|
Post by pupdurcs on Jul 15, 2019 4:10:18 GMT
Great choice. I think people forget just big Snipes really was. I think in his prime he was almost getting paid as much as Denzel was (coincidentally they both appeared in Spike Lee's Mo Better Blues, though that was much earlier on in Wesley's career, so he was supporting Denzel), and shared equal billing and screentime with big-stars like Stallone and Connery. However Snipes' made a lot of bad career choices as well, when he did Blade he was actually in need of a hit, because his last few films prior like Murder at 1600, and The Fan with DeNiro had proven to be costly duds, as well his attempts to chase that Passenger 57 money, with diminishing returns (Drop Zone, Money Train etc...). What ultimately did Snipes in though, was his arrogance in thinking that he didn't need to pay his taxes. This led to a career in straight to DVD actioneers for many years, which I don't think is fair, because unlike other action stars of the time who had also gone the straight to DVD route like Seagal, Snipes could actually act. Seeing any clips from the cheap looking Art of War 2, made me a bit sad. I don't think Blade gets its due. Sure it's not what we think of as a conventional comic-book film, but I think its success proved that you could adapt lesser known properties, and have some level of success. Heck The Blade character himself had never had a series prior to that movie, some of the mythology of that film, like Kris Kristofferson's Whistler mentor character, was directly created for that film. Though, honestly, I probably prefer Blade 2 overall. It's just got some damn fine action sequences, and with del toro in the directors chair, it's really stylish overall, even if the movie does tend to overuse CGI a bit too much for my liking. To be fair, Denzel didn't really hit what was considered the the peak of the A-list payscale (20 million per movie) till the early 2000's, when his string of consistent openings made it difficult for studios not to pay him the top rate. By that time, Snipes career was beginning to falter. But certainly in the 1990's, I'd say there was little to seperate them in terms of bankability. Where Denzel had the edge was prestige. He was already an Oscar winner and multiple-nominee. Snipes never caught on with the Academy, though I feel he had several performances worth considering....but all mostly in genres disrespected by awards/Oscars. Like I said, if his performance as Simon Phoenix in Demolition Man came in the later 2000s era, maybe awards notice might have been more possible. A supporting nod in Mo Better Blues , where he does sizzling work with Denzel, would have been deserved, but many Spike Lee Joints and performances have been denied their due at awards season. New Jack City, Sugar Hill, White Men Can't Jump...Like I said, a great actor who never fully got his due when he should have, and saw his career fall off far earlier than it should have. I don't think Blade gets it full due either, but I've noticed a push in recent years by at least some film journalists to give it credit for kick starting the Marvel Superhero renessaince that some try to credit Bryan Singer's X-Men with, which clearly stole a lot of Blades aesthetic. I think Blade also used Bullet Time before The Matrix. It's a really ground-breaking action film. I like Blade 2 as well. I slightly prefer the original, but as far as quality goes, they are neck and neck for me.
|
|
|
Post by therealcomicman117 on Jul 15, 2019 5:03:04 GMT
Great choice. I think people forget just big Snipes really was. I think in his prime he was almost getting paid as much as Denzel was (coincidentally they both appeared in Spike Lee's Mo Better Blues, though that was much earlier on in Wesley's career, so he was supporting Denzel), and shared equal billing and screentime with big-stars like Stallone and Connery. However Snipes' made a lot of bad career choices as well, when he did Blade he was actually in need of a hit, because his last few films prior like Murder at 1600, and The Fan with DeNiro had proven to be costly duds, as well his attempts to chase that Passenger 57 money, with diminishing returns (Drop Zone, Money Train etc...). What ultimately did Snipes in though, was his arrogance in thinking that he didn't need to pay his taxes. This led to a career in straight to DVD actioneers for many years, which I don't think is fair, because unlike other action stars of the time who had also gone the straight to DVD route like Seagal, Snipes could actually act. Seeing any clips from the cheap looking Art of War 2, made me a bit sad. I don't think Blade gets its due. Sure it's not what we think of as a conventional comic-book film, but I think its success proved that you could adapt lesser known properties, and have some level of success. Heck The Blade character himself had never had a series prior to that movie, some of the mythology of that film, like Kris Kristofferson's Whistler mentor character, was directly created for that film. Though, honestly, I probably prefer Blade 2 overall. It's just got some damn fine action sequences, and with del toro in the directors chair, it's really stylish overall, even if the movie does tend to overuse CGI a bit too much for my liking. To be fair, Denzel didn't really hit what was considered the the peak of the A-list payscale (20 million per movie) till the early 2000's, when his string of consistent openings made it difficult for studios not to pay him the top rate. By that time, Snipes career was beginning to falter. But certainly in the 1990's, I'd say there was little to seperate them in terms of bankability. Where Denzel had the edge was prestige. He was already an Oscar winner and multiple-nominee. Snipes never caught on with the Academy, though I feel he had several performances worth considering....but all mostly in genres disrespected by awards/Oscars. Like I said, if his performance as Simon Phoenix in Demolition Man came in the later 2000s era, maybe awards notice might have been more possible. A supporting nod in Mo Better Blues , where he does sizzling work with Denzel, would have been deserved, but many Spike Lee Joints and performances have been denied their due at awards season. New Jack City, Sugar Hill, White Men Can't Jump...Like I said, a great actor who never fully got his due when he should have, and saw his career fall off far earlier than it should have. I don't think Blade gets it full due either, but I've noticed a push in recent years by at least some film journalists to give it credit for kick starting the Marvel Superhero renessaince that some try to credit Bryan Singer's X-Men with, which clearly stole a lot of Blades aesthetic. I think Blade also used Bullet Time before The Matrix. It's a really ground-breaking action film. I like Blade 2 as well. I slightly prefer the original, but as far as quality goes, they are neck and neck for me. His work in Mo Better Blues is great. I also quite liked his performance in his second and last Lee collaboration Jungle Fever. There he plays a character who makes some questionable decisions, and comes off perfectly. I'm honestly surprised he and Lee never worked together again, prior to Chi-Raq, and all the tax evasion stuff, considering Jungle Fever did pretty well. Blade's definitely been forgotten a bit in the pantheon of important comic book movies, just because it's a lot more small-scaled paced, compared to the shared universe flicks we get these days, but it shouldn't be. It's still a really good movie, wonderfully moody, and with some great color pallets to boot. I think it also doesn't get credit, for playing an important role in helping to make the concept of the vampire more palatable for general audiences in an action context, not just a horror one.
