Badmovies.org Forum

All right, so the title says everything. I feel like big box-office actors (your Will Smiths, your Angelina Jolies) do almost nothing but add to marquis value to a film and often hurt the artistic vision of the motion picture. Besides adding a larger budget to it, could we perhaps have had a more frightening I Am Legend or a Changeling that didn't have its scenery chewed up by Jolie's gargantuan maw? Does anyone else feel that massive stars can hinder a film from being fully artistically realized?

Absolutely.  One of the (many) reasons I don't like Hollywood films is that the story is secondary, the STAR is what it's all about.  Well, the star can't act, and I'm immediately taken out of the story and left wondering what the hell a character from some other movie I saw is doing in this thing. 

This may be mostly true today, but it wasn't always true.  I do NOT hate big name actors like:

* Paul Newman
* Humphrey Bogart
* James Stewart
* Lauren Bacall
* John Wayne
* Spencer Tracy
* James Cagney
* Kim Novak
* Cary Grant
* The Marx Brothers
* Sidney Poitier
* Dustin Hoffman
* Grace Kelly
* Al Pacino (at least for the early part of his career)
* Robert DeNiro (at least for the early part of his career)
* Claude Rains


. . . and the list goes on and on . . .

No, you are most certainly not alone.

I also feel that alot of the big name actors get hyped up so much it detracts from the actual film. Plus tons of them feature in so many bland "blockbusters" that I lose track of who I hate and the films I hate......oooh sooo many  :hatred:

At the moment I can't stand;

Tom Cruise, Brad Pitt, Samuel L. Jackson, Robert De Niro, Angelina Jolie, Will Smith, Jennifer Garner, Ben Affleck, Kirsten Dunst, Jude Law, Keanu Reeves, Ryan Reynolds, Jack Black, Gwyneth Paltrow, Jessica Alba, Brittany Murphy, Megan Fox, Shia Lebouf, Halle Berry and Tom Cruise...again!

I think it's more a case of the film companies thought process, big budget blockbuster movies are done by committees who think more of profit and less of quality. Their thinking is if we can get him/her for this film we're guaranteed $250 - $300 million at the box office, doesn't matter if they're right for the part or even if they're any good, the important thing is to get the film out as quick as possible so we can make as much money as we can. The studio then throws money at the person they want until he or she gives in. The "actors" can't be blamed, unless they're the ones who make the movie. 

For me it really depends on the movie/genre and not to mention the actor.

Theres some "big names" I've always enjoyed films from in the past.  Don't forget, Ah-nold was arguably a big name in Hollywood and put out some great films.  Granted he more or less played the same guy in every film but it worked. Same thing went for Eastwood during his peak. If this isn't the kind of "big name" you're referring to then correct me.

Then theres the actors that I see on a DVD case and run away from like the wind...well...lets see...
Sean Penn (haven't seen a film yet that inspires me)
Morgan Freeman (same old sh*t constantly)
Tom Cruise (over dramatic)
Jennifer Aniston (she plays the role she had on friends in every movie)
Owen Wilson (awful comedic acting)
Sandra Bullock (she killed the Speed movies and I can't figure out why people find her hot)
Adam Sandler (I don't think I've ever laughed at him)
Shia Lebouf (his comedic acting kills me)
Hayden Christiansen (thanks to the prequels)

Theres more but I'll probably list them later.  

I can't stand :

Jude Law
Shia LaBouf
Jessica Alba :hatred: :hatred: :hatred:
Cameron Diaz
Kevin Kline
Steve Martin (except the Man with Two Brains)
Ben -freaking!!!-Affleck
Eddie Murphy

Depends. It's about the acting and the story more than the big name though. I'd rather see the big-name disappearing into the role. So I really admire actors with a lot of range, whether they are "big" or not. Dustin Hoffman for instance. Also, when a big name does an indie film, I'll often check that out on the assumption they did it for the love of the project rather than their usual paycheck.

I can't stand Jim Carrey, and I've always been appalled that the only guy from "In Living Color" who made it big was the token white guy, the one with perhaps the least talent.

I used to resent both Paul Newman and Robert Redford because they were known first as pretty boys, but I soon came to really admire both as actors. Later I admired both even more for other reasons: Redford for Sundance and for directing, Newman for his multitude of projects. I agree with another posters list of the earlier generation of big name actors.

