Why aren't they ENORMOUS stars?

[Otto]

Who should be megastars, but aren't?

Linda Fiorentino (http://imdb.com/name/nm0000400/). Her performance inThe Last Seduction got Oscar buzz even though the film wasn't ultimately eligible for Oscar consideration. She was totally genius brilliant in the role, a role that should have catapulted her to the highest levels of stardom. Instead, she hasn't worked in years.

[Freudian Slit]

I've posted this before, but Thora Birch. Scarlet Johanssen sky rocketed after Ghost World, but she hasn't really been as huge. (I've also had this answered--apparently after Ghost World, she needed time to cope mentally since she really got into the head of her character, Enid, a fairly troubled individual.) Still...I wish she were bigger than she is.

[Hey, It's That Guy!]

Who should be megastars, but aren't?

Linda Fiorentino (http://imdb.com/name/nm0000400/). Her performance inThe Last Seduction got Oscar buzz even though the film wasn't ultimately eligible for Oscar consideration. She was totally genius brilliant in the role, a role that should have catapulted her to the highest levels of stardom. Instead, she hasn't worked in years.
I believe Kevin Smith (not the classiest act in Hollywood himself) had some nasty things to say about working with Linda Fiorentino on his movie Dogma. Smith will usually speak openly about actors being difficult prima-donna diva types, so perhaps this has worked against her more than once. I know this has probably hurt Val Kilmer's career as well, since he is also known for being hard to work with.

[Koxinga]

I believe Kevin Smith (not the classiest act in Hollywood himself) had some nasty things to say about working with Linda Fiorentino on his movie Dogma. Smith will usually speak openly about actors being difficult prima-donna diva types, so perhaps this has worked against her more than once.

Disappontment she wasn't in MIB2

[Kythereia]

Ciarán Hinds (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001354/) (aka Julius Caesar in Rome), although I think his star is on the rise.

Ryan Gosling (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0331516/), who's turned his back on bigger stardom for smaller indie roles.

[bouv]

I've posted this before, but Thora Birch...I wish she were bigger than she is.

I dunno, I'd say she's at least a D, if not DD. :D

[Hey, It's That Guy!]

Ciarán Hinds (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001354/) (aka Julius Caesar in Rome), although I think his star is on the rise.
He'll probably never be as huge as he deserves to be, only because he's older, and he's just a solid actor who disappears into his roles. After Rome, I spotted him recently in Phantom of the Opera, and just saw him in Miss Pettigrew Lives For a Day. But I had no idea who he was back when I saw Road To Perdition, and I'd have to see it again to pick him out.

[Freudian Slit]

I dunno, I'd say she's at least a D, if not DD. :D
Hehe...yeah. I kinda walked into that one.
He'll probably never be as huge as he deserves to be, only because he's older, and he's just a solid actor who disappears into his roles. After Rome, I spotted him recently in Phantom of the Opera, and just saw him in Miss Pettigrew Lives For a Day. But I had no idea who he was back when I saw Road To Perdition, and I'd have to see it again to pick him out.
He was also in "There Will Be Blood" and "Munich." Of course, I also don't remember him in "Munich" since I saw it before I knew who he was. He's also in a Broadway play right now called "The Seafarer" which I highly recommend--he's awesome live, too. Incredibly brilliant actor.

[Otto]

I dunno, I'd say she's at least a D, if not DD.
Yeah, see, the thing is, this thread has absolutely nothing to do with the breast size of, well, anyone. So comments about the breast size of anyone are, how do I put this delicately, not only completely and utterly pointless but are actively disliked by the OP.

Did you have anything at all to contribute that has even a remote connection to the theme of the thread, or is the only thing you have to contribute is "Thora Birch has big titties"? Because there are probably some "who has big titties?" threads where you could post about Thora's big titties where it wouldn't be a totally unwelcome disruption.

[Eyebrows 0f Doom]

Ciaran Hinds, definitely!

He's also in a Broadway play right now called "The Seafarer" which I highly recommend--he's awesome live, too. Incredibly brilliant actor.
Amazing play & Hinds was fantastic! So chilling! He's such a nice guy too.

[Beware of Doug]

Alicia Witt. She's beautiful enough, she's talented enough, and doggone it, people like her.

My guess is she's too talented. Besides a degree in piano, she's supposedly got an IQ pushing 180, which surely wouldn't make life too pleasant in tinseltown.

[Ogre]

Yeah, see, the thing is, this thread has absolutely nothing to do with the breast size of, well, anyone. So comments about the breast size of anyone are, how do I put this delicately, not only completely and utterly pointless but are actively disliked by the OP.

