• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
  • The Politics forum has been nuked. Please do not bring political discussion to the rest of the site, or you will be removed. Thanks.

Hollywood now views action movies stars as disposable (New York Times)

Status
Not open for further replies.

kazebyaka

Banned
Jan 4, 2009
3,466
1
0
The only action star we need
 

overcast

Member
Apr 13, 2010
23,337
0
830
I think the age of the action star is long gone.

Actors being draws in general is pretty rare. Leo is one of them, maybe RDJ (not sure about movies other than Iron man). Younger actors haven't quite hit it big. Fassbender is certainly not a draw, JGL is a small one.. Can't even think of any others. Especially any under 30 or so.
 

Megalosaro

Banned
Aug 19, 2012
12,132
0
0
SoCal
I think Chris Hemsworth is the best male lead in a long time. He has it all. Jes got that dashing nature, hes handsome as hell and hes funny.

Not gonna lie. Im a straight man but I think I have a crush on him
 

Barrage

Member
Feb 8, 2005
8,541
28
1,530
Those of you who think the sky's the limit for Amell...his career is parraleling Tom Welling in many ways, and how's Welling's career going right now
 

old

Member
May 11, 2013
4,962
177
475
One of the biggest reasons is that action movies have changed themselves. Action movies used to be lead by very charismatic leads who could entrance the entire audience. John Wayne. Henry Fonda. Sean Connery. Clint Eastwood. Harrison Ford. Even Bruce Willis and Mel Gibson (Lethal Weapon era Mel Gibson for clarification.) These guys oozed charm, charisma, and character.

Nowadays the lead roles are played to be dull intentionally so. They intentionally pull back the character so that as many audience members as possible can insert themselves into the hero. (Just like how they do in video games too.) The idea is that it will draw more audience members in if they can see themselves saying and doing what the hero does. But that requires the hero to be very middle of the road and mediocre all across their persona.

Since the roles don't require that special talent to capture the screen, they can plug almost anybody into the role nowadays. They're banking the marketing to sell the tickets anyways. Enjoy the Robert Downey Jr's, the Johnny Depps (Cpt. Sparrow), and I would even include Chris Pine (I like his Kirk). They're going to increasingly become rarer.
 

Log4Girlz

Member
May 23, 2006
40,774
0
0
One of the biggest reasons is that action movies have changed themselves. Action movies used to be lead by very charismatic leads who could entrance the entire audience. John Wayne. Henry Fonda. Sean Connery. Clint Eastwood. Harrison Ford. Even Bruce Willis and Mel Gibson (Lethal Weapon era Mel Gibson for clarification.) These guys oozed charm, charisma, and character.

Nowadays the lead roles are played to be dull intentionally so. They intentionally pull back the character so that as many audience members as possible can insert themselves into the hero. (Just like how they do in video games too.) The idea is that it will draw more audience members in if they can see themselves saying and doing what the hero does. But that requires the hero to be very middle of the road and mediocre all across their persona.

Since the roles don't require that special talent to capture the screen, they can plug almost anybody into the role nowadays. They're banking the marketing to sell the tickets anyways.

I think the theory is that its easier to dub their lines in other countries and not lose the nuance of their character. Dull people with dull lines.
 

SwiftDeath

Member
May 31, 2013
23,626
0
0
I think the theory is that its easier to dub their lines in other countries and not lose the nuance of their character. Dull people with dull lines.

Isn't china like the biggest growing or maybe even the biggest country for movie watchers?
 

SlipperySlope

Banned
Mar 11, 2009
6,497
0
0
Too many pretty boys.

Action stars of the 80s were grisly.

This is true. They need to be able to look like somebody who can live out in the snowy wilderness for some time and tough it out. Not someone who looks like they would need to bring a backpack, tent, and arsonal of supplies.
 
D

Deleted member 13876

Unconfirmed Member
I think the theory is that its easier to dub their lines in other countries and not lose the nuance of their character. Dull people with dull lines.

Avoiding the loss off nuance, by making characters with very little nuance seems screwy.
 

Red Liquorice

Member
Jun 4, 2011
12,686
0
0
Action movies are disposable, it seems fitting the stars should be too. Reminds me of all the kids in teen horror films - they're all nobodies too who get killed off except for the main one.
 

Oersted

Member
Mar 14, 2012
32,328
1
0
I think Chris Hemsworth is the best male lead in a long time. He has it all. Jes got that dashing nature, hes handsome as hell and hes funny.

Not gonna lie. Im a straight man but I think I have a crush on him

Do I really go into a Hemsworth movie for sake of action? When I watch a Schwarzenegger / Chan / Stallone movie I know I go in a action movie with the possibility of high quality action.

When I watch Li, Willis and Co I expect cerstain styles , certain trademarks. Hemsworth? Well, eh...
 