I really like Angelina Jolie in action roles for some reason I can't identify. I liked Mr. and Mrs. Smith and Tomb Raider a lot. Brad Pitt doesn't bother me too much either, and he's one of those guys that's done a lot of different stuff. I don't mind Leonardo DiCaprio for the same reason. And I really like Johnny Depp for perhaps the most stretchiest acting stretches (Edward Scissorhands, Chocolat, yes even Pirates of the Caribbean).

I actually like Samuel L. Jackson as an actor. The only reason he's "big-name" is because he's in every cool movie. I don't think you sell movies with his face on them, if you know what I mean.

-Jimmybob

I can't stand:

Mel Gibson
Will Smith
Cerina Vincent (although i'm not sure you would call her a big name)
Also and i know i'll catch flack for this but i can't stand Asia Argento. Her acting is so terrible that I can't help who her father is...her acting ruins movies and makes me cringe...

I also forgot to mention George Clooney (why does everyone think he's so good-looking, i just don't see it). I think his acting skills are over-rated. He seemed to do fine on ER as a sitcom actor, but i just don't think he's cut out for more serious roles.

Some stars have power that can raise mediocre material up, and are always interesting to watch, even in bad movies like "Ishtar" --

Having said that, you know I'm talking about Dustin Hoffman, right?  Just recently, he took a very minor comedic role and infused it with some real panache in "Perfume" -- He's earned his star, as far as I'm concerned.

While Colin Farrell, John Goodman, and Daniel Day Lewis have been in a few poor films, they are always worth watching and raise the material they are in.

That said, not even Meryl Streep could save "The Devil Wears Prada!" --

peter johnson/denny crane

You ask this question in this forum. Stand on top of a display at a multiplex on friday evening and yell it. Let us know how that works out.

I think part of the issue is that, to a film fan, a star can be distracting and make suspension of disbelief more difficult. We're constantly reminded that it's an actor up on screen, someone who we know from their prior roles and about whom we may even know something of their personal lives, political beliefs, etc.  We've formed an opinion of them, and we don't like them mucking up a story we could be interested in with their personal baggage.  Tom Cruise in VALKYRIE comes to mind; people think his ego dominates the screen, or can't imagine such a wimpy guy as a potential assassin.

I've come to believe most of the moviegoing public isn't made up of film fans, it's made up of movie star fans.  Most people don't go to movies because they're intrigued by the plot description, the glowing reviews, or because they enjoyed the director's prior work.  They just want to see their favorite movie idol, be it Bruce Willis, Angelina Jolie, Will Smith or whomever up on the big screen, doing EXACTLY THE SAME THING they did in their last three or four films.

I've gotten over my dislike of Tom Cruise, and Brad Pitt for the moment, because they both have recently tackled roles that required some actual skill (Cruise in "Tropic Thunder" and Pitt in "Burn After Reading")

One guy I will never understand as a Big-Name is George Clooney.  He and Joel Schumacher almost killed the Batman films for god's sake.  In every single movie, he plays the same kind of guy, speaking in that same, worn out, sarcastic tone of voice.  It just drives me nuts every time he opens his mouth now. 

I'll add in Orlando Bloom into the mix. I figured after LOTR he would have advanced as an actor.  I was wrong. 

Well there's no one on that list I'd want to save... except maybe MORGAN FREEMAN who has a persona I like.  That said, an actor has never prompted me to see a film, and never will.  Where's the story?  I don't want big names, big breasts, light shows or special effects (not to say these things don't have their place  :wink:) but just give me a story, well told. 
I don't care for: ALIMACGRAWROBERTTAYLORYAHOOSERIOUSTOMCRUISEBRADPITTPAULAPRENTISSPAULYSHOREVINCEVAUGHNANDYDICKJERRYL EWIS...

I agree with this, these actors use to make movies about the movie and not them.

Todays actors suck! Most of the movies I watch have no name actors in them ...

Now some small exceptions,
Sid Haig
Tim Thomerson
Lloyd Kaufman

and a few others.

  American Dad spanked Clooney good on one of their episodes. The wife blamed Clooney for stealing a scene she was in as a young actress and thereby wrecked any chance she felt she had to become a star. The husband, Stan, uses his CIA contacts to establish a crack-team of former assassin,s analysts, profilers and spys to get revenge for her by doing the one thing nobody else has ever been able to do, break Clooney's heart.   I think South Park did an episode where a cloud of smugness emitted by Clooney during an Oscar speech threatened the little town.
  Then again even the twentysomethings I  work with think he's hot. They like his voice and confidence. So I dunno know. I'm just glad people aren't wearing that dumb-ass haircut of his anymore.

