UYI]

15 hours ago, Cobalt Stargazer said:

According to information I saw elsewhere on these forums, the Marvel juggernaut will be rolling along at least 2020, if not longer. The next Avengers movie is filming now, but it won't be released until 2018.

Which brings me to Elizabeth Olsen.

I think she's an actress who does and will do interesting things outside of franchise work, if only because she's the Olsen who can actually act. I don't know if she'll be a huge draw box office wise, but I do believe she'll have a steady career given her age and the attention she's garnered from the Marvelverse fans.

To be fair, she wasn't brought up in it in the way Mary-Kate and Ashley were. Elizabeth grew up seeing her sisters on TV, and I guess eventually decided to try it herself, but also decided to study it and show that she took it seriously and wanted to perfect her craft. Mary-Kate and Ashley auditioned for Full House at nine months old. They have literally NO memory of not being famous, and I'm sure some of their first memories involve them being onset as Michelle. Add to it their unique fame  as twins, and how they had an entire franchise built around it? Hoo boy. It's a big reason--other than growing up watching them--that I will always be willing to defend them overall, especially for not returning to Fuller House (and you think their old costars would understand that more, having known them virtually THEIR WHOLE LIVES!), and why I understand why they eventually, and gradually, decided not to continue acting careers anymore. They never even asked for it to begin with. I'm sure they enjoyed aspects of it growing up, but they decided to move on. 

TLDR? Elizabeth made the initial decision to act. Yes, she appeared in some of her sisters' videos as a child, but she got to go back to normal life growing up, in a way the other two girls largely never got to do. 

14 hours ago, Athena said:

I like her. Before she got the Marvel work, she was doing indie films. I've seen interviews with her and however kooky the twins' fashion and taste in older men are, in general, all the Olsens seem to have low drama personal lives that don't seem to leak into the tabloids too much. This makes me think they were pretty well raised all things considered. Elizabeth has spoken about it and she really made her own personal decision to go into acting. She's serious and committed to it too. She has a screen presence that can be very sensual. I hope she keeps getting more interesting work.

I'm not a fan of Emma Watson, but I don't think she'll quit acting anytime soon. I think there was a better chance with that she attended Brown briefly. Reading her interviews about that time seems to indicate she felt alienated and out of place because of her celebrity status. She threw herself into being a non-celeb, but did not adjust as well as she thought. From all accounts, she is bright and maybe she'll get into fashion or business or something else, but I think a lot of child actors especially really famous ones like her become use to living as a public figure. That does not mean the money or the status, but more the job and lifestyle of being in the business and being recognized as an actor. I have read that she appears very normal from most fan accounts. I think it'll take her a long time to figure out what she could do other than acting.

I wouldn't say she briefly attended Brown. She graduated from there. I remember her posting a selfie of herself in her graduation cap. 

[Athena]

1 hour ago, UYI said:

I wouldn't say she briefly attended Brown. She graduated from there. I remember her posting a selfie of herself in her graduation cap. 

I stand corrected. Thanks. I don't track her career but I do remember a few years ago she took time off from school (two semesters from her wiki page) but eventually graduate. I agree with @SeanC that producing could be an avenue for her. Wikipedia also tells me she taught yoga for a short period of time.

[Bruinsfan]

On 12/18/2016 at 9:19 PM, SeanC said:

This wouldn't really constitute a departure from the entertainment world, but I could maybe see Watson becoming more involved in producer-type work eventually.  She strikes me as having the temperament for that sort of job.

Wasn't she very involved behind the scenes in getting Perks of Being a Wallflower made? That shows good taste in projects on her part.

[Ms Blue Jay]

It's not like the Olsen twins are under some false assumption that they are Oscar-calibre actors and keep trying to prove themselves in Hollywood.  They've taken a very unique upbringing and turned themselves into accomplished and awarded fashion designers.  They're not trying to be Jennifer Lawrence; they're trying to be the new-school Celine and succeeding.  Their main line has won 4 CFDA awards.  It reminds me of people comparing Keiran and Macaulay Culkin whenever Keiran gets rave reviews for his acting.  Macaulay was exploited. And now Keiran can have that chance.  