GungHo

Single-handedly caused Exxon-Mobil to sue FOX, start World War 3
Jun 4, 2009
8,196
0
990
I would have loved to see Jared Padalecki as Conan. Could you imagine him running around in a loincloth, wielding a big-ass sword, and shouting "You took my father's sword!", at the top of his voice?

No. He could have been the smart Conan, though. The one that looks like a moose, but thinks like a wolf.

I don't know why Hollywood insists on casting 'young muscular football player types' for all of these action roles.
Because they think that's what we want.

Those of you who think the sky's the limit for Amell...his career is parraleling Tom Welling in many ways, and how's Welling's career going right now
Hopefully, Amell knows to tell Steve Martin to GTFO.
 
I see potential in Momoa. Not Arnold or Stallone type potential, but his look stands out and he has a lot of charisma in interviews. He's not a forgettable baby face like the many others.

He just hasn't landed that right part yet. Maybe one of the rumored DC roles could be it.

He would crush it as Lobo.

Hollywood has had problems with action leads for a while. They've done everything they can to make them disposable for going on two decades now. It started in earnest when the Matt Damons and Nicholas Cages were cast in traditional big action roles. The thought of casting guys off the street just to bulk up, shoot a couple of movies, then throw away is the next logical step.
 

overcast

Member
Apr 13, 2010
23,337
0
830
I think Chris Hemsworth is the best male lead in a long time. He has it all. Jes got that dashing nature, hes handsome as hell and hes funny.

Not gonna lie. Im a straight man but I think I have a crush on him
What? From what I've seen, Hemsworth is a decent Thor, but not much else. Was boring as hell in Snow White (granted the movie was shitty).
 

SwiftDeath

Member
May 31, 2013
23,626
0
0
I would say Robert Downey Jr. Some of the old action stars didn't have big muscles. They had big personalities.

Honestly outside of iron man I don't see him as an action star and even in Iron Man his character while awesome doesn't ring the same way as the old action stars did
 

megamerican

Member
Sep 27, 2010
2,301
97
895
The big mistake is thinking action movie fans want a "hunk" as their lead. Arnold and Sly were ripped but they weren't pretty boy models with no personality. Too much emphasis is put on the look of these guys, focus on charisma first. The Rock has a great look but it's his charisma that made him a star. Compare him with Batista's film career and you'll see there's more to it than just look.
 

Mushroomer25

Member
Jan 5, 2012
9,900
1
0
twitter.com
It doesn't shock me that actors being cast for their bodies tend to not have long-standing careers. You see the same thing with female leads who are cast exclusively for their pretty faces (see supermodels cast in Micheal Bay films). A good headshot can land you a first movie, but you actually need some level of personality to resonate with an audience. Hemsworth is only starting to become a legitimate name nowadays, because Thor is a fun character that he's personified. Audiences wouldn't be able to accept another actor as that character. Yet if they did a Conan or John Carter sequel with a different lead actor, nobody would know the difference.

The moral of the story is, don't cast for the costume. Cast for the character, then train that actor until they fill the costume.
 

UrokeJoe

Member
Nov 30, 2007
6,553
0
0
The big mistake is thinking action movie fans want a "hunk" as their lead. Arnold and Sly were ripped but they weren't pretty boy models with no personality. Too much emphasis is put on the look of these guys, focus on charisma first. The Rock has a great look but it's his charisma that made him a star. Compare him with Batista's film career and you'll see there's more to it than just look.

The Rundown Rock best Rock.
 

Poofynamanama

Banned
Feb 8, 2014
843
0
0
Detroit, MI
Amell is a pretty bad actor who can't emote for shit, IMO. I stopped watching Arrow after 8 or 9 episodes, despite wanting to like it I found myself groaning at the acting of pretty much every character. Hopefully the Flash will turn out better :)
 

1.21Gigawatts

Banned
Nov 24, 2012
8,436
234
675
munich
Action stars need to be charismatic and memorable.
This new generation of action stars is everything but charismatic and memorable.
 

sirap

Member
Mar 1, 2013
6,097
1
0
Malaysia
Arnold and Sly had enough charisma to fill several buses despite being barely able to deliver lines in understandable english.
 

LaNaranja

Member
May 29, 2013
4,487
0
0
Too much of the same thing. That's the problem with Hollywood. You might say, variety, I'd say lack of quality and maybe most importantly in this instance: their individuality. At one time there were a dependable crop of male and female actors that you could go to delivery the goods. The differences were discernible. They had also done things on the screen or played characters that you can hang on to. Nowadays, anyone, no matter what is thrust into the spotlight because attention spans are short and the next big thing is needed. I'm not going to slight the list of guys drawn for this article for what they can or can't do in front of the camera, but come on, you can swap most of them out and not even notice. The field is completely diluted with a lot of sameness these days. These producers have a one-track mind and keep hitting on the same look hoping for different outcomes. Actor #1 didn't work? get their clone who can do relatively the same thing.