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Jul 15, 2019 11:07:24 GMT
Jim BrownGenre: BlacksploitationI wasn't going to do another profile but the recent talk for Wesley Snipes and my own posts on Al Freeman Jr and Ivan Dixon in the "Underappreciated" actors thread got me to think about the great - in a lot of ways sports, civil rights, individuality - Jim BrownAn iconic figure - an equivalent in the black community of only a handful of sports figures of his time - Jesse Owens, Joe Louis, Willie Mays etc. who left football after just 9 seasons - at his peak. He is still reasonably argued as the greatest running back ever. That then translated not just to a film career but several film careers - first as an action star in The Dirty Dozen and 100 Rifles which had a taboo shattering sex scene with Raquel Welch - now that's a thread idea too . Brown then eventually dovetailed that action work into the burgeoning Blacksploitation genre and his films in the here are unique and big in comparable ways to arguably lesser actors imo Ron O'Neal's Superfly, Richard Roundtree's Shaft - the artistic merits of which are argued (somewhat amusingly but incongruously) in Spike Lee's hit or miss Blackkklansman (2018). Slaughter, Slaughter's Big Rip-Off, 3 The Hardway, The Slams may not be the best in this genre - Shaft and Superfly are better as "films" than Brown's Slaughter is - but it was the very fact that Brown was playing in it all that gave it some credibility and odd meaning. What's astonishing about Brown is how he mixed genres in this era from urban action to Westerns to a legitimately great non-exploitation performance that's terrifying - James Toback's "Fingers" - he goes outside Blacksploitation because he had a career before it too. Brown is an amazing figure in America acting and culture in a way that the other people you can mention in this specific genre - O'Neal, Roundtree, Fred Williamson, Pam Grier really aren't comparable because as big as they were they were really just personas (except Williamson who was never Brown's real life equal anyway). Brown's Blacksploitation films connect to and are separate from his action films - his work in the genre is tied much more to his anti-hero public persona which he was able to use for great effect. He came first as an actor and as a celebrity and he was bigger and fits into many side things that tie into this genre too - best athlete turned actor (?) - well he was that for a time, he's actually great in Any Given Sunday too (1999) and an actor and man who carved his own way in this genre and wholly outside of it. But in his Blacksploitation films there's an undercurrent that he's acting AND he's Jim Brown the guy whom walked away from big football money, walked into the movies, stood side by side in civil rights marches and did it all his own way. Brown in 1973's "The Slams" - Blacksploitation with more on its mind than you'd think - I'd suspect Tarantino could wax poetic about it for days:
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Jul 16, 2019 12:37:03 GMT
Kevin CostnerGenre: Sports MovieOh Kevin! Simultaneously one of the most popular leading men of his time and one of the most disrespected, who had an almighty downfall as a movie star (and filmmaker) that he never truly recovered from. It can be easy to forget just how big and impactful a star Kevin Costner was, as he hasn't been a truly A-list star in going close to two decades now. But when he was on top, you had the feeling here was another Gary Cooper or Gregory Peck, or someone of that "we don't make 'em like this anymore ilk". Full disclosure....I'm not even a fan of Cooper and regard him as probably the worst actor to have won two Oscars. But I can appreciate the qualities of steadfastness and honesty and integrity that people could find appealing. With his boyish, mid-western good-guyness, Costner had the appeal in spades. Almost a Tom Hanks with more conventional sex appeal.
Costner tapped deeply into that by trying to dominate (and ressucitate) two very American genres. The Western ( which Costner's impact in is well worth covering seperately) and the Sports Movie.
I'm not sure there has ever been a star who reached Costner's level of stardom who has ever been part of as many sports films as he had. He was making them before he became a major star (Chasing Dreams, American Flyers), he was making them while he was a full blown international megastar ( Field Of Dreams, Bull Durahm) and he's continued to make them since his star fell (Draft Day, McFarland USA).
Such is Costner's wizard- like appeal in the genre that he managed to make possibly the only great film about golf in Tin Cup. And that is a sport that's really difficult to sell as cinematically interesting (Happy Gilmore being a possible exception).
It's easy to see why Costner's virtues as a movie star worked so well in this genre. It's Americana through and through. Pulling yourself up from your bootstraps, working hard, overcoming adversity and trying to do it with honor. It's the quintessential mid-western credo, and Costner applies that to the genre. It's been good to him, and he's been good to it. Madonna might want to barf in his presence because of how uncool she found him, and he hasn't been a big star for a very long time....but credit where it's due, Kevin Costner has a case for being the single most impactful star in Sports movies across the board. Here is Costner in a great scene from baseball classic, Bull Durahm:
|
|
|
Post by therealcomicman117 on Jul 16, 2019 18:33:24 GMT
I think a key to Costner's success is that he kinda looks like a "regular guy". He's got movie star appeal, but he always comes off like he could live next door. It's one of the reasons why he works so well in sports movies. He's incredibly amicable to your average person, whether you consider him bland or not as a performer. It's believable he could be a pitcher, or a football player and so on.
It's interesting to note that his sports roles also kinda chart his career trajectory. His first sports film the underseen forgotten American Flyers, he comes off rather raw, like he wants to prove something, but by the time we got to For the Love of the Game, or much later on Draft Day, he's comes off more seasoned, and a lot less like he's vigorous. Of course age also played a part in there, but I also get the feeling that he played it off like he knew that his star-power was falling.
My favorite sports movie of his is probably either Tin-Cup (if you wanna talk great golf movies, I'd also mention Caddyshack), or Bull Durham. The first because I've seen it so many times on TV, and I'm always impressed by how much I enjoy it, and the later because it's probably has one of the best written scripts for a sports movie ever. "This game's fun, OK? Fun goddamnit. And don't hold the ball so hard, OK? It's an egg. Hold it like an egg." Ironically, or not perhaps not all that surprising both movies were written and directed by Ron Shelton, a former minor-league baseball turned writer / director who's probably underrated in the pantheon of sports movie director (I can think of very few), as the majority of his filmography consists of those types of films.