Did you have anything at all to contribute that has even a remote connection to the theme of the thread, or is the only thing you have to contribute is "Thora Birch has big titties"? Because there are probably some "who has big titties?" threads where you could post about Thora's big titties where it wouldn't be a totally unwelcome disruption.Wow. Don't pitch a fit. It was over until you decided to make it a federal case.

[astro]

Yeah, see, the thing is, this thread has absolutely nothing to do with the breast size of, well, anyone. So comments about the breast size of anyone are, how do I put this delicately, not only completely and utterly pointless but are actively disliked by the OP.

Did you have anything at all to contribute that has even a remote connection to the theme of the thread, or is the only thing you have to contribute is "Thora Birch has big titties"? Because there are probably some "who has big titties?" threads where you could post about Thora's big titties where it wouldn't be a totally unwelcome disruption.

I think Mimi Rogers is very talented actress, and should have gotten more opportunties than she did, maybe it's the Scientology thing, but I think it's al least partially because her breasts are too big. Mimi Rogers has huge natural titties. I'm not normally a movie star big titty fan and IRL I could really care less, but in "Full Body Massage (http://www.amazon.com/Full-Body-Massage-Format-Region/dp/B000G8NYFO/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&qid=1205297040&sr=8-1)" there were like these huge pneumatic pillows. If nothing else you had to admire their engineering. I mean, you know she's buxom but noting prepares for the intro where she's running around the house in a robe and a thong, and then she takes off her bra and the twin terrors are unleashed, and she then she crushes them against her chest with her arms while she looks at her rear end. Cheesy as it is, that scene defines erotic.

[Sleeps With Butterflies]

I believe Kevin Smith (not the classiest act in Hollywood himself) had some nasty things to say about working with Linda Fiorentino on his movie Dogma. Smith will usually speak openly about actors being difficult prima-donna diva types, so perhaps this has worked against her more than once. I know this has probably hurt Val Kilmer's career as well, since he is also known for being hard to work with.

Yeah I read that she was pretty difficult. Janeane Garafalo was also not shy in mentioning that she was difficult, and they only had one scene together.

[Wile E]

Alicia Witt. She's beautiful enough, she's talented enough, and doggone it, people like her.

My guess is she's too talented. Besides a degree in piano, she's supposedly got an IQ pushing 180, which surely wouldn't make life too pleasant in tinseltown.

I was surprised to see her as a regular on Law & Order: Criminal Intent (partnered with Chris Noth). I don't catch that one that often but was glad to see that at least she's got a regular gig.

[Hey, It's That Guy!]

I had desperately hoped Alicia Witt would've been cast as Mary Jane Watson in the Spider-Man movies, but instead they went with Kirsten Dunst, who I didn't care for.

[Cisco]

I'm pretty sure I'd heard the Linda Fiorentino is a monster to work with thing before Dogma, because I remember being surprise that Smith cast her.

There have been a lot of entertainers over the years who have diva'd themselves right out of the business. Chevy Chase is the first one that comes to mind, but it's a long list.

[Justin_Bailey]

Linda Fiorentino (http://imdb.com/name/nm0000400/). Her performance inThe Last Seduction got Oscar buzz even though the film wasn't ultimately eligible for Oscar consideration. She was totally genius brilliant in the role, a role that should have catapulted her to the highest levels of stardom. Instead, she hasn't worked in years.

In addition to Kevin Smith, I've read that people she worked with on Men in Black didn't much care for her attitude either.

[Zsofia]

I'm always surprised that an amazingly talented actress like Tilda Swinton isn't more famous.

[It's Not Rocket Surgery!]

I nominate Alfre Woodard. I remember watching Star Trek: First Contact and noticing that her acting was just on a different level from the rest of the cast, including Patrick Stewart.

Of course, if she hasn't made it big by now, it's not likely to happen. 55-year-old actresses don't seem to strike it rich, unless they're British.

[KneadToKnow]

I had desperately hoped Alicia Witt would've been cast as Mary Jane Watson in the Spider-Man movies
Oh. My. God.

Now I'll never be able to watch those movies again, for the bitter taste of disappointment.

[susan_foster]

I'm always surprised that an amazingly talented actress like Tilda Swinton isn't more famous.

Probably will change since she won an Oscar.

Susan

[Evil Captor]

I think Mimi Rogers is very talented actress, and should have gotten more opportunties than she did, maybe it's the Scientology thing, but I think it's al least partially because her breasts are too big. Mimi Rogers has huge natural titties. I'm not normally a movie star big titty fan and IRL I could really care less, but in "Full Body Massage (http://www.amazon.com/Full-Body-Massage-Format-Region/dp/B000G8NYFO/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&qid=1205297040&sr=8-1)" there were like these huge pneumatic pillows. If nothing else you had to admire their engineering. I mean, you know she's buxom but noting prepares for the intro where she's running around the house in a robe and a thong, and then she takes off her bra and the twin terrors are unleashed, and she then she crushes them against her chest with her arms while she looks at her rear end. Cheesy as it is, that scene defines erotic.

