Terribly arbitrary I know but here is the game I was playing. I was watching Crimson Tide and mention was made of Run Silent Run Deep and as a lover of sub movies I went to IMDB to see if I had rated it. I then clicked on Burt Lancaster and chose filmographies by ratings to see if I had missed rating any of his movies.
I was amazed to find he had appeared in 35 movies rating 7.00 or better which generally means a pretty good movie. Looking through the list there are a lot of fine movies. It does include two TV movies but they are both award winners.
I then wondered who had been in more: DeNiro? No only 26. Pacino? A mere 28. Well obviously Charlie Chaplin. Nope, 22. A woman maybe, Meryl Streep? Ha ha, 13. Katherine Hepburn then? No, just 21. Oh, of course, the greatest film actor of all time, Jimmy Stewart. Bingo 36!
I think you’ll be hard-pressed to beat Bess Flowers, unless you want to loosen up the definition of movie a bit, in which case Mel Blanc would be up there.
I suspect that this thread equates to about the same thing as you’re looking for. Of particular note is John Cazale, who died after making 6 films that all score higher than an 8.
Jimmy Stewart was the first guy I’d have thought of.
Henry Fonda had 32. Spencer Tracy and John Wayne had 28.
It’s almost BOUND to be an old-timer, just because stars made so many MORE movies (both good and bad) in the Thirties and Forties than they do today. Today, Tom Cruise or Russell Crowe makes a movie every two years, or once a year if he feels like it. In the old Hollywood studio system, stars cranked out movies constantly.
Gary Cooper had 32.
It just occurred to me to try character actors who worked steadily in the Thirties and Forties. Woudja believe… Walter Brennan scored a 35?
Whooooooa! We have a new leader, by a mile! I haven’t subtracted out TV movies, but Bette Davis is in the lead. She has 100 movies with a 7.0 or better. Fewer if I subtact TV work, but still…
Bette Davis is clearly the star to beat now!