At the Oscars Sunday night, Jon Stewart may have been the official host, but it was definitely the George Clooney show.
He is incredibly popular, both with the public and with Hollywood. He is charming. He is politically relevant. He’s been called the Frank Sinatra of his generation (sure he remade Ocean’s 11, but let’s not get carried away!)
Now he is an Oscar winner (where he gave one of the best speeches ever).
Has Clooney crossed over into iconic status? Is he a showbiz legend now?
I think Clooney is more famous for people a likeable playboy than his body of work.
Because, before this year, it wasn’t that impressive.
What are your thoughts on Clooney and how will he be remembered? (of course, he still has time to make more significant movies…)
I think he’s suited for iconic status. Who else is there?
Who else (in his generation) has written, directed, and acted in TV and movies and can do a good interview as well? I like that he takes himself seriously without being pompous.
I’ve been a fan of Clooney’s since Three Kings, and he cemented himself as one of my favorite actors with O Brother, Where Art Thou? I haven’t yet seen either of the films he did this year.
I think he’s definitely en route to being a legend. I wouldn’t say he’s the Sinatra of our age though. I think he’s actually more comparable to Ronald Reagan, though I am not endorsing him for politics. I like him, in a day and age of tramps, assholes and psychos in hollywood I think he’s a breath of fresh air. I’m sorry I missed his speech though.
I think you are right. He has an extremely high Q factor.
Everyone seems to like him. He has fun with the roles he takes on and appears to have built up a large group of friends in Hollywood.
He is critically acclaimed for his serious pieces and doesn’t get bashed for his fluff like the enjoyable Ocean’s 11 and Ocean’s 12 movies.
He is an excellent interview and appears more intelligent then the average actor.
He has also managed to not fall into the “Free Tibet” celebrity style cause that so many actors do.
What do you have against Francis Albert, I know he got cranky late in life but he was the heart of the party in the 50’s into the early 60’s. He always helped out his friends and pretty popular with the Fans, Press and other Stars.
I’ve come across several comparisons to Cary Grant, but none to Sinatra. I don’t think the Sinatra reference holds up to scrutiny; this Clooney doesn’t sing and didn’t break into the movies after having a career in music, and he’s a far more nice and genial a fellow than Sinatra was (or at least the Mob-connected Sinatra of middle age onwards).
As for the comparisons to Grant, I think that reflects both on Clooney’s personality and on the debonair leading-man roles – generally likeable rascals and slightly flawed, but ultimately dependable heroes – he’s had in recent years, beginning with his likeable pediatrician womanizer character in the first years of ER.
But Clooney has shown a serious and sustained interest in producing, directing, and writing his own projects, to a far greater degree than Frank Sinatra (who dabbled a bit as a producer and director), and which Cary Grant, who became a star during the zenith of the studio system, never did (or felt he had to do).
Perhaps a more apt comparison could be made between George Clooney and Michael Douglas, who also started as a TV and film star, often in likeable-rascal roles, branching out into more ambigous, complex characters (and a few antiheroes) in middle age, while establishing himself as one of Hollywood’s biggest producers. But not even Douglas has shown the same commitment to, and facility for, directing and now screenwriting that Clooney has, who’s almost twenty years younger.
IIRC, Sinatra’s relationship with the press was shaky at best in the 50s. (Didn’t he once punch a reporter back then?) He was also tempermental on set.
It’s hard to compare Clooney with other stars, which is always a good sign. Clark Gable is the closest comparison: both were well-liked, loved by the public, sexy, and good actors (though Clooney is probably better).
I think it’s just that women lust for him without him being hated by men. Guys think he’d be great to have a beer with and women think he’d be great at just about everything. For an actor, that’s the Grand Slam of Q.
I can’t say I’d mind him becoming a Hollywood Legend. I’ve always enjoyed seeing him in roles and interviews.
His most appealing attribute is that, with all of his other attractive and impressive attributes, he’s somehow managed to avoid turning into a smug prick.
Omniscient laid a finger on it with the “great to have a beer with,” observation. You get the impression that, apart from his talent, he’d be a really interesting guy to have a conversation with – and not just in a “probably has an inexhaustable supply of great anecdotes” way, but in that he seems affable, intelligent, articulate, sincere, and very likely to be as interested in your end of the conversation as you are in his.
I can’t think of another “Movie Star” that has had that quality in such a striking way since James Stewart. What’s not to like?
There’s only two other film icons who come to mind as genuine quadruple threats: Woody Allen (as director, writer, producer, and less frequently and pleasingly, lead/character actor) and Clint Eastwood (as director, producer, star, and composer/songwriter).
But that’s as far as the comparisons go. Woody Allen was never a classic romantic leading man even when his alter-ego did get the girl and hasn’t been consistently beyond self-parody as an actor (and sadly, even as a writer/director) for years. And Clint Eastwood always played ruggedly individualistic antiheroes and even now doesn’t do screenplays; he hasn’t had a writer’s credit since 1964’s A Fistful of Dollars. OTOH, he’s written songs and/or scores for ten films over the past twenty years*, which probably makes him one of the more successful film composers in the industry.
*The IMDB credits him with nine, but leaves out his improvisory jazzy noodlings at the piano on In the Line of Fire.
Actually I always had the same felling about Hanks and Michael J. Fox. They both seemed like regular guys that were very successful.
Hanks especially I always compare to Stewart.
:smack: :smack: improvisatory. Gaack. (That’s what happens when I try to follow the Discovery Channel’s **Dirty Jobs ** while typing… Mike Rowe, ummm…)
I think Eve nailed it with the Cary Grant comparison. And yes, given the respect that Clooney has been getting from critics of late, he’s probably bound for that kind of status - at least as much as anybody’s able to achieve it these days. I like him a lot, so that’s okay with me.
Clooney was also responsible in a big way for bringing South Park and its creators, Trey Parker and Matt Stone, to big-time prominence in the late '90s.