Good point. I read somewhere -- possibly here -- that Christina Ricci had breast reduction surgery so she'd be taken seriously as an actress. Do you suppose this is what has kept Pamela Anderson from getting an Oscar nod?

Anyway, the reason they're not huge stars is simple: not enough gas around when they were initially formed.

[Mrs. Cake]

I was jumping in to say Ciaran Hinds as well, who has been a huge personal favorite of mine since the mid '90's (Persuasion, Jane Eyre, Ivanhoe). I so wanted him to be cast as Aragorn in LOTR - sorry Viggo, but you just weren't my idea of a Numenorean.

[garygnu]

I've posted this before, but Thora Birch...
Just a note, Ms. Birch has top billing on four movies slated for this year, a mix of drama and pop titles. Maybe this is her year.

[Gorsnak]

I've always thought that Altair deserves to be a bigger star. 12th brightest star in the night sky, but a measly 1.7 solar masses, and stuck that backwater constellation Aquila to boot. Not hardly an Ursa Major or Orion, there.

[zagloba]

Anyway, the reason they're not huge stars is simple: not enough gas around when they were initially formed.In fact, a recent study shows that prenatal dutch ovens lead to increased birth weight.

[Manduck]

I was going to nominate Jennifer Tilley, but I maybe I shouldn't, because of the bosoms.

[RickJay]

I think most of the names mentioned so far fall into four categories:

1. People who're impossible to get along with. Linda Fiorentino has had a reputation for being an absolutely impossible bitch for as long as I can remember, long before Kevin Smith worked with her. She's beautiful and talented, but Hollywood has lots of beautiful and talented women, and in the end, if you have a choice between one who's hateful and mean and one who's nice, who're ya gonna pick?

Tom Cruise may be a nut, but by all accounts he is kind and generous to everyone on a movie set; if a key grip told him on a movie set in 2000 that he was having a baby girl, and Cruise meets him on a set this year, he'll ask the guy how his baby is, and is she in second grade or third? He's an expert of networking and getting along with people, and makes it so people enjoy working with him. Fiorentino did the opposite, so when it came time to find a sexy brunette, they started calling other numbers.

2. People who aren't very good looking. The simple truth is that looks matter, and the most famous actors (and especially actresses) are pretty. Tilda Swinton is a hell of an actress but she's not beautiful. Looks even affect critical impressions. The majority of Best Actress winners are young, pretty girls.

3. People who just take a different career path, like Ryan Gosling, Alicia Witt or Ciaran Hinds. I mean, it's not like those people are worried where the money for the next gas bill is coming from.

4. People who chose to work in big movies and TV shows, but not necessarily as stars. Alfre Woodard is the perfect example; she's never been a megastar, but she's had non-stop work in the movies and television for thirty years, has won four Emmy awards, was nominated for an Oscar, and I am sure has made an excellent living doing what she loves; why bother with the paparazzi when you can make millions working on all kinds of movies and shows?

[Beware of Doug]

Just a note, Ms. Birch has top billing on four movies slated for this year, a mix of drama and pop titles.Oh, you said titles.

Never miiiind... :D

[Wile E]

I was going to nominate Jennifer Tilley, but I maybe I shouldn't, because of the bosoms.

that and the not being a very good actress thing.

[Hostile Dialect]

I'm glad Ryan Gosling is staying in his niche, for purely selfish reasons. Who else could play his troubled and nuanced characters the way he can? Half Nelson and Lars & the Real Girl wouldn't have been anywhere near as good with anyone else in the lead, IMO.

[Freudian Slit]

I'm glad Ryan Gosling is staying in his niche, for purely selfish reasons. Who else could play his troubled and nuanced characters the way he can? Half Nelson and Lars & the Real Girl wouldn't have been anywhere near as good with anyone else in the lead, IMO.
Why exactly is he famous? I looked him up on IMDb, and I noticed he'd been in some things I'd heard of, but most of the titles seem pretty obscure. I know he was nominated for an Oscar, but I'd never even heard of "Half Nelson."

[Hostile Dialect]

I wouldn't say he is famous. Among arthouse film enthusiasts and people who live in Hollywood, maybe.

ETA: He's a hell of an actor, though. Really, do yourself a favor and check out Lars and the Real Girl, and/or Half Nelson. The guy is AMAZING. He can communicate more in a look than most of the actors he works with can convey in entire pages of dialogue. The only person I can think of who didn't look like an amateur next to him is Patricia Clarkson, and maybe the coworker he had a thing for in Half Nelson. Maybe the crack dealer in Half Nelson. Maybe.