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Jul 16, 2019 21:30:47 GMT
I think a key to Costner's success is that he kinda looks like a "regular guy". He's got movie star appeal, but he always comes off like he could live next door. It's one of the reasons why he works so well in sports movies. He's incredibly amicable to your average person, whether you consider him bland or not as a performer. It's believable he could be a pitcher, or a football player and so on. It's interesting to note that his sports roles also kinda chart his career trajectory. His first sports film the underseen forgotten American Flyers, he comes off rather raw, like he wants to prove something, but by the time we got to For the Love of the Game, or much later on Draft Day, he's comes off more seasoned, and a lot less like he's vigorous. Of course age also played a part in there, but I also get the feeling that he played it off like he knew that his star-power was falling. My favorite sports movie of his is probably either Tin-Cup (if you wanna talk great golf movies, I'd also mention Caddyshack), or Bull Durham. The first because I've seen it so many times on TV, and I'm always impressed by how much I enjoy it, and the later because it's probably has one of the best written scripts for a sports movie ever. "This game's fun, OK? Fun goddamnit. And don't hold the ball so hard, OK? It's an egg. Hold it like an egg." Ironically, or not perhaps not all that surprising both movies were written and directed by Ron Shelton, a former minor-league baseball turned writer / director who's probably underrated in the pantheon of sports movie director (I can think of very few), as the majority of his filmography consists of those types of films. Damn, can't believe I forgot Caddyshack, which is indeed legendary. Appreciate you pulling me up on that. I'd say Tin Cup maybe counts as the only "serious" great golf film. Caddyshack is great (and I do rate Happy Gilmore as well), but they are outrageous comic farces. Very interesting (and astute) take on how Costner's performances in the genre have evolved over the years to reflect his career trajectory. I'd have to agree. Question: Among the current crop of leading men, say under 40, do you are anyone that could impact the Sports genre similarly to Costner? No leading man ever really took to it like him (or if they did it was mainly in one franchise like Stallone in the Rocky films). For some reason, I feel like Ryan Gosling could really make a mark in sports films if he wanted to, but so far he's only done a supporting role in Remember The Titans. Guess you really need to actually have some sort of passion for sports to gravitate to the material the way Costner does.
|
|
|
Post by therealcomicman117 on Jul 17, 2019 1:52:58 GMT
I think a key to Costner's success is that he kinda looks like a "regular guy". He's got movie star appeal, but he always comes off like he could live next door. It's one of the reasons why he works so well in sports movies. He's incredibly amicable to your average person, whether you consider him bland or not as a performer. It's believable he could be a pitcher, or a football player and so on. It's interesting to note that his sports roles also kinda chart his career trajectory. His first sports film the underseen forgotten American Flyers, he comes off rather raw, like he wants to prove something, but by the time we got to For the Love of the Game, or much later on Draft Day, he's comes off more seasoned, and a lot less like he's vigorous. Of course age also played a part in there, but I also get the feeling that he played it off like he knew that his star-power was falling. My favorite sports movie of his is probably either Tin-Cup (if you wanna talk great golf movies, I'd also mention Caddyshack), or Bull Durham. The first because I've seen it so many times on TV, and I'm always impressed by how much I enjoy it, and the later because it's probably has one of the best written scripts for a sports movie ever. "This game's fun, OK? Fun goddamnit. And don't hold the ball so hard, OK? It's an egg. Hold it like an egg." Ironically, or not perhaps not all that surprising both movies were written and directed by Ron Shelton, a former minor-league baseball turned writer / director who's probably underrated in the pantheon of sports movie director (I can think of very few), as the majority of his filmography consists of those types of films. Damn, can't believe I forgot Caddyshack, which is indeed legendary. Appreciate you pulling me up on that. I'd say Tin Cup maybe counts as the only "serious" great golf film. Caddyshack is great (and I do rate Happy Gilmore as well), but they are outrageous comic farces. Very interesting (and astute) take on how Costner's performances in the genre have evolved over the years to reflect his career trajectory. I'd have to agree. Question: Among the current crop of leading men, say under 40, do you are anyone that could impact the Sports genre similarly to Costner? No leading man ever really took to it like him (or if they did it was mainly in one franchise like Stallone in the Rocky films). For some reason, I feel like Ryan Gosling could really make a mark in sports films if he wanted to, but so far he's only done a supporting role in Remember The Titans. Guess you really need to actually have some sort of passion for sports to gravitate to the material the way Costner does. Hmm, interesting question. Gosling is a good potential example, but I feel like he wants to do whatever he wants. Plus I just realized he's not currently signed on to anything after First Man. I'm assuming he might be taking a bit of a break. I was actually thinking Michael B. Jordan, if you're taking about current actors. He's done the Creed movies (spinoffs of the Rocky movies of course), which have been the only recently sport films to make any sort of dent, that I can think of, and I could see him doing a serious "athlete biopic" or something of that sort, down the road. It's actually really hard to think of a proper answer, because we're in a much different era of films, largely dominated by superhero movies. The amount of noteworthy sports movies that get released every year, has decreased rather substantially. Plus as you pointed out, there hasn't been an actor who had an affinity for doing sports films, quite like Costner did.
|
|
urbanpatrician
Based
"I just wanna go back, back to 1999. back to hit me baby one more time" - Charli XCX
Posts: 4,715
Likes: 2,293
|
Post by urbanpatrician on Jul 17, 2019 9:48:31 GMT
Charlton Heston
Genre: Action/Sci-fi/Swashbuckling
Charlton Heston has had one of the longest and most remarkable careers in Hollywood history. Doing films as early as the 50s and remained active in a couple of brief roles up until the 90s as a grumpy old man. But I've always felt he has been somewhat underrated, or at least not thought about or talked about enough. When people think Old Hollywood, the names James Stewart and Cary Grant are more often to come up...... those you can refer to as the common man. And among other genre and action stars, there's Humphrey Bogart, John Wayne, and Clint Eastwood. Then after the iconography of those people, then you may begin to get to a revisionism of Charlton Heston. It is strange for someone who has been in some of the most popular films of all time and has been doing it for so long, and according to the audience's box office numbers even in the 70s..... apparently did not start to lose box office appeal until somewhere into the late 70s. But such as it is, he has not been revised in a way that Bogart or Stewart or Dean have. Or Eastwood eventually will.
If you were to ask a very young film watcher, they are more likely to know him as that evil guns and firearms endorsing nut stuck to an old period where people were toting guns around and lifting them up in the air doing tribal dances like it was cool. Because their fellow SJWs in some SJW circle has pointed that out through some forum posts that HE is the rifle man, the only time you may see him talked about on some film forums is for that.
