Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The list is compiled based off both Warner Bros films’ box office data gathered during Jack Warner’s reign as studio chief (particularly for films directed by Michael Curtiz, Best Director academy award winner whose films were far more consistent at being successful at the box office than those of John Ford’s), and the signficance of the actors’ screen time in those films. Relevant box office data is below.
1. Night and day (1946) w/Cary Grant and Alexis Smith: $7,418,000
2. Casablanca (1942) w/Humphrey Bogart and Ingrid Bergman: $6,859,000
3. Yankee Doodle Dandy (1942) w/James Cagney: $6,523,000
4. Life with Father (1947) w/William Powell and Irene Dunne: $6,455,000
5. Mildred Pierce (1945) w/Joan Crawford and Zachary Scott: $5,638,000
6. The Adventures of Robin Hood (1938) w/Errol Flynn (and Olivia de Havilland): $3,981,000
7. Passage to Marseille (1944) w/Humphrey Bogart (and *Michele Morgan): $3,786,000
*Fun fact: Michele Morgan was one of the actresses in consideration to play Bogart’s leading lady in Casablanca (also considered were Ann Sheridan, Luise Rainer, and Hedy Lamarr) prior to Bergman being cast.
Then I disagree with how they came up with that list.
I can seem people back in 1945 saying, "Wow, I just gotta go see that Joan Crawford movie!", because she had been in many very popular films as the star. I don't there were many people saying, "Wow, I just gotta go see that Zachary Scott move!".
Clark Gable could recite lines, but he could not act.
I think you've mentioned that before, and that is your personal take on it. And that's fine.
But others called him "The King Of Hollywood" for many years. And, "Gable was one of the most consistent box-office performers in the history of Hollywood, appearing on Quigley Publishing's annual Top Ten Money Making Stars Poll sixteen times. He appeared opposite many of the most popular actresses of their time. He frequently acted alongside Joan Crawford, Myrna Loy, Jean Harlow, Lana Turner, Norma Shearer and Ava Gardner."
I think you've mentioned that before, and that is your personal take on it. And that's fine.
But others called him "The King Of Hollywood" for many years. And, "Gable was one of the most consistent box-office performers in the history of Hollywood, appearing on Quigley Publishing's annual Top Ten Money Making Stars Poll sixteen times. He appeared opposite many of the most popular actresses of their time. He frequently acted alongside Joan Crawford, Myrna Loy, Jean Harlow, Lana Turner, Norma Shearer and Ava Gardner."
Gable was a huge star in his day because in his day, stars basically played themselves in every movie. Few really acted. They just changed costumes and recited the lines. Gable was king of this. He was hugely popular. No doubt. But he couldn't act his way out of a phone call.
Real "actors" vs. "movie stars" was perfectly parodied in MY FAVORITE YEAR (a greatly under-rated flick).
Gable was a huge star in his day because in his day, stars basically played themselves in every movie. Few really acted. They just changed costumes and recited the lines. Gable was king of this. He was hugely popular. No doubt. But he couldn't act his way out of a phone call.
Real "actors" vs. "movie stars" was perfectly parodied in MY FAVORITE YEAR (a greatly under-rated flick).
Status:
"Pickleball-Free American"
(set 27 days ago)
Location: St Simons Island, GA
23,542 posts, read 44,230,538 times
Reputation: 16965
Quote:
Originally Posted by phetaroi
I simply disagree with you.
I actually think that Mark S. makes a point that has been debated in the Industry for eons: Stage Presence vs. Camera Presence. There's general consensus in the industry that they are two different skillsets, and crossover from one to another can be difficult for most actors. Clark Gable was amazing in front of a camera, but he never performed on a Broadway stage*. There was likely a good reason for that, as he lacked the technical skills necessary for a good stage actor(as did, I infer, Errol Flynn). On the flipside, you have the case of legendary Broadway actress Tallulah Bankhead, who owned the Great White Way for years but could never really get her Hollywood career off the ground. The apex of it was arguably Lifeboat, a fairly forgettable Hitchcock film. There was a reason that when the role of Regina Giddens was cast in The Little Foxes (one of Bankhead's greatest stage roles), Hollywood producers chose Bette Davis over Bankhead for the role. The deeply emotional performance would require a good number of close-ups, and this was the supreme provenance of Davis, not an actor that was used to working behind a proscenium. Bankhead was understandably bitter about this, but it was what it was.
When Clara Bow was referred to as the "It Girl", the "It' that Hollywood was referring to was camera presence.
*His last stage role was in a minor L.A. Production of The Last Mile in 1930.
I actually think that Mark S. makes a point that has been debated in the Industry for eons: Stage Presence vs. Camera Presence. There's general consensus in the industry that they are two different skillsets, and crossover from one to another can be difficult for most actors. Clark Gable was amazing in front of a camera, but he never performed on a Broadway stage*. There was likely a good reason for that, as he lacked the technical skills necessary for a good stage actor(as did, I infer, Errol Flynn). On the flipside, you have the case of legendary Broadway actress Tallulah Bankhead, who owned the Great White Way for years but could never really get her Hollywood career off the ground. The apex of it was arguably Lifeboat, a fairly forgettable Hitchcock film. There was a reason that when the role of Regina Giddens was cast in The Little Foxes (one of Bankhead's greatest stage roles), Hollywood producers chose Bette Davis over Bankhead for the role. The deeply emotional performance would require a good number of close-ups, and this was the supreme provenance of Davis, not an actor that was used to working behind a proscenium. Bankhead was understandably bitter about this, but it was what it was.
When Clara Bow was referred to as the "It Girl", the "It' that Hollywood was referring to was camera presence.
*His last stage role was in a minor L.A. Production of The Last Mile in 1930.
This post -- I agree with you.
And it's not unlike my thinking when folks are often disappointed when they feel a film hasn't 'lived up to' a novel. Two different mediums.
Decades ago I saw Dean Martin interviewed, and the interviewer said (paraphrased), "When I go to watch one of your movies, it seems like I'm always watching you play Dean Martin". To which Dean replied, "Who do you want me to play? Laurence Oliver?"
And I think Dean had a point. When I go to see a Robert DeNiro film, I go to see Robert DeNiro. When I go to see a Meryl Streep film, I go to see Meryl Streep. I know exactly what to respect from them.
I actually think that Mark S. makes a point that has been debated in the Industry for eons: Stage Presence vs. Camera Presence.
There is also a difference between being a great actor and being a movie star. You can definitely be both. You can be a great actor and have great "screen presence." But not everyone does.
I think Timothy Chalamet is a really, really great actor. Extremely talented. I think he has all the screen presence of a bored barista.
No one ever accused Charles Bronson of being a great actor. But when he walked onscreen, you knew it and paid attention.
And I think Dean had a point. When I go to see a Robert DeNiro film, I go to see Robert DeNiro. When I go to see a Meryl Streep film, I go to see Meryl Streep. I know exactly what to respect from them.
But there are actors like, I don't know, Cate Blanchett or Toni Collette or even DiCaprio, who disappear into their characters. As opposed to Jack Nicholson, who is Jack Nicholson in every movie.
Did Errol Flynn do much other than play the swashbuckler? I mean, wasn't he just about as typecast as, say, Boris Karloff was in horror movies?
Cary Grant could do just about anything. And how is Jimmy Stewart not on that list? Besides being the George Bailey types, Jimmy Stewart played a clown in The Greatest Show on Earth and the villain in the second Thin Man movie. He did lots of western's, too.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