[astro]

that and the not being a very good actress thing.

But a reasonably good amateur poker player. (http://michiganzone.blogspot.com/2007/10/jennifer-tilly-is-all-inliterally.html)

[Lizard]

I had desperately hoped Alicia Witt would've been cast as Mary Jane Watson in the Spider-Man movies, but instead they went with Kirsten Dunst, who I didn't care for.

After looking Witt up, I agree. The character is supposed to be a model and soap-opera actress. However good of an actress Kirsten Dunst is, I don't consider her pretty enough for either (which is why she's never done those jobs in real life) But Witt is (http://www.imdb.com/media/rm2105383680/nm0001860).

And for all the talk about what a bitch Linda Fiorentino is, she worked pretty steadily into her early 40s, a time when most actresses find their careers in decline no matter how good they are.

[Manduck]

that and the not being a very good actress thing.
HEY! Dammit, you're talking about the future Mrs Manduck!

[Justin_Bailey]

And for all the talk about what a bitch Linda Fiorentino is, she worked pretty steadily into her early 40s, a time when most actresses find their careers in decline no matter how good they are.

That couldn't have been too hard considering her breakthrough came at 35. But according to the IMDB, this is what she appeared in during the peak of her career:

Where the Money Is (2000)
What Planet Are You From? (2000)
Ordinary Decent Criminal (2000)
Dogma (1999)
Body Count (1998)
Men in Black (1997)
Kicked in the Head (1997)
Larger Than Life (1996)
Unforgettable (1996)
Bodily Harm (1995)
Jade (1995)
The Desperate Trail (1995) (V)
The Last Seduction (1994)

Aside from The Last Seduction, Men in Black and Dogma, were any of those movies any good? I'm pretty sure the "female and in her early 40s" curse didn't get her (which I think is crap anyway), but it definitely had to do with her choices and the well known reputation of her attitude problem.

[FordPrefect]

I had desperately hoped Alicia Witt would've been cast as Mary Jane Watson in the Spider-Man movies
Alia has grown up! Wow.

[mswas]

Good point. I read somewhere -- possibly here -- that Christina Ricci had breast reduction surgery so she'd be taken seriously as an actress. Do you suppose this is what has kept Pamela Anderson from getting an Oscar nod?

Anyway, the reason they're not huge stars is simple: not enough gas around when they were initially formed.

Yea, Christina Ricci an Jennifer Connelly both became far less interesting after their breast reductions. It sort of seemed like selling off an asset because some asshole producer wanted to be sadistic.

[E-Sabbath]

But what about Mimi Rogers? I have heard she's a delight to work with. Really, large yabbos knocking her out of work?

Edit: Er, where does she fit in the 'four types' list.

[Ike Witt]

Oh, you said titles.

Never miiiind... :D
[Sean Connery] Not a fan of the ladies, are you Trebek? [/SC]

[Hostile Dialect]

MMMmmmmmm, Buffalo 66-era Christina Ricci.

[Happy Scrappy Hero Pup]

What the hell do Ryan Gosling's titties have to do with anything?


Personally, I'm a big fan of Rufus Sewell- (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001722/) I think he's a great actor with a real presence on film; perhaps the lazy eye prevents him from getting the work that he should.



















and plus he got them small titties what means he a good actor.

[Lizard]

That couldn't have been too hard considering her breakthrough came at 35. But according to the IMDB, this is what she appeared in during the peak of her career:

Where the Money Is (2000)
What Planet Are You From? (2000)
Ordinary Decent Criminal (2000)
Dogma (1999)
Body Count (1998)
Men in Black (1997)
Kicked in the Head (1997)
Larger Than Life (1996)
Unforgettable (1996)
Bodily Harm (1995)
Jade (1995)
The Desperate Trail (1995) (V)
The Last Seduction (1994)

Aside from The Last Seduction, Men in Black and Dogma, were any of those movies any good? I'm pretty sure the "female and in her early 40s" curse didn't get her (which I think is crap anyway), but it definitely had to do with her choices and the well known reputation of her attitude problem.

Every actor, no matter how good, has some whiffs. Lou Gossett Jr. won an Oscar for An Officer and a Gentleman; name one other good movie he ever made. (If you say Iron Eagle I will shoot you.) I'm not denying Fiorentino may have been difficult, but so are a lot of stars. I think her career just petered out naturally as she aged, which happens all the time to females actors. You think it's crap, but how many actresses can you name who worked steadily after age 45 at the same rate they did before? I don't think it's any big secret that men have longer careers than women do, fair or not.