But I think his contribution to films has been unique. He is the epitome of a leading man to me. He has a very strong theatricality to him that makes him ideal for monologue oriented theatrical acting. I think he is a theater actor at heart, but apparently ended up as primarily an action star. Reading his early bio, he originally auditioned for early parts under the fancy and pretentions of a theater actor. I think the reason he eventually became an action star is that while he can do Shakespeare, he seems somewhat different of a Shakespearean actor than Olivier or Brando. Following Brando's success with A Streetcar Named Desire, Brando was inserted into some Hollywood vehicles. Some action films, a few bible epics, and the kinda stuff Heston was also doing popular at the time. But he was still not loved as much as he was in A Streetcar Named Desire. I think it comes down to heart and soul. I can see how Brando kinda failed at being the type of action star Heston was for a reason. While I think Heston has the ability to make a good attempt at Shakespeare, he ultimately didn't possess the heart and soul of Brando. And he didn't have the status of an Olivier at the time to try to become the 2nd apprentice to Olivier. Ultimately the influence of Olivier was too strong in the 50s that it would not have been a good idea to try to earn the acclaim that Larry did for his Shakespeare films. It probably would've never worked. Heston's best scenes in Ben-Hur does have Shakespearean tinges to it, but they were ultimately the kind of leftover dramatics that have been the type to be historically harshly criticized. He was not as talented as Olivier. It's not a harsh criticism. I just believe that's why actors do what they're good at. Olivier would look silly shooting apes and playing Moses or some Spanish general. Heston apparently worked with Laurence Olivier once to my knowledge in a play that flopped in the early 60s. He definitely in his heart and soul was interested in pursuing that brand of acting. He turned down the Marilyn Monroe comedy Let's Make Love in 1960... a film probably sold on the popularity of Marilyn but would not have earned him any artistic acclaim other than him being in it.
The real turning point in Heston's career came when he became the type of actor that could have a cult built around him for his contribution in the medium of genre television. The genre science fiction started to earn a cult in the 50s not only in films but in TV. The Twilight Zone and Alfred Hitchcock Presents as some of the most famous examples. Hitchcock built his cult and enhanced it. Heston started to transition into sci-fi films in the late 60s.... with the sci-fi classic Planet of the Apes regarded as one of the most famous sci-fi films of all time. I see him as that type of actor that could've done Star Wars. He could've had that cult built around him. That type of passionate sci-fi loving nerd cult. The type that watches Star Trek and The Twilight Zone. I think that group of audience was interconnected in the 50s and 60s, and if you were to ask me I bet the majority were Hitchcock fans. I mention this point because can anyone not see him playing Han Solo? Because I think he would've been even better than Harrison Ford. Sure he doesn't have Ford's goofiness, but he probably would've had a better idea in mind about how to approach the character. I think he would've been even better as an older Jedi Knight, but it's a shame I never got to see him playing a Star Wars character.
Following Planet of the Apes, studios decided that Heston was still a marketable commodity and eventually continued his marketable trend in action films and had him became an action star in some disaster and airplane explosion epics. Also the film Soylent Green which also seem to have a disaster film tinge to it, but that sums up his career for me. His acting has always seemed to intangibly point to that feeling of disaster and panic. Some of his most famous scenes in history is him wretched onto the ground in anguish. Exactly what I mean by him giving off the feeling of disaster and panic.
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Jul 17, 2019 14:50:18 GMT
Charlton Heston
Genre: Action/Sci-fi/SwashbucklingCharlton Heston has had one of the longest and most remarkable careers in Hollywood history. Doing films as early as the 50s and remained active in a couple of brief roles up until the 90s as a grumpy old man. But I've always felt he has been somewhat underrated, or at least not thought about or talked about enough. When people think Old Hollywood, the names James Stewart and Cary Grant are more often to come up...... those you can refer to as the common man. And among other genre and action stars, there's Humphrey Bogart, John Wayne, and Clint Eastwood. Then after the iconography of those people, then you may begin to get to a revisionism of Charlton Heston. It is strange for someone who has been in some of the most popular films of all time and has been doing it for so long, and according to the audience's box office numbers even in the 70s..... apparently did not start to lose box office appeal until somewhere into the late 70s. But such as it is, he has not been revised in a way that Bogart or Stewart or Dean have. Or Eastwood eventually will. If you were to ask a very young film watcher, they are more likely to know him as that evil guns and firearms endorsing nut stuck to an old period where people were toting guns around and lifting them up in the air doing tribal dances like it was cool. Because their fellow SJWs in some SJW circle has pointed that out through some forum posts that HE is the rifle man, the only time you may see him talked about on some film forums is for that. But I think his contribution to films has been unique. He is the epitome of a leading man to me. He has a very strong theatricality to him that makes him ideal for monologue oriented theatrical acting. I think he is a theater actor at heart, but apparently ended up as primarily an action star. Reading his early bio, he originally auditioned for early parts under the fancy and pretentions of a theater actor. I think the reason he eventually became an action star is that while he can do Shakespeare, he seems somewhat different of a Shakespearean actor than Olivier or Brando. Following Brando's success with A Streetcar Named Desire, Brando was inserted into some Hollywood vehicles. Some action films, a few bible epics, and the kinda stuff Heston was also doing popular at the time. But he was still not loved as much as he was in A Streetcar Named Desire. I think it comes down to heart and soul. I can see how Brando kinda failed at being the type of action star Heston was for a reason. While I think Heston has the ability to make a good attempt at Shakespeare, he ultimately didn't possess the heart and soul of Brando. And he didn't have the status of an Olivier at the time to try to become the 2nd apprentice to Olivier. Ultimately the influence of Olivier was too strong in the 50s that it would not have been a good idea to try to earn the acclaim that Larry did for his Shakespeare films. It probably would've never worked. Heston's best scenes in Ben-Hur does have Shakespearean tinges to it, but they were ultimately the kind of leftover dramatics that have been the type to be historically harshly criticized. He was not as talented as Olivier. It's not a harsh criticism. I just believe that's why actors do what they're good at. Olivier would look silly shooting apes and playing Moses or some Spanish general. Heston apparently worked with Laurence Olivier once to my knowledge in a play that flopped in the early 60s. He definitely in his heart and soul was interested in pursuing that brand of acting. He turned down the Marilyn Monroe comedy Let's Make Love in 1960... a film probably sold on the popularity of Marilyn but would not have earned him any artistic acclaim other than him being in it. The real turning point in Heston's career came when he became the type of actor that could have a cult built around him for his contribution in the medium of genre television. The genre science fiction started to earn a cult in the 50s not only in films but in TV. The Twilight Zone and Alfred Hitchcock Presents as some of the most famous examples. Hitchcock built his cult and enhanced it. Heston started to transition into sci-fi films in the late 60s.... with the sci-fi classic Planet of the Apes regarded as one of the most famous sci-fi films of all time. I see him as that type of actor that could've done Star Wars. He could've had that cult built around him. That type of passionate sci-fi loving nerd cult. The type that watches Star Trek and The Twilight Zone. I think that group of audience was interconnected in the 50s and 60s, and if you were to ask me I bet the majority were Hitchcock fans. I mention this point because can anyone not see him playing Han Solo? Because I think he would've been even better than Harrison Ford. Sure he doesn't have Ford's goofiness, but he probably would've had a better idea in mind about how to approach the character. I think he would've been even better as an older Jedi Knight, but it's a shame I never got to see him playing a Star Wars character. Following Planet of the Apes, studios decided that Heston was still a marketable commodity and eventually continued his marketable trend in action films and had him became an action star in some disaster and airplane explosion epics. Also the film Soylent Green which also seem to have a disaster film tinge to it, but that sums up his career for me. His acting has always seemed to intangibly point to that feeling of disaster and panic. Some of his most famous scenes in history is him wretched onto the ground in anguish. Exactly what I mean by him giving off the feeling of disaster and panic. Nice one. You really delivered Not much more to add. You really covered most of the ground here with Chuck in this genre.
