Did we have any new great actors coming into the Hollywood scene at the end of 00's, beginning of 10's? Christopher Waltz comes to mind, but most of them are just new pretty faces (and there's A LOT of them!)

Any names?

I should out Fishgurl!

Nobody can be considered great anymore in the popular sense until they are at least 30 because the mediocre young Hollywood types are taking up the space in the big budget films where greatness could happen. I think most of the great young American actors are in New York doing theatre and indie films while waiting their turn for when the overhyped Kristens, Roberts and Shias of the world burn out or fade from the scene. A few real deal American 20 somethings to watch that I know about who are already working in Hollywood and could make the jump to greatness with the right film roles are Dane DeHaan, Zoe Kazan, Alison Brie, Monica Raymund and Justine Lupe. (I excluded Fishgurl because of a standing death threat. haha)

Michael Fassbender?

There will always be great actors coming out of every generation.

The difference is, the days of the megawatt "movie star" are over (Brad Pitt, George Clooney, Johnny Depp, etc. are the last generation of these kinds of "stars"). This has nothing to do with talent, but with the world we live in, which is dominated by the 24-hour news cycle which churns through "the story of the moment" so that what was huge news months ago can feel like ancient history.

So you'll have people like Michael Fassbender who may continue to do great work - but he won't have the kind of celebrity attention that guys like Depp, Cruise, etc. may have gotten.

In other words, as time goes on, "celebrity" and "great actors" will become disentangled (in fact, when you think about it, more and more "celebrities" are reality stars, regular people who get thrust into the news cycle for their 15 minutes, and actors/athletes/musicians with screwed up personal lives).

Again, there will continue to be a LOT of great actors, but they won't garner the kind of media attention that previous generations of actors may have gotten because our media has changed.

No more movie stars, just character actors - some of whom are more recognized than others.

quote:

Originally posted by gyokoren:
I should out Fishgurl!

Nobody can be considered great anymore in the popular sense until they are at least 30 because the mediocre young Hollywood types are taking up the space in the big budget films where greatness could happen. I think most of the great young American actors are in New York doing theatre and indie films while waiting their turn for when the overhyped Kristens, Roberts and Shias of the world burn out or fade from the scene. A few real deal American 20 somethings to watch that I know about who are already working in Hollywood and could make the jump to greatness with the right film roles are Dane DeHaan, Zoe Kazan, Alison Brie, Monica Raymund and Justine Lupe. (I excluded Fishgurl because of a standing death threat. haha)

I agree - although the hype machine has always been there.

While I don't have sympathy for those who are getting overhyped (they are going to live comfortably if they manage their money right), I do think they are also being pushed before they are truly ready to fill those shoes. They were hyped before they could really hone their craft. They may be decent actors, but not strong enough (yet) to carry a film (or franchise) - but the studios and agents see their pretty young faces and think that that's sufficient to get them out there before they're fully ripe. And they might be right - for a film or two; burn them out and replace them with another new young pretty face.

Jon Hamm is a great counterexample. He's been a working actor for a long time before Mad Men. But would he have been ready 10 years prior to be the leading man type when he was in his 20s? He likely grew into it over time, and when Mad Men came along, he was the right man in the right project at the right time.

Bryan Cranston - who would've thought the goofy father from Malcolm in the Middle could be such an amazing dramatic actor? Again, who knows, he may have had the dramatic chops all along, but it's also likely he probably wouldn't be able to carry a dramatic show like that when he was younger - but then fast forward a decade or two, and he ends up being the right actor for the right project at the right time.

I think Elizabeth Olson, Mia Wasikowska, and Jennifer Lawrence and Elle Fanning are great (relatively) newcomers, as well as Andrew Garfield, Paul Dano, and Adam Driver. Jessica Chastain is also relatively new, and I think she's on the road to a great career. Then again, many of these actors have made their mark in indies and major studio films have yet to showcase them to full potential.

quote:

Originally posted by ScarlettO'/Hara:
I think Elizabeth Olson, Mia Wasikowska, and Jennifer Lawrence and Elle Fanning are great (relatively) newcomers, as well as Andrew Garfield, Paul Dano, and Adam Driver. Jessica Chastain is also relatively new, and I think she's on the road to a great career.

Yeah, I don't really know about these... Maybe Jessica Chastain only, but still. Garfield? No.

Michael Fassbender - yes, probably one of the best to come out recently.

I think donquixote is right. I haven't seen a movie star being born in about a decade now. Are we not going to have any more Pitts and Depps, who, yes - were pretty faces - but are amazing actors too?! And I'm not even talking about movie stars like DeNiro or Pacino, and especially Grant or Tracy; you were right, these people are probably somewhere in New York, doing their great job, but don't get enough attention because teenagers decided its the time for Pattinsons and Stewarts to take up the stage.