Edited December 21, 2016 by Ms Blue Jay

[methodwriter85]

So, J-Law is about to have her first huge flop. The numbers for Passengers ain't looking very good. It'll be interesting to see where she goes from here, because Joy "under-performed" last year and she no longer has the Hunger Games films.

[absnow54]

I think she'll go back to indies for a while to rebuild her reputation. At least that's what she keeps saying she plans to do. She still has an Aranofsky and Spielberg picture coming up, and that Amy Schumer movie that probably won't help. It's not like there are any actresses threatening to dethrone her (Emma Stone, maybe, but she's found her niche in comedy). There are a lot of talented actresses in her age group, but they haven't quite made the jump to Movie Star.

Edited December 24, 2016 by absnow54

[ruby24]

I don't think it matters. Even if she never did anything good again she's famous and well-known enough that it's not like anyone's going to forget who she is.

I always figured she wouldn't do much after the Hunger Games movies were done, tbh.

[Danny Franks]

5 hours ago, absnow54 said:

I think she'll go back to indies for a while to rebuild her reputation. At least that's what she keeps saying she plans to do. She still has an Aranofsky and Spielberg picture coming up, and that Amy Schumer movie that probably won't help. It's not like there are any actresses threatening to dethrone her (Emma Stone, maybe, but she's found her niche in comedy). There are a lot of talented actresses in her age group, but they haven't quite made the jump to Movie Star.

I wouldn't be so sure of Emma Stone staying firmly within that niche. La La Land is getting very good reviews, and looks like it has more weight than your average Hollywood comedy, and she's got Battle of the Sexes coming out next year, where she's playing Billie Jean King. While it's listed as a 'comedy-drama', again I expect it will be taken more seriously due to the subject . If it's good, then I wouldn't be surprised to see people talking Oscar nominations for Emma Stone. That's what usually happens when someone transforms their physical appearance to play a real life figure.

And after that, she's apparently going to be costuming it up in a movie about Queen Anne, of all things.

As for other potential competition for Lawrence, I wouldn't take my eyes off Daisy Ridley. She's got the mega-franchise and a pretty full slate of upcoming roles, according to IMDB. It might take a couple of years, but I think the sky's the limit for her.

[methodwriter85]

On the other hand, I can't see Chris Pratt taking much of a hit. Let's be honest here, he's a man, and Hollywood will give a lot more chances to a guy than they will a woman, especially one who's the face of two nascent franchises and in the prime leading man age of 35 to 50. How many big-budget bombs has Ryan Reynolds been allowed to have before getting Deadpool? Compare that to his contemporary Reese Witherspoon, who's now going the HBO series route for reviving her acting career. (Her producing career seems just fine though.)

It does kind of suck that they won't get paired together again for a movie, because Jennifer Lawrence honestly has amazing chemistry with him.

Speaking of Big Little Lies...man, Shailene Woodley has definitely had a down year. I felt bad for her that she was stuck in such a mediocre franchise. It sounds like the 4th t.v. movie installment was cancelled or it's in a lot of trouble- Theo James has already walked away. Snowden was a good movie- too bad it also bombed. Joseph Gordon Levitt hasn't been having the best of luck lately, either.

Big Little Lies honestly looks like a good choice- HBO series usually always tend to garner critical acclaim, if not always ratings. And it's got a pretty great cast. I did laugh at Reese Witherspoon's character having an indignant response when Laura Dern's character turned her ageist comment against her. Because it is true- at 40, Reese is no longer considered a young woman in Hollywood. It's going to be interesting to see how Reese handles that, because she can no longer play the kind of roles that made her famous. She does seem to have a pretty good awareness of the mistakes she made with her career, so we'll see.

Edited December 24, 2016 by methodwriter85

[Cobalt Stargazer]

4 hours ago, methodwriter85 said:

On the other hand, I can't see Chris Pratt taking much of a hit. Let's be honest here, he's a man, and Hollywood will give a lot more chances to a guy than they will a woman, especially one who's the face of two nascent franchises and in the prime leading man age of 35 to 50. How many big-budget bombs has Ryan Reynolds been allowed to have before getting Deadpool? Compare that to his contemporary Reese Witherspoon, who's now going the HBO series route for reviving her acting career. (Her producing career seems just fine though.)

