WindingRoad10

WindingRoad10 t1_iu51b0s wrote

Reply to Did NORBIT cost Eddie Murphy the Oscar for DREAMGIRLS? by GLSCinephile

That actually was the "story / rumor" around that time. Eddie was doing well going into that award season. He won the SAG Award, Golden Globe, Critics Choice, & was nominated.

Norbit being released in January (and the response to it), was widely circulated as being the reason he lost. Eddie was a (likable) Hollywood star for 3 decades...this was his first nomination, so I got the feeling that goodwill, along with a fairly strong performance in Dreamgirls, would get him the win. The Norbit came out.

I'm not if Norbit deserves 100% of the blame, but I definitely think it did not help his case.

3

WindingRoad10 t1_iu19hav wrote

Reply to comment by Orphan__of_Kos in There are no movie stars or recognizable names, just super heroes and Tom Cruise by [deleted]

Really? I think these days there are more average looking actors. (Maybe it's because of the amount of content) W

Most of actors that I mentioned rose in ranks in the 90's, 00's. I don't think that era was true escapism. For me, the true escapism was the Golden era of Hollywood.

The 80's & 90's & 00's on were pure entertainment. (Music, video games, cable tv, expanded sports, PPV, etc. were all other forms of competing entertainment)

Still, I believe that was the last era of the true era of the traditional movie star (The "Planet Hollywood" Era). There are "movie stars" these days, but it is different than before.

These days you can have a lead like Bob Odenkirk (Nobody). None of Jordan Peele's movies were huge names before & while starring in his 3 movies. A movie like "Smile" would've starred a recognizable (horror) name. Baby Driver, A Quiet Place, Dune, Old, etc. Even movies that tank (Bros) had non stars lead the movie.

These days, you can easily have an actor who is not necessarily a star lead a film. In the the "escapism era", stars were contracted with studios, so there had to be stars. Now, you can simply be an actor.

In terms of Melissa, She is a recognizable name though (and a brand). She ranked #4 in 2020 in terms of highest paid actresses. (According to Forbes). She's been in the top 5 since 2016.

1

WindingRoad10 t1_iu0hbsi wrote

Reply to There are no movie stars or recognizable names, just super heroes and Tom Cruise by [deleted]

The "age" of the traditional movie star has for the most part ended. But the level of acting from performers hasn't diminished. While there are still plenty of classically "beautiful" Hollywood types, you also now have strong actors who, image wise society would consider to be "normal / average" people. I think this is a positive, depending on the role & the film. Many people connect to it more.

There was an era where movies were true escapism (vs pure entertainment). So the beautiful untouchable was what people wanted. These days, more people can identify with a Melissa McCarthy than they can with a Charlize Theron...There isn't a right or wrong, but the mystery of the start facade is gone. People are totally fine with watching "regular" people in a film now.

In terms of the MCU / DC (which many times get a bad rap). They are a genre that (for the most part) puts out entertaining films that general audiences enjoy. The golden age of Hollywood had your Errol Flynn swashbuckling films that people enjoyed. The were adventure films back then as well.

But in terms of recognizable names, you still have that. Viola Davis, Frances McDormand, Gary Oldman, Tom Hanks, Denzel, Brad Pitt, Leo D., & tons more.

1