|
|
cherry68
Based
Man is unhappy because he doesn't know he's happy. It's only that.
Posts: 3,596
Likes: 2,073
|
Post by cherry68 on Jul 17, 2019 16:46:27 GMT
urbanpatrician I can see Heston playing Han Solo, Obi Wan Kenobi, Dart Vader and even Chewbacca. Actually I would have liked to see him playing them all.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2019 16:57:42 GMT
How about Jean Sorel and giallo? I can't imagine that any one actor ever made more giallo films. Mattsby pacinoyesAnd he did it all while looking like this, I might add...
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Jul 17, 2019 17:04:46 GMT
urbanpatrician I can see Heston playing Han Solo, Obi Wan Kenobi, Dart Vader and even Chewbacca. Actually I would have liked to see him playing them all. This makes me laugh, because it's actually true. Chuck could play all those roles (he's about tall enough for Chewy) Chuck often got knocked for being a bit "stiff" as a film actor (a common critique aimed at classically trained stage actors who move into film), but you can't deny the man was versatile.
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Jul 17, 2019 17:39:52 GMT
@tyler - Yes I think it's safe to call Sorel the King of the giallo although look how odd the giallo is - he never worked with Argento, nor did the queen of giallo Edwige Fenech (photo below) - nor did they work with each other (I think?), giallo acting often didn't matter which is why so few actors shined in it more than once. For females it had pornographic/sexist elements since you wanted to see the deaths of beautiful women not ew.........acting. A giallo with great performances in it is somewhat rare in either genre - and that makes sense - Asia Argento is amazing in The Stendahl Syndrome and never close in anything else because what that acting needed well no other picture could have needed. But Sorel could carry giallo pictures and make you think the plots, however ludicrous seemed grounded - he could play wealthy, mysterious or ordinary. He's the king and his queen, the barely talented Edwige Fenech below who is sexy as hell on screen far more than in still photos and who you are absolutely dying to kill........um..........kiss
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Jul 18, 2019 19:44:21 GMT
Michael DouglasGenre: Erotic ThrillerThe Great Michael Douglas is without question or exaggeration one of the most important leading men in the history of American film. Because he represented something primal and visceral at the right place, at the right time. In the 1980's (and into the early 90's) the career of Douglas began to peak right at a moment in society when men, particularly middle class white men, we're going through an existensial identity crisis. Wheras his father Kirk represented the post-war straggler or heel, Michael in the age of the yuppie, became the onscreen personification of the ambitions and fears of the upwardly mobile white male, for an entire generation. It's incredibly rare for any actor to have this level of impact and audience identification. Yet somehow, Douglas managed it in several genres, like drama (Wall Street), black comedy ( War Of The Roses) and social satire (Falling Down).
Douglas impact as a leading man across film and in society was huge. It's especially surprising since he was a relative late-bloomer as an A-list leading man, and had a fairly short peak. About 12-13 years. But he sure crammed a lot in.
Arguably his biggest impact was becoming the male representative of the Erotic Thriller, a genre designed to titilate and excite, that drew controversy and social commentary like flies. Kicking off with 1987's Fatal Attraction, Douglas played Dan, a solid middle class husband and father who embarks on an exciting affair with Glenn Close. Glenn's character turns into every man's worst nightmare, a bunny boiling nutcase who cannot accept the fling is over. Needless to say the film was a massive hit that spawned a thousand headlines and think pieces.
Douglas had somehow become a filmic avatar, and he wasn't about to waste this opportunity. He went back to the erotic well, with arguably even greater success in Basic Instinct, where once again, he's a hapless dude trying to survive the clutches of a man eating woman (played wonderfully by the panty free Sharon Stone). The formula got successfully repeated in Disclosure (this time Demi Moore playing the vixen out to destroy him) and did an interesting gender-switcheroo on the workplace sexual harrasment debate.
That Douglas kept on hitting the zeitgeist over and over again, in this genre (and others) is testament to his nose for material, but also to his unique skills and qualities as a screen actor. Mike, we salute you, king of the erotic thriller!
Here's Michael in da club (in a ridiculous v-neck sweater!) in Basic Instinct trying to get some booty from bi-sexual Sharon Stone....
|
|
|
Post by therealcomicman117 on Jul 19, 2019 2:51:50 GMT
I was actually considering Douglas as my first write up, when it came to erotic thrillers.
Not only was Douglas's run as a major star over a specific period, but he was already 40 when Romancing The Stone made him a movie star. Of course he had acted prior, and also had his production company where he helped produce films like One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest, but he struggled for a while to get under the shadow of his father Kirk, even with him being involved in huge hits like Coma and The China Syndrome.
It makes his run as a erotic thriller star all the more noteworthy because he was already middle-aged when he did Fatal Attraction. To me Douglas is great at playing "scummy yuppies". People who can easily be fooled, but are also not exactly "pure of heart", if you get my drift. Something like Basic Instinct wouldn't have worked as well if another director aside from Verhoeven had done that film. He just got the "trashiness" of Estevez's screenplay better then anyone, and Douglas's performance as a "wrong-headed cop", helps make the flick incredibly entertaining as well. You're never really sure if he's a good or bad until the very end.