A not quite random observation, because I see the bolded part fairly often. Is it that it would be "better" if Pratt's career took a hit if Passengers flops than if Lawrence's career did? I haven't seen the movie yet, but the sentiment that Ryan Reynolds got a thousand chances before Deadpool because he's a man doesn't really apply to Pratt, who has really only been on the map for a short while. The first Guardians of the Galaxy came out two years ago, and then he was in Jurassic World and The Magnificent Seven. I have it on good authority that pretty much no one went to see the former because Pratt was in it, and the latter is already out on DVD even though it was only released in the last week of September. So that's one smash and two so-so movies, and yeah, Star Lord will be in the next Avengers movie in addition to Guardians 2, but Infinity War doesn't hit theaters until 2018. I'm not trying to start up a big debate about gender politics because this is the wrong thread for that, but it seems peculiar to compare Ryan Reynolds' career to Chris Pratt's simply because Reynolds has so many more crap films under his belt.

[pivot]

Jennifer Lawrence will be fine. She is still one of the most bankable actors around. She has two hit franchises + Silver Linings Playbook and American Hustle. Joy made money as well. There is no other actress even close to her for bankability except maybe Streep who has had plenty of flops as well. 

[PepSinger]

Quote

 Compare that to his contemporary Reese Witherspoon, who's now going the HBO series route for reviving her acting career. (Her producing career seems just fine though.)

I would say that Wild definitely revived her career. It wasn't a blockbuster, but it received rave reviews. Also, she was nominated for an Academy Award for Best Actress. I think that she is just being more thoughtful about the work she wants to do, and it seems as if she is more in control of her career. I don't think the HBO series is supposed to indicate that she can't find worthwhile movies to do; the HBO series is just what she wants to do next.

Edited December 25, 2016 by PepSinger

[JBC344]

30 minutes ago, pivot said:

Jennifer Lawrence will be fine. She is still one of the most bankable actors around. She has two hit franchises + Silver Linings Playbook and American Hustle. Joy made money as well. There is no other actress even close to her for bankability except maybe Streep who has had plenty of flops as well. 

I think the point is that those franchises have ended and as good as she was in them, one more than the other, most franchises don't rely on the specific actors involved like they used to.  In the movies where she herself has headlined, haven't done so well. 

I also think Jennifer Lawrence will be fine.  I think she is a good actress, but the problem with being "bankable" is that you have to keep those stats up in order to justify the paycheck.  I've said this before but now is the time where her bankability as an actress is being tested when she doesn't have a franchise to fall back on. 

[methodwriter85]

Joy made 56 million domestic against a 60 million dollar budget. The only thing that kept it in the black was the overseas gross. It didn't bomb, but they couldn't have been thrilled with the results.

Jen will be fine regardless but she needs to headline another big hit if she wants to keep up her 10/20 million dollar paychecks. I wonder if this is her Speed 2 moment. Big flop, but then comes back strong the next year.

[Dejana]

19 hours ago, Danny Franks said:

I wouldn't be so sure of Emma Stone staying firmly within that niche. La La Land is getting very good reviews, and looks like it has more weight than your average Hollywood comedy, and she's got Battle of the Sexes coming out next year, where she's playing Billie Jean King. While it's listed as a 'comedy-drama', again I expect it will be taken more seriously due to the subject . If it's good, then I wouldn't be surprised to see people talking Oscar nominations for Emma Stone. That's what usually happens when someone transforms their physical appearance to play a real life figure.

And after that, she's apparently going to be costuming it up in a movie about Queen Anne, of all things.

I hadn't heard about the Queen Anne role but that Stone may star in a project about Rosemary Kennedy, a tragic, under-told story--if there is such a thing with the Kennedys--but also the sort of role that wins truckloads of awards. Emma Stone, Oscar perennial, would be one of the more surprising career trajectories to come to pass, if these more serious projects all work out for her.

[Athena]

3 hours ago, Dejana said:

I hadn't heard about the Queen Anne role but that Stone may star in a project about Rosemary Kennedy, a tragic, under-told story--if there is such a thing with the Kennedys--but also the sort of role that wins truckloads of awards. Emma Stone, Oscar perennial, would be one of the more surprising career trajectories to come to pass, if these more serious projects all work out for her.

