The TV Addict 

Watching HANCOCK something dawned on me. Will Smith is currently not only the biggest movie star in the world, but like his character in that movie I might even argue he’s the only one of his kind left.

Now when I say movie star, I’m talking about the kind we had many of back in the 1990’s, the kind whose presence in a film could single-handedly guarantee at least a $20 million draw at the box office. We’re talking Jim Carrey, Harrison Ford, Tom Hanks, Will Smith, Tom Cruise, Adam Sandler, Mel Gibson, Bruce Willis and Julia Roberts. These were stars that could get people to see a movie solely based on the fact that they were in it, and would make loads of money. Sure, admittedly, a lot of those films they starred in were high-profile summer blockbuster, which helps things considerably. The spectacle of the movies catered perfectly to the spectacle of their movie stardom.

These days though stars of that caliber seem to have all but disappeared, and I can think of a few reasons why. Some of those above mentioned stars have fallen prey to controversy and/or made idiots of themselves (Mel Gibson, Tom Cruise). Some have distanced themselves willingly from the public or projects (Harrison Ford, Julia Roberts). Some are starting to outstay their welcome, or unsuccessfully struggle between branching out and predictably pigeonholing themselves into the same old shtick (Jim Carrey, Adam Sandler). Throw in the fact that special effects have emerged as stars themselves, tabloids have reached new levels of overexposure, and the rising costs of movies (and hence greater risks) and you have a few more reasons.

Yet I think perhaps the central reason is many stars are diluting their own value. Those actors mentioned above were stars because they were often associated with a very particular image in a very particular type of film: high-profile, high-concept, big budget Hollywood films. Since the 90s many of those actors have more frequently taken on films that stray from that mold, taking on genres not associated with them and their success, or even going so far as to star in much lower profile projects. In other words, many actors want to actually act every now and then and be legitimately recognized for it. As a result, the consistency fans came to except from certain actors and their projects in the 90s is no longer there. That’s not to say these stars aren’t still successful. You’ll find they’ve had several hits in the last few years, but they are almost always films resembling their past successes and that cater to their image, and they are not nearly as consistent or frequent as they used to be. Whenever they do a less mainstream project, the audience goes away.

That need for a certain mainstream consistency is also why many actors who could or should be movie stars aren’t. George Clooney may be a movie star in the classical Hollywood sense in terms of debonair personality, but not in the contemporary Hollywood sense (i.e. financial). His movies don’t make money because he rarely makes movies that are appealing enough to a mainstream audience. There are any number of actors like that, where if they did nothing but mainstream rom-coms or action flicks or (accessible) political thrillers they would have Will Smith levels of stardom.

That’s the thing though. Since catapulting to film success with INDEPENDENCE DAY, Smith has never strayed from the roles and films that made him a movie star in the first place. Even when they’ve been slightly more dramatic (THE PURUSIT OF HAPPYNESS) they’ve nevertheless remained high-profile projects (often just because he was involved). As a result, despite having made one movie a year since 96’s INDEPENDENCE DAY, Will Smith is the same guy he was then, and in many ways is making the same kind of films.

Maybe that is why – as much as I find the guy extremely charming and talented – I find myself wondering if the dying out of the modern movie star isn’t such a bad thing. Then again, I suppose it depends on whom you ask. I respect those actors who may not have the status Smith holds, but who have taken risks, branched out and taken on diverse projects. It earns my loyalty enough so that I’ll see both their low and high profile projects. But of course then there are perhaps those who wish Brad Pitt would stop making artsy Westerns (ASSASSINATION OF JESSE JAMES) and Coen brother farces (BURN AFTER READING) and instead make more movies like the OCEAN’s flicks and TROY.

Who is right? I’m not sure, but I do know that as long as actors increasingly enact their artistic right for diversity, Will Smith will remain very lonely at the top. Then again given the money he makes for himself and the studio, and his popularity with audiences, does anybody really care?

What do you guys think? Is the modern movie star dying out? Did it ever exist in the first place? Do you prefer consistent stars like Will Smith or appreciate actors like Clooney and Pitt who branch out all over the place?