[Miller]

Every actor, no matter how good, has some whiffs. Lou Gossett Jr. won an Oscar for An Officer and a Gentleman; name one other good movie he ever made. (If you say Iron Eagle I will shoot you.)

If I say Enemy Mine, can I escape with a severe beating?

[Lizard]

Yea, Christina Ricci an Jennifer Connelly both became far less interesting after their breast reductions.

After watching Black Snake Moan, I must respectfully disagree.

[Lizard]

If I say Enemy Mine, can I escape with a severe beating?

No, you may not! :p

[Rocketeer]

Ciaran Hinds, definitely!


Amazing play & Hinds was fantastic! So chilling! He's such a nice guy too.

Did you catch him in There Will Be Blood? I thought that guy's face looked familiar, but woulda never placed him as the dashing hero of Persuasion.

[Rocketeer]

I think Mimi Rogers is very talented actress, and should have gotten more opportunties than she did, maybe it's the Scientology thing, but I think it's al least partially because her breasts are too big. Mimi Rogers has huge natural titties. I'm not normally a movie star big titty fan and IRL I could really care less, but in "Full Body Massage (http://www.amazon.com/Full-Body-Massage-Format-Region/dp/B000G8NYFO/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&qid=1205297040&sr=8-1)" there were like these huge pneumatic pillows. If nothing else you had to admire their engineering. I mean, you know she's buxom but noting prepares for the intro where she's running around the house in a robe and a thong, and then she takes off her bra and the twin terrors are unleashed, and she then she crushes them against her chest with her arms while she looks at her rear end. Cheesy as it is, that scene defines erotic.

I've often thought that Bryan Brown is the luckiest actor on Earth. :p

[Eyebrows 0f Doom]

Did you catch him in There Will Be Blood? I thought that guy's face looked familiar, but woulda never placed him as the dashing hero of Persuasion.
Yup! That was a nice surprise. He really gets around! I believe he's currently in Mrs Pettigrew Lives For a Day. (I think that's the right title.)

[Grossbottom]

Lou Gossett Jr. won an Oscar for An Officer and a Gentleman; name one other good movie he ever made. (If you say Iron Eagle I will shoot you.)
Diggstown.

[Justin_Bailey]

I think her career just petered out naturally as she aged, which happens all the time to females actors. You think it's crap, but how many actresses can you name who worked steadily after age 45 at the same rate they did before? I don't think it's any big secret that men have longer careers than women do, fair or not.

I don't think that's right at all. How many men work just as steadily as they did before as they approach 50?

There are fewer parts for everyone as they get older and the occasional older man who works alongside a progressively younger woman is pretty rare. How often does that actually happen? Especially now that many of the standard "older men/younger women" actors like Sean Connery and Michael Douglas work much less than they did before.

[Ellis Dee]

I don't think that's right at all. How many men work just as steadily as they did before as they approach 50?

There are fewer parts for everyone as they get older and the occasional older man who works alongside a progressively younger woman is pretty rare. How often does that actually happen? Especially now that many of the standard "older men/younger women" actors like Sean Connery and Michael Douglas work much less than they did before.I agree completely. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that men and women have basically the same shelf life as actors; it's just that the women's window of opportunity skews younger.

For every Sean Connery or Michael Douglas who gets to work older, you're going to have a Kirsten Dunst or Natalie Portman (both still young despite hitting it big 14 years ago) who gets to start much younger. How many male stars take off at age 13?

I'd say that men get an extra 5-10 years at the end of their career that the women don't. Say, late 40s to mid 50s. But on the flipside, I'd say the women get an extra 5-10 years at the beginning of their career. Not many men become sustainable movie stars until their mid-20s, whereas it's practically normal for women to hit it big as they're turning legal.

Scarlett Johansson, Keira Knightley, Ellen Page, Evan Rachel Wood, Camilla Belle, Anne Hathaway; the list goes on and on. Look at Heroes, where Hayden Penettiere broke out at 16, while her in-show love interests remain anonymous throwaway actors. That's because young guys get about as much respect as older women.

[NDP]

For every Sean Connery or Michael Douglas who gets to work older, you're going to have a Kirsten Dunst or Natalie Portman (both still young despite hitting it big 14 years ago) who gets to start much younger. How many male stars take off at age 13?

I'd say that men get an extra 5-10 years at the end of their career that the women don't. Say, late 40s to mid 50s. But on the flipside, I'd say the women get an extra 5-10 years at the beginning of their career. Not many men become sustainable movie stars until their mid-20s, whereas it's practically normal for women to hit it big as they're turning legal.