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Jul 19, 2019 12:28:41 GMT
I was actually considering Douglas as my first write up, when it came to erotic thrillers. Not only was Douglas's run as a major star over a specific period, but he was already 40 when Romancing The Stone made him a movie star. Of course he had acted prior, and also had his production company where he helped produce films like One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest, but he struggled for a while to get under the shadow of his father Kirk, even with him being involved in huge hits like Coma and The China Syndrome. It makes his run as a erotic thriller star all the more noteworthy because he was already middle-aged when he did Fatal Attraction. To me Douglas is great at playing "scummy yuppies". People who can easily be fooled, but are also not exactly "pure of heart", if you get my drift. Something like Basic Instinct wouldn't have worked as well if another director aside from Verhoeven had done that film. He just got the "trashiness" of Estevez's screenplay better then anyone, and Douglas's performance as a "wrong-headed cop", helps make the flick incredibly entertaining as well. You're never really sure if he's a good or bad until the very end. Would have been cool to see your profile of Douglas. He's a very interesting great actor to me. He's of the same generation of actors as Al Pacino, Robert DeNiro, Jeff Bridges, Dustin Hoffman and Jack Nicholson and in their league talent-wise , but wheras they all became firmly established leading men in the 1970's, as you said, Douglas struggled to get out of the shadow of his father, even though he was an actor in the 70's. He found more notable success as an Oscar winning producer. Then it all clicked when he became middle aged with Romancing The Stone. The charisma, the sheer acting talent, the ability to carry a film with ease....it just happened. It's rare for young actors whom we are familiar with to have such a quantum leap in terms of their ability, onscreen charisma, range and skill-set as they reach middle age. Off the top of my head, something similar happened to Josh Brolin (who also had a famous actor for a father). As a young actor, Brolin was decent enough, but showed little of the exceptional talent he would become as he approached middle age and was cast in No Country For Old Men and American Gangster. Brolin never became the movie star Douglas did, but has become one of the strongest character actors (and occasional leads) in the business, and has certainly made his mark embodying one of the most iconic movie villains of our time in Thanos.Since I've done Douglas, who else are you considering profiling now? Enquiring minds want to know.
|
|
|
Post by therealcomicman117 on Jul 19, 2019 15:54:02 GMT
I was actually considering Douglas as my first write up, when it came to erotic thrillers. Not only was Douglas's run as a major star over a specific period, but he was already 40 when Romancing The Stone made him a movie star. Of course he had acted prior, and also had his production company where he helped produce films like One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest, but he struggled for a while to get under the shadow of his father Kirk, even with him being involved in huge hits like Coma and The China Syndrome. It makes his run as a erotic thriller star all the more noteworthy because he was already middle-aged when he did Fatal Attraction. To me Douglas is great at playing "scummy yuppies". People who can easily be fooled, but are also not exactly "pure of heart", if you get my drift. Something like Basic Instinct wouldn't have worked as well if another director aside from Verhoeven had done that film. He just got the "trashiness" of Estevez's screenplay better then anyone, and Douglas's performance as a "wrong-headed cop", helps make the flick incredibly entertaining as well. You're never really sure if he's a good or bad until the very end. Would have been cool to see your profile of Douglas. He's a very interesting great actor to me. He's of the same generation of actors as Al Pacino, Robert DeNiro, Jeff Bridges, Dustin Hoffman and Jack Nicholson and in their league talent-wise , but wheras they all became firmly established leading men in the 1970's, as you said, Douglas struggled to get out of the shadow of his father, even though he was an actor in the 70's. He found more notable success as an Oscar winning producer. Then it all clicked when he became middle aged with Romancing The Stone. The charisma, the sheer acting talent, the ability to carry a film with ease....it just happened. It's rare for young actors whom we are familiar with to have such a quantum leap in terms of their ability, onscreen charisma, range and skill-set as they reach middle age. Off the top of my head, something similar happened to Josh Brolin (who also had a famous actor for a father). As a young actor, Brolin was decent enough, but showed little of the exceptional talent he would become as he approached middle age and was cast in No Country For Old Men and American Gangster. Brolin never became the movie star Douglas did, but has become one of the strongest character actors (and occasional leads) in the business, and has certainly made his mark embodying one of the most iconic movie villains of our time in Thanos.Since I've done Douglas, who else are you considering profiling now? Enquiring minds want to know. Brolin's a bit different though, as you pointed out, since he took on supporting roles, in addition to occasionally playing the lead, whereas Douglas by that point had enough clout, that he would always be the leading man. Even when he was technically playing a supporting role like in The Ghost and The Darkness, he demand his role be buffed-up, and he'd get top-billing. I'm currently jotting down a bunch of names, but I primarily wanna cover a lot of comedic actors. One in particular that stands out to me is Bill Murray, who I think doesn't get enough respect for his "smart-ass" humor. Another that comes to mind, is Harrison Ford & legal thrillers.
|
|
|
Post by therealcomicman117 on Jul 19, 2019 16:48:56 GMT
Bill Murray
Genre: Comedy - more particularly of the smartass and or slob mentality
Eddie Murphy was already mentioned, so I wanted to highlight another influential comedic actor. Bill Murray started his career in second city, was discovered by Lorne Michaels, becoming Chevy Chase’s replacement on SNL.
Playing multiple characters and honing his skills in skits, made him a natural fit for movies, just like most of the “primetime players”, from that particular period of SNL, such as Belushi and Aykroyd. Teaming up with Harold Ramis and Ivan Reitman, he went on to produce a string of successful comedies, set around the “snobs versus slobs” mentality, or the working class man vs. the system, if you want to take it that far.
What made Murray stand up in comparison to so many of his contemporaries, is that he was rarely over the top, and he seemed like the kind of chill comedian you might wanna hang on. As Gene Siskel once put it, he didn’t even seem like he was acting at all. When he confronts possessed Sigourney Weaver in Ghostbusters for example, he’s not terrified, instead he simple treats her like he would a woman, telling her he doesn’t go out with girls like that. That made him a natural fit for comedy vehicles like Scrooged, and Groundhog Day, where his type of humor was largely palatable, that he could carry those “trapped in fantasy” type scenarios entirely on his shoulder. He wasn’t a Chevy Chase (largely picking mediocre or bad scripts), as he was very picky with his screenplays, nor was he a second banana like Dan Aykroyd, he was almost entirely an original.
Even when Murray was over the top, such as screaming in the graduation day scene in Stripes, it felt earned, or his role in Caddyshack.
Of course Murray would later transition into more art-housy films with directors like Wes Anderson, and Jim Jarmusch, largely due to the failure of later comedic vehicles Larger than Life, and The Man Who Knew Too Little (a movie that I’ll admit that I’m a fan of). He realized that he needed to adapt to age, as he couldn’t simply keep doing the same things over and over again. Still, however, we go back and enjoy those older movies, and see a real comedic genius at work.
|
|
|
Post by TerryMontana on Jul 19, 2019 22:31:45 GMT
I ADORE HIM!!!!!!!!