I think Emma Stone is underrated as an actor actually and in some ways, I think she has more potential in range than Jennifer Lawrence. She can do the comedy roles better. I first became impressed with Stone when she was 18 in Paper Man which no one saw but also starred Jeff Daniels, Ryan Reynolds, and Kieran Culkin. The movie itself was meh, but Culkin and Stone acted around the other two. I think Stone has had some very questionable choices in her roles, but I think she has improved as an actress (and can continue to) and she is very charismatic on screen.

[methodwriter85]

I can do you guys one better- I saw Emma Stone (back when she was Emily Stone) all the way back during the summer of 2004, when she was on a VH1 reality show that was trying to cast the members of its Partridge Family remake. She was 15. I rooted for her the moment I saw her screentest, where she's playing the scene where Laurie talks about her diary entries about getting her first bra. She was pretty much the only potential Laurie that was actually good. She wound up winning, but the pilot didn't get ordered to series.

I still hold out hope that she might be the one to revive romantic comedies.

Edited December 25, 2016 by methodwriter85

[aradia22]

Quote

I think she'll go back to indies for a while to rebuild her reputation. At least that's what she keeps saying she plans to do. She still has an Aranofsky and Spielberg picture coming up, and that Amy Schumer movie that probably won't help. It's not like there are any actresses threatening to dethrone her (Emma Stone, maybe, but she's found her niche in comedy). There are a lot of talented actresses in her age group, but they haven't quite made the jump to Movie Star.

I could see her having a Charlize Theron kind of career. Working steadily post-Oscar, taking some more supporting roles, some swings and misses. I could see her doing some more "serious action movie girl" parts rather than straight up indie movies (like mumblecore). Like those Ghost in the Shell, Underworld, Resident Evil kind of parts... but something she would consider more highbrow, maybe with a big director. Maybe she'll camp it up in something like Snow White and the Huntsman, and then find her Mad Max Fury Road. I'm not sure if she's built for mainstream success exactly because (not that rom-coms are that popular anymore) but she doesn't have that warm, likability. I don't see her playing Emma Stone or Anna Kendrick kind of roles. I can see her doing some action blockbusters because they can be more dramatic and involve fewer wisecracks. I wonder how she would be in a period piece because that's the kind of indie I could see her taking. Not Joy or even a WWII era movie but something colonial America or farther back that gets nominated for Costume Design Oscars.

Quote

On the other hand, I can't see Chris Pratt taking much of a hit. Let's be honest here, he's a man, and Hollywood will give a lot more chances to a guy than they will a woman, especially one who's the face of two nascent franchises and in the prime leading man age of 35 to 50.

Bwahahahaha. 

[SeanC]

9 hours ago, aradia22 said:

I'm not sure if she's built for mainstream success exactly because (not that rom-coms are that popular anymore) but she doesn't have that warm, likability. 

She doesn't?  Warmth and likeability are typically considered one of the main things Lawrence has going for her.  She's already found enormous mainstream success.

[methodwriter85]

9 hours ago, aradia22 said:

Bwahahahaha. 

It's true though. Leading male careers tend to break out at around mid/late 30's (see: Tom Hanks, Bradley Cooper, Chris Pratt, Channing Tatum, Kevin Costner, Michael Keaton, Denzel,), and they tend to stay in-demand as a leading guy until their 50's, and even beyond. Guys who break out as superstars in their 20's tend to be rarer, such as Travolta, Cruise, Smith, and Leo.

In females, it seems like that age is about 22 to 35, but Sandra Bullock and Julianne Moore (not to mention Meryl Streep) managed to keep themselves in demand past that. But you really have to be exceptionally talented and/or charismatic to stay there at that level.

[JessePinkman]

18 hours ago, SeanC said:

She doesn't?  Warmth and likeability are typically considered one of the main things Lawrence has going for her.  She's already found enormous mainstream success.

In person yes but I've yet to see a performance of hers where she had anything approaching a personality, much less a likeable one.

[UYI]

On 12/24/2016 at 8:14 AM, absnow54 said:

I think she'll go back to indies for a while to rebuild her reputation. At least that's what she keeps saying she plans to do. She still has an Aranofsky and Spielberg picture coming up, and that Amy Schumer movie that probably won't help. It's not like there are any actresses threatening to dethrone her (Emma Stone, maybe, but she's found her niche in comedy). There are a lot of talented actresses in her age group, but they haven't quite made the jump to Movie Star.

