Here’s something strange that I have noticed about my generation. Even though we’re pretty much the coveted demographic, we claim very few Hollywood stars among our ranks. Even stranger, out of the few we do have, almost none of them are guys. Why? How is it that we have spent this entire time paying fealty to Hollywood even as they continue to spite our generation in front of the camera? Are we really that young?
When I talk about my generation, I mean Generation Y. (Dammit why did America decide to half-ass generation names just in time for me to earn such a crap title?) We’re also known as (consults Wikipedia) the ‘Net Generation’, the ‘Hipster Generation’ or ‘Generation Next’. Wait, what the hell? My generation has an AKA with the word hipster in it? Also, isn’t Generation Next an old Pepsi campaign? Well, shit. I did a little research to make my point and now I’m just angry.
Aside: To calm down a little, I checked out the next generation in line and found they have a just-as-dumb name in Generation Z. These guys get ‘Internet Generation’ or ‘Generation Text’ for their nicknames. While terrible, it’s still better than a failed Pepsi campaign. (What next, Generation AA? Oh, no, never mind, Wikipedia says the next one will be AO. Poor saps.)
Now, to get back on topic, I feel that Generation Y is behind the previous generations when it comes to putting up bankable, excellent movie stars, especially those of the masculine persuasion. To keep things easy, I’ll round off and refer to Gen Y as anyone born from 1980 to 1995. There doesn’t seem to be an agreed-up list of start/stop dates, with some starting Gen Y as early as 1975 and some starting as late as 1982. However, actual researchers seem to agree on 1980 as the cutoff, so screw everyone else. Science!
Now give me the names of the most bankable stars currently working in Hollywood. Tom Cruise, Tom Hanks, Julia Roberts. Those make sense, right? Well, in a depressing twist, bankable in Hollywood doesn’t mean beloved, talented or Oscar-worthy. According to Forbes, the top ten include Daniel Radcliffe, Shia LaBeouf, Anne Hathaway, Robert Pattinson and Kristen Stewart.
Hey! Guess how these guys got on the list? Franchises! Harry Potter, Transformers and Twilight happened, and they happened to make cash. So let’s say ‘fuck the word bankable’ because it’s arguable that all three of those franchises would still have done well without any of those actors.
So what about reliable? What actors in Generation Y are consistently challenging themselves? Which ones do you see in a movie and go “I like that guy/girl! They’re always good no matter what movie they’re in?” Personally, I’d immediately remove LeBeouf, Pattinson and Stewart. I’d leave Radcliffe and Hathaway in and then add Joseph Gordon-Levitt. Jennifer Lawrence and Elizabeth Olsen have excellent potential, but I don’t think their catalog is big enough yet for me to comfortably say that I would like to see almost every movie they star in.
What exactly does it take to become a beloved, respected actor/actress? With the success of Martha Marcy May Marlene and Winter’s Bone, the leads (Olsen and Lawrence, respectively) were immediately praised as the next big thing. They were welcomed to Hollywood as breakout stars and immediately placed in a tentative pantheon of great actresses. That sure as hell didn’t happen when LeBeouf starred in the first Transformers movie. It wasn’t until I saw Gordon-Levitt in Brick that I really started to believe that he was a truly phenomenal actor.
Are we tougher on guys than on girls, or do we simply have different standards? Certainly the question comes into play when we compare talent with bankability. Male stars are more likely to be bankable in action films, not Oscar-worthy ones. Sure, we all love Liam Neeson, but he’s suddenly so much more popular doing brainless action films like Taken and Unkown than he ever was in Oscar contenders like Rob Roy and Schindler’s List. Does it take a few action vehicles for someone to become a trusted Hollywood go-to guy? Is that why Tom Cruise and Sylvester Stallone are still working? Are they go-to guys because there’s nobody in Generation Y ready to pick up the action hero torch, or is there nobody to pick up the torch because Cruise and Stallone are hogging all the roles?
Back to the talent argument, I think the best way to support my claim is also the most arbitrary one. What Generation Y actors do you see as future Oscar winners? I think this speaks more about talent. Again, it’s all relative, but I think we can agree on a few names. (That way we can also leave out the monetary end. Example: there are more people who decry Stewart as talentless than there are defenders of her abilities, but she’s currently the most monetarily bankable actress in America.)
So here’s the other part of my argument: I think there are quite a few Generation Y women who can and will continue to put out movies that demonstrate their incredible skills, whether or not the movie itself is good. Lawrence, Olsen, Hathaway, Ellen Page, Christina Ricci (Black Snake Moan, anyone?) and Scarlett Johannson. Right off the top of my head, there are over half a dozen women, born 1980-1995 who can and should win Oscars in their lifetime.
So what about the guys? Joseph Gordon-Levitt is a no-brainer. We don’t get Bale or Di Caprio. James Franco only fits Gen Y if we go by non-scientific dating. I actually liked Zac Effron in Me and Orson Welles but he hasn’t done anything since makes him anything special. Chris Evans is great but he has yet to tackle a challenging role that convinces me he’s an esteemed actor. The only other guy I suspect of greatness is Ryan Gosling. That’s it. Two, maybe three guys in Hollywood are both bankable and Oscar-level talented. That’s three out of a potential pool of millions.
Before you say anything, yes, I think part of it is appearance. Women are definitely cast with more thought towards their looks than men are. This means they’re more likely to become famous as they’re younger. Americans seem to love the older action star, be he grizzled or just worldly. This gives guys more leeway in the looks department. But does this explain why so few guys in my generation are taking the really good, meaty, challenging roles from some of the grizzled old guard?
I genuinely have no idea, but I believe that something is wrong in Hollywood. Because the Baby Boomers refuse to go quietly into the night, my generation is going to have a severe shortage of excellent actors and actresses in twenty years. Just take a look at your local theater. The Baby Boomers and Gen X’ers are still throwing their heroes up on screen, even if they’re no longer within a decade of the role they’re playing. Seriously, some of these guys need to calm down and start playing grandfatherly roles.
What do you think? Do I have a good argument here? Do you think I’m missing the point? Are you pissed off that I left someone off my list? Let me hear it and maybe I’ll revise this entire argument just to prove you wrong.
No comments:
Post a Comment