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Jul 19, 2019 23:23:57 GMT
Bill MurrayGenre: Comedy - more particularly of the smartass and or slob mentalityEddie Murphy was already mentioned, so I wanted to highlight another influential comedic actor. Bill Murray started his career in second city, was discovered by Lorne Michaels, becoming Chevy Chase’s replacement on SNL. Playing multiple characters and honing his skills in skits, made him a natural fit for movies, just like most of the “primetime players”, from that particular period of SNL, such as Belushi and Aykroyd. Teaming up with Harold Ramis and Ivan Reitman, he went on to produce a string of successful comedies, set around the “snobs versus slobs” mentality, or the working class man vs. the system, if you want to take it that far. What made Murray stand up in comparison to so many of his contemporaries, is that he was rarely over the top, and he seemed like the kind of chill comedian you might wanna hang on. As Gene Siskel once put it, he didn’t even seem like he was acting at all. When he confronts possessed Sigourney Weaver in Ghostbusters for example, he’s not terrified, instead he simple treats her like he would a woman, telling her he doesn’t go out with girls like that. That made him a natural fit for comedy vehicles like Scrooged, and Groundhog Day, where his type of humor was largely palatable, that he could carry those “trapped in fantasy” type scenarios entirely on his shoulder. He wasn’t a Chevy Chase (largely picking mediocre or bad scripts), as he was very picky with his screenplays, nor was he a second banana like Dan Aykroyd, he was almost entirely an original. Even when Murray was over the top, such as screaming in the graduation day scene in Stripes, it felt earned, or his role in Caddyshack. Of course Murray would later transition into more art-housy films with directors like Wes Anderson, and Jim Jarmusch, largely due to the failure of later comedic vehicles Larger than Life, and The Man Who Knew Too Little (a movie that I’ll admit that I’m a fan of). He realized that he needed to adapt to age, as he couldn’t simply keep doing the same things over and over again. Still, however, we go back and enjoy those older movies, and see a real comedic genius at work. Good choice, nice write-up. Murray is an absolute legend for me. His deadpan style was similar to Chevy Chase (who was great in his prime, despite turning out by all accounts to be a complete douchebag as a human being. But who can hate Clark Griswold or Fletch), but he definitely wasn't a Chase clone, and was his own unique thing. Of the generation of comic actors that really blew up in the 80's, I probably rate Murray just behind Eddie Murphy and Steve Martin.I agree that while Murray wasn't exactly a second bannana, I think he did a lot of his best work in ensembles ( Ghostbusters, Caddyshack, Kingpin). Of course he had a couple of truly great comedies where he was the lead and driving force ( Scrooged, Groundhog Day), I feel like Murphy and Martin edged him in their ability to carry as many vehicles on their backs as they did. Of course, neither Murphy nor Martin have had quite as successful a second act career as Murray, as an acclaimed darling of indie dramadies. So it's a trade-off I guess.
|
|
|
Post by therealcomicman117 on Jul 20, 2019 1:13:02 GMT
Bill MurrayGenre: Comedy - more particularly of the smartass and or slob mentalityEddie Murphy was already mentioned, so I wanted to highlight another influential comedic actor. Bill Murray started his career in second city, was discovered by Lorne Michaels, becoming Chevy Chase’s replacement on SNL. Playing multiple characters and honing his skills in skits, made him a natural fit for movies, just like most of the “primetime players”, from that particular period of SNL, such as Belushi and Aykroyd. Teaming up with Harold Ramis and Ivan Reitman, he went on to produce a string of successful comedies, set around the “snobs versus slobs” mentality, or the working class man vs. the system, if you want to take it that far. What made Murray stand up in comparison to so many of his contemporaries, is that he was rarely over the top, and he seemed like the kind of chill comedian you might wanna hang on. As Gene Siskel once put it, he didn’t even seem like he was acting at all. When he confronts possessed Sigourney Weaver in Ghostbusters for example, he’s not terrified, instead he simple treats her like he would a woman, telling her he doesn’t go out with girls like that. That made him a natural fit for comedy vehicles like Scrooged, and Groundhog Day, where his type of humor was largely palatable, that he could carry those “trapped in fantasy” type scenarios entirely on his shoulder. He wasn’t a Chevy Chase (largely picking mediocre or bad scripts), as he was very picky with his screenplays, nor was he a second banana like Dan Aykroyd, he was almost entirely an original. Even when Murray was over the top, such as screaming in the graduation day scene in Stripes, it felt earned, or his role in Caddyshack. Of course Murray would later transition into more art-housy films with directors like Wes Anderson, and Jim Jarmusch, largely due to the failure of later comedic vehicles Larger than Life, and The Man Who Knew Too Little (a movie that I’ll admit that I’m a fan of). He realized that he needed to adapt to age, as he couldn’t simply keep doing the same things over and over again. Still, however, we go back and enjoy those older movies, and see a real comedic genius at work. Good choice, nice write-up. Murray is an absolute legend for me. His deadpan style was similar to Chevy Chase (who was great in his prime, despite turning out by all accounts to be a complete douchebag as a human being. But who can hate Clark Griswold or Fletch), but he definitely wasn't a Chase clone, and was his own unique thing. Of the generation of comic actors that really blew up in the 80's, I probably rate Murray just behind Eddie Murphy and Steve Martin.I agree that while Murray wasn't exactly a second bannana, I think he did a lot of his best work in ensembles ( Ghostbusters, Caddyshack, Kingpin). Of course he had a couple of truly great comedies where he was the lead and driving force ( Scrooged, Groundhog Day), I feel like Murphy and Martin edged him in their ability to carry as many vehicles on their backs as they did. Of course, neither Murphy nor Martin have had quite as successful a second act career as Murray, as an acclaimed darling of indie dramadies. So it's a trade-off I guess. Thanks. Chevy Chase is great too, it's just that he was a lot less selective with his roles. For every Fletch or Vacation film, there was also a million Oh Heavenly Dog type roles, and I couldn't see Murray doing a movie like that during his prime. Making a lot of a bad career decisions is part of the reason why he fell into obscurity a bit, after Vegas Vacation. It's interesting to rank 80s comedians, especially the ones you mentioned. I'd say Murphy had the box office, Murray the "artistic drive" (even back during his popularity, his big passion project was a remake of The Razor's Edge), and Martin the longevity, as he was still headlining big comedies well into the 2000s, even if the films were considerably worse, then his 80s run (which might among my favorite of any actor ever), which I always found remarkable given he was sixty years old. Of course Murray works well in ensemble, but generally he's also the guy who's holding everything together, which is probably part of why he can carry his own movie successfully too. One of my favorite Bill Murray movies, that doesn't get enough talked about enough, which also inexplicably tanked back in the day, is also his only film as a director, Quick Change. A really enjoyable and witty crime comedy, where Bill Murray gets to show off his smart-ass and slyness nature to its fullest.