Brie Larson?

I remember all the talk about her being the next J Law when she won her Oscar in February, so I'm curious about what might happen with that. Then again, I hope that's just career wise. I don't need anymore actresses--or anyone, really--talking about scratching their butt on rocks or peeing behind their moms in photos in interviews, thank you.  

[AimingforYoko]

5 minutes ago, UYI said:

I remember all the talk about her being the next J Law when she won her Oscar in February, so I'm curious about what might happen with that.

Well, she's now part of the MCU (Captain Marvel), so she's got her franchise and she's also starring in the next Kong movie, so presumably she'll be part of the Universal Monster universe. All she needs now is to hook up with a strong director and she'll have that part locked down as well.

[SeanC]

1 hour ago, JessePinkman said:

In person yes but I've yet to see a performance of hers where she had anything approaching a personality, much less a likeable one.

That's definitely a minority opinion, so I don't think that presents a career challenge for her.

17 minutes ago, AimingforYoko said:

Well, she's now part of the MCU (Captain Marvel), so she's got her franchise and she's also starring in the next Kong movie, so presumably she'll be part of the Universal Monster universe. All she needs now is to hook up with a strong director and she'll have that part locked down as well.

One of her 2017 releases is The Glass Castle, directed by Destin Cretton, who she previously worked with on Short Term 12.  I wouldn't be surprised to see that result in another nomination.

She's also in something called Basmati Blues, which sounds kinda nuts.

Edited December 27, 2016 by SeanC

[methodwriter85]

Brie, like Shailene, strikes me as someone who's playing the long game. They even have similar backgrounds as people who were child actors, but not really stars. (Well, Shailene did have t.v. fame for The Secret Life of an American Teenager.) Their acting styles are kind of similar with that naturalistic, low-key feel to it.

[pivot]

On 12/25/2016 at 3:03 AM, methodwriter85 said:

Joy made 56 million domestic against a 60 million dollar budget. The only thing that kept it in the black was the overseas gross. It didn't bomb, but they couldn't have been thrilled with the results.

Jen will be fine regardless but she needs to headline another big hit if she wants to keep up her 10/20 million dollar paychecks. I wonder if this is her Speed 2 moment. Big flop, but then comes back strong the next year.

You can't just look at Box Office #s to determine profitability anymore. The home market is as big as the BO now and actresses like Jennifer Lawrence, George Clooney and Jennifer Aniston do great money at home rentals/streams/purchases. That's why they get big paychecks.

[JBC344]

2 hours ago, pivot said:

You can't just look at Box Office #s to determine profitability anymore. The home market is as big as the BO now and actresses like Jennifer Lawrence, George Clooney and Jennifer Aniston do great money at home rentals/streams/purchases. That's why they get big paychecks.

Huh?  Are you sure?  That logistically can't make profitable sense.  A studio makes most of their money from the BO.  Now a movie can have a huge BO and a really great Video on Demand (VOD) showing making it very profitable but having a good VOD without the BO isn't exactly the same.  The VOD numbers would have to be through the roof for a studio to really take notice since they are making a smaller profit on it and it still is only reaching a small number of the population.  VOD is really beneficial for indie/niche movies or as a nice compliment to a movie that is already expected to do well at the BO.

Once a movie starts going down the distribution line the profit margin gets smaller.  The home market is a nice compliment to the studio system but it doesn't come close to rivaling the BO, not yet at least.  It's also a nice boost to the actor's overall exposure.  If anything I would say what saves or really helps an actor's profitability is the overseas market. 

There is also the issue of longevity as well as interest.  For example say George Clooney's last five movies made 100 million at the box office.  Compare that to someone like Sam Worthington from Avatar, which made billions at the BO.  George Clooney will continue to get the bigger paycheck because of consistency, interest, and track record, even though technically the studio has made more money off of Sam.  The problem is that Sam has never been able to duplicate that success outside of Avatar, he also unfortunately isn't an actor that the public is that interested in seeing.

[aradia22]

Quote

Brie, like Shailene, strikes me as someone who's playing the long game. They even have similar backgrounds as people who were child actors, but not really stars. (Well, Shailene did have t.v. fame for The Secret Life of an American Teenager.) Their acting styles are kind of similar with that naturalistic, low-key feel to it.