I like some people I like:

Tom Hanks
Morgan Freeman
Michelle Pfeiffer
Lea Thompson (she's doing crime dramas called Jane Doe, they can be seen on Five occasionally)
Denzel Washington
Will Smith
Dustin Hoffman (His cpt. Hook is brilliant!!!!Best. Villian. Ever. Forget Heath Ledger)
Jennifer Tilly
Brad Dourif
Robert Englund

 :teddyr:

Less of the hate, guys.

Heres one I'm ashamed at myself for forgetting.  David f'n Caruso.   :hatred:  In the realm of bad acting, he has excelled past all expectations. 

yeah the whole 'star first, movie second'/identical roles in every film thing is annoying. the stars become brands, brands have to be reliable...etcetera.

But he's gone straight through bad and into funny as hell.

Definitely Tom Cruise in Valkyrie sprang immediately to mind. The plot to kill Hitler is a fascinating piece of history, and ideal movie material, but cast Cruise as Stauffenberg and I immediately get apprehensive. It's not even that he's necessarily a bad choice. He does at least look the part. But Cruise's movies are usually vehicles for Tom Cruise. Not what I'd want the movie to be.

I agree that Cruise's performance in Tropic Thunder was great, but he's still known more as a "movie star" than as an actor. And, as others have said, most movie stars are just too big to blend into a role and convincingly become someone else. Most, Cruise included, are at their best when playing basically the same character, tailor-made for them, in movies where it doesn't matter that they stick out like a sore thumb. Arnie was mentioned, and he'd probably be the first to admit he was a big star but not much of an actor. Didn't matter. He was playing Americans with names like Doug Quaid using a thick Austrian accent and nobody cared. People wanted to see Arnie shoot people, blow things up and spout one-liners. The character was secondary.

Many of the stars named as good or tolerable (Jimmy Stewart, Tom Hanks, Dustin Hoffman, etc.) earned their stardom by being good actors. Or, like Arnold and John Wayne before him, stuck mainly to what they were good at.

We almost need to do away with blanket terms and have specific categories for stars, like celebrated actor, action hero and something else for the window dressing. Box-office bait, perhaps?

There are few actors in movies today ... some that come to mind that I don't have a mental image of who they are, are people like ...

Kevin Spacey
Tim Roth
Tom Hanks
Dustin Hoffman
Ed Norton
Kenneth Branagh
Paul Giamatti
Bob Hoskins
Anthony Hopkins
and a few others.

.Adam Sandler-I NEVER find this guy funny. Even on SNL.
.David Spade-Same as Sandler-not funny.Annoying little boy man. Annoying little gnat.
.Charles Bronsan-I dunno-Seems full of himself.
.Woody Allen-I have NEVER seen the humor in his movies. Whiney shmuck.
.Will Smith-no comment.
.Paris Hilton-WHY!?!?!Why is this women in films?!?!?
.Tom Cruise-Pretty boy.
.Hugh Grant-ugh!
.Eddie Murphey-His voice just annoys the HELL out of me. He should have stayed to SNL.
.Chevy Chase-Smug. Just wanna slap him.
  Actually,most SNL stars should be forbidden to make the jump into films.Dan Akryod is wooden.Jim Belushi is a bad version of his more famous brother.Though I find Will Ferral funny on SNL,a whole film with him in it is too much.Never found Steve Martin to be funny even on TV.

OK...actors I think should get MORE screen time....
.Sid Haig!!!-Bless his heart! I love the guy.
.PAM GRIER!!!!
.David Carridine!!!-I dunno....just kinda laid back cool.
.John Saxon-I dunno-the guys been around forever. He deserves more roles.
.Mary Wornov-I just love her! She just always seems to be having so much fun.
.Micheal Rooker-He should be a big name by now. Why isn't he?
.John Hurt-Now this guy is a REAL actor!
.

RCMerchant:
You'll be enchanted to know, I'm sure, that the Boulder International Film Festival is honoring Chevy Chase in person this year, for his "Contributions to Comedy" . . . Well, Klaus Kinski is dead, and so's Lee Van Cleef, so I guess Chase is every bit as funny as they were . . .
And, oh, you better hurry & order your tickets, 'cause the opening-night keynote address by Chase costs a mere $75, so I bet people will be snapping those up like hotcakes . . .
peter johnson/denny crane

Compared to Chevy Chase,Lee Van Cleef is hilarous. And Chevy may not be dead...but his carrear seems to be.