And Dwayne Johnson still one of biggest star right now, these mediocre guys just don't have charisma.

I'm not big on the action movies, but I get the sense that Hollywood has been trying to create action stars by taking a handsome face and pumping him full of steroids and chicken breast and throwing him in a stupid comic book movie, and then they wonder why nobody gives a shit about him. Charisma is more important than looks/muscles, as well as actually having good roles/movies.

Is this really a bad thing? As has been said in countless armchair casting threads here, acting talent is more important than looks. If you have a talented, charismatic actor who is physically capable of packing on muscle then why wouldn't you go for that over a body builder who only looks the part?

Action stars need to be charismatic and memorable.
This new generation of action stars is everything but charismatic and memorable.

So you guys are saying the newly buff Chris Pratt has a shot? :D
 

Buckethead

Banned
Jul 31, 2008
38,161
0
0
A Chicken Coop
Typical vapid Hollywood.

These scripts were shite which is all Hollywood trash is these days.

I don't think these guys are anything special, good looks, no character, but even if they were the second coming of Daniel Day Lewis, they couldn't make a nostalgia rehash or blood orgy sell tickets.
 

Sho_Nuff82

Member
Jan 2, 2007
39,630
1
0
The way I see it, Hollywood has failed to create new "superstar" actors in the last 15 years or so

I mean they were clearly trying to with Shia Labeouf with all the roles he got but yeah that's never going to happen

I mean when was the last super star actor made?

Harrison Ford for instance had some crazy ass contract with the studios back in the day that clearly showed how they saw actors of his level a real investment, not some disposable set piece

I think audiences genuinely like Helmsworth, Channing Tatum, The Rock, and Jamie Foxx. Crowe was that dude for a hot second and then he went to do more dramatic stuff, Will Smith should have been Neo and stopped pushing his kids. Matt Damon made Jason Bourne nearly as popular as Bond in his third film.

Edit: How did I forget Wahlberg? Shooter is that hotness.
Liam Neeson has a crazy action movie resume since Phantom Menace, including Gangs of New York, Batman Begins, Kingdom of Heaven, Clash of the Titans (which actually made money), The A-Team, Battleship, Taken 1&2, and Taken on a plane.
 

JdFoX187

Banned
May 17, 2006
16,042
0
0
35
Lawton, Okla.
www.examiner.com
It seems that Hollywood is trying to manufacture these stars instead of letting one show up. Taylor Kitsch, Sam Worthington, Robert Pattinson, Kellan Lutz, etc. were all groomed to be big leading guys and given the keys to these franchises and were marketed as leading men and they simply weren't.

Besides, this is all a cycle. Right now, it's the franchises that are selling. There's not a single actor or actress in Hollywood right now that can carry a movie on their name alone. Will Smith and Johnny Depp were thought to be the two best, but both their major blockbusters flopped this summer. Switch out a competent actor with any of the Marvel crew -- RDJ aside, arguably -- and you'll see the same results. Don't force it. Just let it be.
 

Dead Man

Member
Aug 24, 2007
54,233
0
0
I can't get too worked up about this, they are still paid very well, and most of the guys they talk about aren't action movie stars anyway. More actors who were in a couple action movies.
 

Hours Left

Member
Jun 28, 2006
33,614
1
0
What a strange article, like this is something new or even remotely exclusive to "action stars".

There are lots of guys doing really great, Chris Hemsworth is one of them. Some make it, some don't.
 

Particle Physicist

between a quark and a baryon
Jun 7, 2004
25,579
1
1,730
According to reports, Chris Hemsworth made a pittance for “Thor” and received a pay increase of only $500,000 for the sequel.

Oh boohoo.

I didn't even realize there was a Conan remake. When did it come out?
 

terribletwo

Member
Jul 22, 2009
1,204
0
0
The Rock has been on an absolute tear since Fast Five (some duds, but a lot of hits)

The 80s had a million disposable stars too. A List was Arnold and maybe Sly. B List was Seagal and Norris. and then 100 guys below that

I didn't even realize there was a Conan remake. When did thy come out?
Few years ago but really really really dont' watch it
 

rexor0717

Member
Dec 6, 2008
10,033
0
0
My Chris ranking goes Evans > Hemsworth > Pratt. I'd see a movie for the first two, but I think Evan's career is slowing down a bit. Are there any other relevant action Chris's?
 

lamaroo

Unconfirmed Member
Sep 21, 2012
21,078
0
0
One of the biggest reasons I'm excited for Pratt to be headlining something, guy is funny and charismatic as hell.

Evans is pretty charismatic too, but his Captain America character is dull and boring.
 

watershed

Banned
Mar 12, 2011
19,593
0
0
The closest thing to an action star Hollywood has produced in the past 5 years is Liam Neeson.
This is a pretty amazing truth. Liam Neeson went from being a "serious" actor to a b-movie action star spitting out one liners in bad American accents. And he's great at it!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.