Scarlett Johansson, Keira Knightley, Ellen Page, Evan Rachel Wood, Camilla Belle, Anne Hathaway; the list goes on and on. Look at Heroes, where Hayden Penettiere broke out at 16, while her in-show love interests remain anonymous throwaway actors. That's because young guys get about as much respect as older women.

But there's a flip side to this. No matter what gender they are, actors in their late teens and early twenties are still fairly raw in terms of their craft. It's ultimately to a male actor's advantage to spend those years in relative obscurity since he can make and learn from his mistakes and become more experienced out of the glare of public attention. By the time an actor hits his 40's, he's more likely to be at or near his peak talent-wise at the same time his career is peaking. In contrast, the actresses in their late teens and early twenties who hit it big have whatever deficiencies they have in terms of inexperience out there for all of the general movie-going and TV-watching public to see. Unfortunately, by the time many actresses have improved and become more experienced, the number of parts available to them has drastically decreased.

Of course, it should be emphasized that, percentage-wise, this only applies to the most successful of the successful in the acting profession.

[Justin_Bailey]

Unfortunately, by the time many actresses have improved and become more experienced, the number of parts available to them has drastically decreased.

Did you miss the list in Ellis Dee's post? Any of those actresses can write their own ticket and all of them are highly respected. The number of young actors on such a list would be considerably smaller (if not completely non-existant).

[Elendil's Heir]

Ciaran Hinds was also very good (in fact, he was the best part of the movie) as a steely Russian leader in The Sum of All Fears.

Rufus Sewell was also excellent in Dark City and A Knight's Tale.

Either of them, with a meaty breakout role, could be huge in Hollywood.

[NDP]

Did you miss the list in Ellis Dee's post? Any of those actresses can write their own ticket and all of them are highly respected. The number of young actors on such a list would be considerably smaller (if not completely non-existant).

In the cases of Scarlett Johansson, Keira Knightley, Evan Rachel Wood, Anne Hathaway, and Hayden Penettiere, there's a lot of disagreement out there regardng that point. I think the consensus is better with Ellen Page and Camilla Belle but that's only because they're still pretty new. In any case, I think all of these actresses are still in the "promising" stage of their careers. They still have room to grow and are thus more prone to making the same mistakes most actors their same age do. The only difference is the mistakes are out there for more of the public to see.

[Ellis Dee]

In the cases of Scarlett Johansson, Keira Knightley, Evan Rachel Wood, Anne Hathaway, and Hayden Penettiere, there's a lot of disagreement out there regardng that point. I think the consensus is better with Ellen Page and Camilla Belle but that's only because they're still pretty new. In any case, I think all of these actresses are still in the "promising" stage of their careers. They still have room to grow and are thus more prone to making the same mistakes most actors their same age do. The only difference is the mistakes are out there for more of the public to see.Yeah, but all this is irrelevant. My point was that women and men have the same basic shelf-life as actors; the women just start earlier. You're jumping through an awful lot of hoops to try and keep the martyr status of actresses going in the face of this counter to "but it's so unfair that women are put out to pasture earlier than men!"

Men finish later, women start earlier, men are most famous later in their career, women are most famous at the beginning of theirs. Sounds like a perfectly fair deal to me. Don't girls mature faster anyway? To try and claim some kind of handicap because the more-famous younger women can't possibly be great because they're young is disingenuous at best.

Also, what disagreement do you mean? That actresses like Scarlett Johansson and Keira Knightley are big stars? I can't imagine there is any disagreement on that, so you must be talking about your unrelated point about acting ability. Note that I never brought acting ability up, so you can't quote me and then say there's disagreement when you're talking about a point I never made.

As for acting ability, I'm afraid that is a non-starter, since there isn't a single actor in Hollywood we'd all agree is a good actor. That's the reason I carefully couched my terms as "big stars" and "sustainable careers".

Finally, Scarlett and Keira are both five years past the "promising" stage of their careers.

[faithfool]

In answer to the OP, I think that Tim Roth should be huge. He's an incredible actor with great range and depth of knowledge regarding whatever role he takes on, big or small. And he's been amazing in every part I've ever seen him in, to the point that I look forward to any new stuff he's got coming down the pipeline.

[Freudian Slit]

In answer to the OP, I think that Tim Roth should be huge. He's an incredible actor with great range and depth of knowledge regarding whatever role he takes on, big or small. And he's been amazing in every part I've ever seen him in, to the point that I look forward to any new stuff he's got coming down the pipeline.
He's currently in one called "Funny Games" which just came out. I think it looks awesome (partly because I like him, and also because the movie just looks so odd and bizarre in a good way).

[Hey, It's That Guy!]