I would say Shailene is actually striking at mainstream success and not quite hitting. She has some solid projects (in terms of popularity) but they're not on the level that launches someone to superstardom (possibly because of quality). Brie is the one who has really been playing the long game. You don't take that part in the United States of Tara (a show I kept trying to like but never really did) or all those indies for the recognition. And remember this?

[methodwriter85]

I'm pretty sure I already posted this, but damn.

I would never, ever want my 15-year old self recorded for posterity. It really is funny that she's now the second former Disney star to win an Oscar.

I wonder if she auditioned for High School Musical? Although man, that cast has had some up and down's. I really thought Lucas Grabeel was going to have an interesting career because he struck me as a talented character actor, but other than a small part in Milk he didn't seem to go anywhere. Corbin Bleu seems like he's going the T.V. personality route. Vanessa Hughens really seems to have settled into a theater/musical career, and Zac Efron has morphed into a 35-year old steroid queen. And then there's Ashley Tisdale. It seems like she's doing more behind the scenes stuff now. Which is smart, honestly.

Edited December 28, 2016 by methodwriter85

[aradia22]

Quote

Corbin Bleu seems like he's going the T.V. personality route. 

Corbin has actually had a better theatre/musical career. Unlike Vanessa, he's not really going for high profile projects but I think he's content to be a working actor and that will serve him better in the long run. And I think he has the talent to back it up. 

[Bruinsfan]

On 12/24/2016 at 3:08 PM, methodwriter85 said:

Because it is true- at 40, Reese is no longer considered a young woman in Hollywood.

Are 40-year-olds considered young women anywhere? While I agree that there's a sad shortage of decent roles being written for mature actresses these days, 40 has been early middle aged for as long as I can remember—it's entirely possible to be a grandparent at that age. Unless you're someone like Danica McKellar or Bianca Lawson who can believably play more than a decade younger, those young single gal in the big city roles should be firmly in the rearview mirror.

Edited December 29, 2016 by Bruinsfan

[Ms Blue Jay]

Single people who are age 40 exist.  They even live in cities.  Why would it bother you if Reese played a single gal in a big city?  To be honest, it wouldn't bother me.  Gabrielle Union is 42 and stars in Being Mary Jane which is about being a single woman in Atlanta.  I'm a fan of the show.  The Sex and the City women were supposed to be around 28-45 (ranging from Carrie to Samantha, Seasons 1-6), and they were mostly single throughout.

Matthew McConaughey is rarely married in his movies and he's 47.  Does Tom Cruise have wives in his movies?  Denzel plays single sometimes, like in Flight.

Stacey Dash and Rachel McAdams famously played high school students at age 28 and 26.  No one had a problem with it.  (To be honest, I remember Rachel being announced as being 29 at the time... but.... I guess......I'll take the internet's word on it.)

Edited December 29, 2016 by Ms Blue Jay

[aradia22]

Quote

Are 40-year-olds considered young women anywhere? While I agree that there's a sad shortage of decent roles being written for mature actresses these days, 40 has been early middle aged for as long as I can remember—it's entirely possible to be a grandparent at that age. 

Quote

Single people who are age 40 exist.  They even live in cities.  Why would it bother you if Reese played a single gal in a big city?  To be honest, it wouldn't bother me. 

I don't think the single part is really as relevant. But I agree that in general (unless you're preternaturally young-looking) it's better to graduate from ingenue roles. You can still 100% be a protagonist. But I think even the women of SATC got called out for acting foolish when they should have known better. But that show was always a little cartoonish/farcical.

[Ms Blue Jay]

That's like saying people in their 40s don't act foolish in love.  Anyway.  I will just leave it and say that I disagree.

[aradia22]

I think there's a difference in the way sitcom and rom-com people tend to act and the way people tend to act in the real world. To bring it back to the conversation about movie stars, I think it's getting harder for everyone to pull off characters like that, regardless of age. It's not as much of a viable path towards stardom. Except maybe those CBS sitcoms like BBT. 

[Lunata]

Nothing left to say.  Carrie and Debbie, R.I.P.