I don't hate big-name actors but I do get tired of them.  Did anyone but me read the book that The Changeling was based on?  Every actor, many of them unknown to me, was almost a carbon copy of the real-life person until you got to Angelina Jolie.

Exactly. It's jarring, isn't it? It's as if the star clashes with the movie.

I'm just gonna go ahead and put this out there - As much as we all hate Tom Cruise now, he did happen to make an excellent Lestat...

That is all.  :drink:

Least funny man to ever work in comedy films. Yes, I'm even counting Paulie Shore. All of his "jokes" are just him making stupid gibberish noises. Ugh.

Adam Sandler is hit and miss for me. Some of his movies I really enjoyed, but others I haven't. It's been years since I've even gone out of my way to see one. I'd say his movies have gotten less enjoyable the more successful he's gotten, and the more he's tried to act. Put him in a ridiculous lowbrow comedy, playing some insane yet good-hearted loser, and surround him with guys like Clint Howard and Rob Schneider playing equally off-the-wall characters, and I will probably like it. I haven't enjoyed Sandler any time he's aimed higher than that.

I don't have any problem with big name actors in concept, and very rarely does it hurt suspension of disbelief for me.  Actors can dominate a film of course, but that's a fault of the film in many cases, not always the fault of the actor.  I also don't think an actor dominating a film means it is inherently a bad movie either.  Like, say, Malcolm McDowell dominates every scene in A Clockwork Orange, but it's still a great film. 

I might also add that "star power" was a more important draw in Hollywood films 60 years ago and earlier than it is today.  They could sell almost any film with two or three big names in it back then, which isn't the case now.  They also built films around the available stars even more than now (perhaps that's an opinion, but it seems that way to me).  It helps a lot to have big names now (obviously), but it doesn't guarantee anything. 

So basically, I'd say it is actually LESS of an issue now than it once was. 

Burgo, I'll also add I think it is funny that John Wayne is on your list.  He plays the exact same part, in a larger than life sort of way, in almost every one of his many, many roles.  I don't think any actor in the modern day has done it as extreme as he has.  It's perhaps the worst in his war films, where apparently he was drafted from the streets of Dodge City.  Not to say I don't enjoy his performances as well, for what they are. 

I enoy westerns and I am a huge fan of Spaghetti Westerns but I think John Wayne is extremely over rated.
I think I have seen only 2 of his films,True Grit(watched it on TV at my grandparents)and I forget the name of the other.

I thought he was great in Rio Lobo, aside from Unforgiven it's my favourite western.

Some actors bring a certain amount of flair and panache to every role they undertake . .

like Sean Connery.

Others cast a wet blanket of boring over everything they touch -

Keanu Reeves.

However, some actors I truly admire incude:

Tom Hanks
Mel Gibson
Sam Neill
Gary Oldman

Some actresses that I will watch whether they can act or not:

Anne Hathaway
Cameron Diaz
Barbara Carrera
Michelle Pfeiffer

 :bluesad:

http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=M4nrVMPVoTU

Wow, so I wasn't alone on this. It's hard to tell with all the responses in my way :smile: But seriously, I don't think that adding big names is necessarily a bad thing. It's just that somebody should be famous for their performances, not who they happen to be intimate with at the time or what they're wearing or how they happen to be existing at any one particular time. I'm so sick of hearing about what people like Tom Cruise and Hugh Jackman do on their off time because that takes away from their job and makes them useless fodder for deadening conversation. And once you do that they start to become overly famous for no reason. When was the last time you recall Julia Roberts doing anything worthwhile as an actress? Never? Well, why do I still here about what she does and does not do outside of the studio? it's a vicious cycle, and I know that the hype machine is important to Hollywood's infrastructure, but it makes me physically ill sometimes to hear the banal details of a celebrity's life. So thank goodness for people like Kate Winslet and Leonardo DiCaprio, actually performing well enough to be mentioned instead of wearing something lurid or saying something celebridiculous (HA!)

Nice to hear someone praising Leo instead of bashing him. I'm not a huge fan myself, but I think he gets way too much crap for no reason (other than that he used to be "the pretty boy from Titanic").