He's currently in one called "Funny Games" which just came out. I think it looks awesome (partly because I like him, and also because the movie just looks so odd and bizarre in a good way).
Roth plays the villain in this summer's Incredible Hulk movie as well, facing off against Edward Norton for the first time since they were rivals for Drew Barrymore's affection in Woody Allen's musical Everyone Says I Love You over a decade ago.

[faithfool]

He's currently in one called "Funny Games" which just came out. I think it looks awesome (partly because I like him, and also because the movie just looks so odd and bizarre in a good way).

Yep, that's what got me to thinking about him being on the list. :) Then of course, there's the fact that I'm going to see Funny Games today. It's my birthday gift to myself.


Oooh, Big Bad Voodoo Lou, you mentioned Edward Norton! That's another yummmmmmmmmm.

[Equipoise]

Why exactly is he [Ryan Gosling] famous? I looked him up on IMDb, and I noticed he'd been in some things I'd heard of, but most of the titles seem pretty obscure. I know he was nominated for an Oscar, but I'd never even heard of "Half Nelson."This post made me laugh. Isn't this what the thread is about? People who aren't famous but should be? I first saw Ryan Gosling in a 2002 Sandra Bullock movie, Murder By Numbers, where he and another up-n-coming actor, Michael Pitt (Funny Games) are high school students who also happen to be intellectual serial killers, staying one step ahead of a determined homicide detective (Bullock). He was impressive in the role. I keep up with movies enough that I had already heard about him. He got a lot of attention in the arthouse world for a previous movie called The Believer, where he played a Jewish neo-Nazi (based on a true story btw). Then I saw him in The United States of Leland (about a disturbed kid in a juvenile detention facility) with Don Cheadle, and was again impressed by him. I missed his romantic movie The Notebook, and then also missed Half-Nelson, which I kicked myself for since it got him an Oscar nomination. I'll never again miss anything Ryan Gosling does. I'm glad too he's staying in a niche. He's perfect where he is.

Regarding the OP, needless to say I think Happy Rhodes should be an enormous star. She has the enormous talent (amazing music, phenomenal voice, fascinating lyrics), a great back-story, the ability to inspire with passion, and is beautiful inside and out to boot. But she won't play the game, such as changing her name or giving up the rights to her music. She prefers being a homebody to touring. She hates self-promotion. She makes the music and if people like it, fine. If they don't, fine. She's not in it to be famous. I admire her for it, but it's still a shame she doesn't get the recognition she deserves, and probably never will.

[Dangerosa]

I think that there is also just a certain number of room for "enormous stars." There is a little more room for "stars" and a space we fill with "tabloid fodder" - a different category than stars but with some overlap (Paris Hilton is tabloid fodder, but not a "star"). So in order for there to be movement, someone has got to drop off - it isn't quite that absolute, but you get the idea.

[Hey, It's That Guy!]

Yep, that's what got me to thinking about him being on the list. :) Then of course, there's the fact that I'm going to see Funny Games today. It's my birthday gift to myself.
Warning: It is a hard movie to watch. NOT a feel-good movie by any means. If you're in a good mood and want to stay that way, you might want to pick something else.

[faithfool]

Warning: It is a hard movie to watch. NOT a feel-good movie by any means. If you're in a good mood and want to stay that way, you might want to pick something else.

Which means in the faithfoolverse that I'm gonna love it!! :D

[Elendil's Heir]

I think that there is also just a certain number of room for "enormous stars." There is a little more room for "stars" and a space we fill with "tabloid fodder" - a different category than stars but with some overlap (Paris Hilton is tabloid fodder, but not a "star"). So in order for there to be movement, someone has got to drop off - it isn't quite that absolute, but you get the idea.

Reminds me of a Doonesbury strip from the mid-1970s, in which a panel discussion of People magazine staff writers and paparazzi bemoans the fact that the terms "star" and "superstar" had become so devalued. They agreed to start at ground zero: only Robert Redford would be so described!

[medstar]

Maybe these talented performers have seen what happens to their more famous co-workers and decide not to go that way. Maybe they want to have just enough fame to have a long career of playing interesting characters instead of the lead.

[Hodge]

Warning: It is a hard movie to watch. NOT a feel-good movie by any means. If you're in a good mood and want to stay that way, you might want to pick something else.This is an understatement. "Funny Games" is a bleak, nihilistic, psychologically brutal film that pulls no punches in subverting audience expectations and will leave you wanting to take a shower afterwards. It's also a very good film.

Disclaimer: I have not seen the English language version and I have absolutely no plans to do so. I've only seen most of the original Austrian version.

[Illuminatiprimus]

I think I need to make the point for those who haven't realised yet that there are two films by the name Funny Games - one which stars Tim Roth and one which doesn't. Hodge and Big Bad Voodoo Lou are talking about the latter.