Its a bit sad, really. It is getting tiring of seeing these pretty faces on screen. Give me "Spencer Tracy"! I sure wish Pacino, DeNiro, Pitt, Depp, Nicholson, etc. would live forever. And I also wish Depp would get back to doing films he was in the 90's, instead of these money-makers he's been doing in the last decade (but, you know, the dude's gotta a family to feed).

I think Tom Hardy has potential to be very good in the future; he's got this Christian Bale chameleon thing going on, or at least he's trying very hard. Also, how about Ryan Gosling, Anne Hathaway?

I never really liked Ryan Gosling or Anne Hathaway. Well... Anne Hathaway really redeemed herself as Catwoman and I'm hoping she goes in an upward trend in Les Mis.

I hate how people praise Ryan because of "Drive" and say "oh, that's the Actor's movie." COME ON! He mugs like crazy in that. Christopher Lee who never spoke in those Hammer Dracula films, which he's not proud of, did a better job in not using dialogue. It was everything around Ryan that made him look good such as the cars, the gloves, the amazing 80s like soundtrack, other actors, and of course the cool scorpion jacket.

Yeah, I thought Ryan's acting in Drive was creepy.

I'd agree with the talent of Fassbender though, and I don't really care about whether he'll get "real" star quality or not - frack that. As long as he does great work, in great movies, what the hell does it matter if he becomes a 'star' or what not? WHy are people so obsessed with that, anyway?

quote:

Originally posted by Degprinsessan:
Yeah, I thought Ryan's acting in Drive was creepy.

Which is part of its power.
Nine-tenths of his character there was below the surface. Years of back story were apparent without ever being explicit.

Ever seen "The Believer"? He's been pretty unique from early on.

As for Hathaway, after her main bit in "Les Miserables", the film audience burst into sustained applause. It was impossible not to; she goes to all kinds of places in one song.

Elle Fanning, by the way, is another to watch.

As to the idea that stardom is done, nah. People thought that after the studio system died, but then we got Clooney, Roberts, Pitt, etc. There will always be actors who grab people's attention in a way that goes beyond the craft - whether or not they have that part down.

Think of all the musicians who were said to be the "next Bob Dylan". None were. Because the mistake was watching for the next Dylan while the first Springsteen was coming along. Same thing with acting. We don't know WHAT will make some future personality impossible to ignore, good actor or not. But we can be sure there will be one. Again and again.

Stanislav, I would agree with you, but if you were to think - what names come to mind of the great actors that came into screen in the last decade? And obviously we're not comparing actors "born" today with actors acting today; that would be just unfair.

Are these actors as good as the old ones were when they were acting in their first decade on the silver screen? Any of the starting actors do the same job in their third film as Pacino did in The Godfather?

I'm still with donquixote on this one and say that real good ones just don't get a chance, because pretty faces, marketable faces are getting all the space now.

quote:

Originally posted by Stanislav Meiner:
Which is part of its power.
Nine-tenths of his character there was below the surface. Years of back story were apparent without ever being explicit.

To me, I thought it was untruthful and out of adjustment. But we're all different.

"Are these actors as good as the old ones were when they were acting in their first decade on the silver screen? Any of the starting actors do the same job in their third film as Pacino did in The Godfather?"

Actually, I think in some cases they're even better. I don't agree with that stars before were born because of talent and today because of appearance. I think it was the exact same way before as well. It's all about making money and 'marketable faces'. The business is even bigger now with millions of projects and millions of aspiring actors, so I would argue that the quality is getting better and better.

quote:

Originally posted by Degprinsessan:

so I would argue that the quality is getting better and better.

Really?

Yep. I'm not only talking about Hollywood though, and there are of course more shit out there than it used to. But yeah, I think there are a large portion of pretty fantastic actors out there, especially in film.

We had a pretty big name producer do a seminar at my school last month and he said that young American actors are on average MUCH better than they were even ten years ago. This is because of improvements in our training and the decreased cost of being able to get experience through student films, new media and producing our own indie work, etc.

That begged a question that a guy in my class had the balls to ask. "If young actors are so much better now, why do you keep showing us the same shitty boring people over and over again?" I felt queasy and wanted to hide but the producer just laughed and explained what should be obvious. It's all about money. Not the money from the box office but the money they have to raise to get the film made. Investors are very risk averse and demand that established names be attached to projects. He went on to say that they recognize they are working with an outdated business model that is starting to bend back on itself at the box office and they are not fooling themselves into believing that many people go to see movies because the actors they hyped as stars at a young age are in them. They need real stars and would love to break new actors in starring roles but it just isn't normally feasible in today's economic climate.

His advice was to keep doing quality work however you can get it and over time it will be like walking through a misty fog. You are just walking along and suddenly realize that you've gotten wet. They also see that and it will be when your time will come. Another thing he said that I thought was encouraging is that they know who you are if you are putting yourself out there and really have the goods. It's just a matter of when the time will come that they can use you. Just don't expect anything big to happen fast. It can but it is the exception and requires unusual circumstances.