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Jul 20, 2019 3:41:38 GMT
Good choice, nice write-up. Murray is an absolute legend for me. His deadpan style was similar to Chevy Chase (who was great in his prime, despite turning out by all accounts to be a complete douchebag as a human being. But who can hate Clark Griswold or Fletch), but he definitely wasn't a Chase clone, and was his own unique thing. Of the generation of comic actors that really blew up in the 80's, I probably rate Murray just behind Eddie Murphy and Steve Martin.I agree that while Murray wasn't exactly a second bannana, I think he did a lot of his best work in ensembles ( Ghostbusters, Caddyshack, Kingpin). Of course he had a couple of truly great comedies where he was the lead and driving force ( Scrooged, Groundhog Day), I feel like Murphy and Martin edged him in their ability to carry as many vehicles on their backs as they did. Of course, neither Murphy nor Martin have had quite as successful a second act career as Murray, as an acclaimed darling of indie dramadies. So it's a trade-off I guess. Thanks. Chevy Chase is great too, it's just that he was a lot less selective with his roles. For every Fletch or Vacation film, there was also a million Oh Heavenly Dog type roles, and I couldn't see Murray doing a movie like that during his prime. Making a lot of a bad career decisions is part of the reason why he fell into obscurity a bit, after Vegas Vacation. It's interesting to rank 80s comedians, especially the ones you mentioned. I'd say Murphy had the box office, Murray the "artistic drive" (even back during his popularity, his big passion project was a remake of The Razor's Edge), and Martin the longevity, as he was still headlining big comedies well into the 2000s, even if the films were considerably worse, then his 80s run (which might among my favorite of any actor ever), which I always found remarkable given he was sixty years old. To be honest, in terms of longevity, Murphy is probably up there with Martin, despite some big flops. Maybe even moreso. All the Pluto Nash's in the world will not kill the industry's fascination with Murphy as an A-list comedy headliner ( I just read Netflix want to pay him 70 million dollars to do a stand-up special). Murphy has in production or pre and post-production, Dolemite (which is a biopic) , Triplets (sequel to Schwarzneggar/Devito comedy Twins, with Murphy as the third embryo), Beverly Hills Cop 4 and Coming To America 2.It's 2019 and studios are still rolling out the red carpet to Murphy like it's 1988, in hopes of recapturing the magic that made him arguably the greatest comic actor of all time. And maybe the most financially successful .None of the other comedic superstars from the 80's still carry that kind of juice in the industry today. Not Martin and not Murray. It probably helps Murphy that he doesn't seem to age that much. He's looked about 38 for the last 25 years.
|
|
|
Post by therealcomicman117 on Jul 20, 2019 4:15:21 GMT
Thanks. Chevy Chase is great too, it's just that he was a lot less selective with his roles. For every Fletch or Vacation film, there was also a million Oh Heavenly Dog type roles, and I couldn't see Murray doing a movie like that during his prime. Making a lot of a bad career decisions is part of the reason why he fell into obscurity a bit, after Vegas Vacation. It's interesting to rank 80s comedians, especially the ones you mentioned. I'd say Murphy had the box office, Murray the "artistic drive" (even back during his popularity, his big passion project was a remake of The Razor's Edge), and Martin the longevity, as he was still headlining big comedies well into the 2000s, even if the films were considerably worse, then his 80s run (which might among my favorite of any actor ever), which I always found remarkable given he was sixty years old. To be honest, in terms of longevity, Murphy is probably up there with Martin, despite some big flops. Maybe even moreso. All the Pluto Nash's in the world will not kill the industry's fascination with Murphy as an A-list comedy headliner ( I just read Netflix want to pay him 70 million dollars to do a stand-up special). Murphy has in production or pre and post-production, Dolemite (which is a biopic) , Triplets (sequel to Schwarzneggar/Devito comedy Twins, with Murphy as the third embryo), Beverly Hills Cop 4 and Coming To America 2.It's 2019 and studios are still rolling out the red carpet to Murphy like it's 1988, in hopes of recapturing the magic that made him arguably the greatest comic actor of all time. And maybe the most financially successful .None of the other comedic superstars from the 80's still carry that kind of juice in the industry today. Not Martin and not Murray. It probably helps Murphy that he doesn't seem to age that much. He's looked about 38 for the last 25 years. Yeah, Murphy has definitely had a remarkable long career, especially given his inconsistent career post 1990 financial-wise. It's even more remarkable when you consider how many comedy stars flame-out rather quickly, and never truly gain back that any of that popularity they once had. More recently, I think it helps that he hasn't done much in the past decade. Studios, especially those like Netflix are very curious to see what he does next, and will give him money, since he's still a name. Him doing standup is especially huge, since it's been decades since he last spoke on a mic, and in his day he was one of the most popular standup comedians around. People question why Netflix would give him 70m, but I think he's worth at least half of that. I will say though, that I don't think that Triplets and Beverly Hills Cop IV are getting made. Although if that Coming to America sequel proves to be popular enough, I could see it eventually leading to BHC4.
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on Jul 20, 2019 7:30:28 GMT
If Murphy officially signs a contract or says he's willing to do it and a script is ready, studios would make Beverly Hills Cop 4 in a heartbeat. I don't think it's conditional on Coming To America 2 being a hit or not. It could flop (it won't), and they'd still take another chance on Murphy making it rain as Axel Foley.
Triplets does feel a bit shakier in terms of getting out of development phase, as neither Arnie nor Devito carry annywhere the clout they once did, and it's more their baby than Murphy's.
|
|
|
Post by therealcomicman117 on Jul 20, 2019 16:01:18 GMT
Oh I'm not disagreeing that Beverly Hills Cop 4 will probably get off the ground irregardless of how well Coming to America 2 does, I just think major studios are looking that movie and seeing it context of how long Eddie Murphy has been on the big-screen, and if it somehow doesn't do well, then they're might be a bit more hesitant at greenlighting other Eddie Murphy films for a while.
Triplets is more of a case of a completely unnecessary sequel that was announced nearly a decade ago, and has been in development hell. I definitely don't think its getting made. It's just still listed because it was never officially cancelled.
|
|