[Hey, It's That Guy!]

I think I need to make the point for those who haven't realised yet that there are two films by the name Funny Games - one which stars Tim Roth and one which doesn't. Hodge and Big Bad Voodoo Lou are talking about the latter.
The new one that stars Tim Roth is a shot-for-shot remake of the original Austrian Funny Games from 1997, and the same director, Michael Haneke, made both.

[BMax]

I was going to nominate Jennifer Tilley, but I maybe I shouldn't, because of the bosoms.[\quote]


[QUOTE=Wile E]that and the not being a very good actress thing.

I think her sister Meg is just as pretty and way more talented. And I wonder why her career didn't take off in a big way.

[Illuminatiprimus]

The new one that stars Tim Roth is a shot-for-shot remake of the original Austrian Funny Games from 1997, and the same director, Michael Haneke, made both.

Illuminatiprimus watches as ignorance is gunned down in front of him. Silence ensues.

[Wendell Wagner]

Beware of Doug writes:

> Alicia Witt. She's beautiful enough, she's talented enough, and doggone it,
> people like her.
>
> My guess is she's too talented. Besides a degree in piano, she's supposedly got
> an IQ pushing 180, which surely wouldn't make life too pleasant in tinseltown.

This is a nitpick, but do you realize how absurdly unlikely it is that she has an I.Q. pushing 180? I'll take that as meaning at least 175. That's five standard deviations above average:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_deviation

Being at or above an I.Q. of 115 (one standard deviation above the mean) is true for about one person in six. 130 (two standard deviations) is true for about one person in forty. 145 is true for about one person in 800, 160 for about one in 30,000, and 175 for about one in 3,000,000. The average person can't distinguish I.Q.'s over 145. It's very dubious if an I.Q. test can distinguish I.Q.'s over 160. Also, 190 (six standard deviations) is impossible to distinguish even if everybody who had ever taken an I.Q. test since they began being given could be all ranked somehow, since 190 is about one in 1,000,000,000, and I don't think that many people have taken I.Q. tests.

[NDP]

[Quote=Originally Posted by Manduck]
I was going to nominate Jennifer Tilley, but I maybe I shouldn't, because of the bosoms.[\quote]

I think her sister Meg is just as pretty and way more talented. And I wonder why her career didn't take off in a big way.

Meg Tilley was mentioned earlier in this thread. Apparently, she took a sabbatical from acting around 1995 to write and hasn't returned yet.

[Kyrie Eleison]

Jennifer Jason Leigh is the name that pops into my head. I've never really understood why she never became a bigger star. Hers is a relatively obscure name that will induce me to watch a move every time, and I'm rarely disappointed. She's got a large body of work, but I still get the impression that she's a relative unknown. She does have a tendency to play damaged or odd characters; perhaps it's a lack of range that has kept her from prominence.

[NDP]

Jennifer Jason Leigh is the name that pops into my head. I've never really understood why she never became a bigger star. Hers is a relatively obscure name that will induce me to watch a move every time, and I'm rarely disappointed. She's got a large body of work, but I still get the impression that she's a relative unknown. She does have a tendency to play damaged or odd characters; perhaps it's a lack of range that has kept her from prominence.

I disagree with your assessment that Jennifer Jason Leigh is "obscure" and "unknown" but you are correct that her deeply neurotic "Queen of Pain" persona has prevented her from taking her career to the next level. I think she's one of those actors or actresses who had the misfortune of being born at the wrong time. Had Leigh been born 20 years earlier and started her career in the 60's rather than the 80's, she probably would've been a bigger star.

[vivalostwages]

I think Mimi Rogers is very talented actress, and should have gotten more opportunties than she did, maybe it's the Scientology thing, but I think it's al least partially because her breasts are too big. Mimi Rogers has huge natural titties. I'm not normally a movie star big titty fan and IRL I could really care less, but in "Full Body Massage (http://www.amazon.com/Full-Body-Massage-Format-Region/dp/B000G8NYFO/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&qid=1205297040&sr=8-1)" there were like these huge pneumatic pillows. If nothing else you had to admire their engineering. I mean, you know she's buxom but noting prepares for the intro where she's running around the house in a robe and a thong, and then she takes off her bra and the twin terrors are unleashed, and she then she crushes them against her chest with her arms while she looks at her rear end. Cheesy as it is, that scene defines erotic.

Rogers' plentiful chestage is also very visible and quite literally on display in The Door in the Floor.

[Elendil's Heir]

Rogers' plentiful chestage is also very visible and quite literally on display in The Door in the Floor.

Quite so. Kim Basinger's charms are also very, um, well-displayed.