[Captain Carrot]

Just saw this:

http://uproxx.com/tv/mash-william-christopher-dead-84/

Of course 2016 had to have one more casualty.

[methodwriter85]

On a lighter note...Chris Pratt Vanity Fair cover story.

Damn, I wish I had lived a vagabond lifestyle in Hawaii in my early 20's.  I did love Everwood in its first two seasons (the show lost me with the back half of the series), and it's cool to see him reach the heights he's reached.

Emily VanCamp's had a great post-Everwood career, too. She might not be headlining movies but she's doing pretty well.

And then there's Gregory Smith. I think he had Rookie Blue, an ABC summer series, and that's about it.

Mike Erwin though surprised me. I really thought he was headed for a really great career- more on the t.v. side, but he broke my heart as Colin and it makes me sad he never broke out. If I remember correctly, they killed Colin off because Mike asked to be written out so he could do a pilot. Might have been a big mistake, career-wise. If I'm remembering correctly. For all I know, they were always going to kill him off. It DID drive a lot of the story in Season 2, and Emily's acting in that season is what made me realize she actually had great chops. Revenge was definitely a show that went on longer than it needed to (it really should have been a limited mini-series), but her acting in that really did make it work

Edited January 4, 2017 by methodwriter85

[aradia22]

Quote

Emily VanCamp's had a great post-Everwood career, too. She might not be headlining movies but she's doing pretty well.

Mike Erwin though surprised me.

I thought her acting was atrocious in that show. She was like a robot or a mannequin. Completely lifeless. 

The only thing I know Mike Erwin from is that Lifetime movie She's Too Young. 

Talent aside, I think it can be tough for actors who start out young. It's one thing if you've got name recognition and people think you can bring in a fan base. But otherwise it seems difficult to make the jump to movie stardom. I'm not sure what it is. It's not like casting directors are only hiring huge names for movies. There are lots of parts to fill. I suppose some people are meant to do fairly well as working actors (e.g. the kind who show up every so often on procedurals). 

[Kel Varnsen]

16 hours ago, methodwriter85 said:

On a lighter note...Chris Pratt Vanity Fair cover story.

Damn, I wish I had lived a vagabond lifestyle in Hawaii in my early 20's.  I did love Everwood in its first two seasons (the show lost me with the back half of the series), and it's cool to see him reach the heights he

I remember reading about how he got into acting and Rae Dawn Chong and how he got Parks and Rec because Mike Schur (the show's creator) was married to one of the writers of The OC (who was also Regis's daughter). I also thought it was cool how the three main Parks and Rec had completely different backgrounds. Amy did the improv thing, Nick Offerman is a clasically trained actor (he even  did Kabuki during his training in University) and Pratt just kind of lucked into it. 

[katha]

On 4.1.2017 at 7:33 PM, aradia22 said:

Talent aside, I think it can be tough for actors who start out young. It's one thing if you've got name recognition and people think you can bring in a fan base. But otherwise it seems difficult to make the jump to movie stardom. I'm not sure what it is. It's not like casting directors are only hiring huge names for movies. There are lots of parts to fill. I suppose some people are meant to do fairly well as working actors (e.g. the kind who show up every so often on procedurals). 

I think it might be a bit of a neighbour of the child actor phenomenon? As in, often in these roles for very young performers, they're written around a certain quality they have and/or around their youthfulness, great display of range is not necessarily required. And so when they can't pass for a teenager/ingenue anymore, interest in hiring them fades. This has happened to both female and male performers in that age range. It's happening to child actors all the time, suddenly they're not cute anymore...then what? I'm sure it must be brutal to live through that. And it doesn't have to be tied to skill, even, you can have a decent amount of talent but still the offers stop coming in.

Someone like Christian Bale, for example, might have been helped by the fact that the first role that brought him to public attention was Empire of the Sun. It's not really a typical child actor performance, it's not even an ingenue performance, it's so dark and considered that perhaps the industry was more accepting of seeing him as a grown-up because he was allowed to display range in that movie? But still, he struggled for years to establish himself as an adult actor. I'm sure that he turned out to be a handsome man helped here as well, the industry is brutal on that front.

But for every case like that, where it worked out for a variety of reasons, you have countless examples of child or teenage actors fading away.

Edited January 5, 2017 by katha