Should movie actors command more respect than tv actors? I see they routinely go first on talk shows, get fawned over and gossiped about more, etc. Is it because only the best of the best can make it into movies, or is the movie genre supposed to be superior to tv? Given the crap that Hollywood churns out, I daresay I enjoy well-made tv shows more than a lot of movies out there.
An A-List movie actor can earn $15 million or more to appear in a movie. Even the best-known TV actors rarely make that much for an entire season of television. There are exceptions – the cast of Seinfeld was making a million bucks an episode for a couple years – but those are extremely rare.
So, as far as the business side of Hollywood is concerned, being a movie star is definitely greater than being a TV star.
I think for the longest time, there was a real stigma associated with being a “TV” actor as opposed to a “movie” actor. Now that TV stars can command the same high salaries as A-list movie stars, they are routinely getting more respect. Also, many second-tier, faded, or washed-up movie stars have experienced career renaissances thanks to perfect roles on solid TV shows, and received new levels of fame and acclaim: Kiefer Sutherland, Charlie Sheen, Jason Bateman, even James Spader to an extent.
Finally, the rise of smartly-written, long-form episodic dramas in the '90s really raised the bar as far as the quality of TV shows. HBO gets a lot of credit for this with The Sopranos, Oz, Six Feet Under, and Deadwood, but network shows as diverse as Northern Exposure, The West Wing, and Buffy the Vampire Slayer really started this trend in the '90s. Most actors associated with these shows (especially the HBO ones) are considered “good” actors, often better than the hugest of movie stars.
Nah. While there are occasional TV stars who become nearly as big as movie stars, movies are where the money and prestige still is.
There are plenty of good actors in TV, of course, but there are also plenty of good movie actors (and who aren’t stars, either). The proof is that actors who regularly star in movies don’t appear in TV (other than an occasional guest star) if they have a choice, whereas TV stars try pretty damn hard to break into starring roles of movies once their show ends (and during breaks).
But how much of that is just inertia of traditional thinking? I think actors want the movie jobs because they are cushy and pay more. But is the acting in a movie noticeably above the acting in prime time TV? I do notice an acting difference between prime time and daytime soaps. But between movies and primetime, not so much.
Like I said in an earlier thread, famous movie actors seem to get more respect than famous TV actors because movie stardom is considered more substantial and long-term than TV stardom. TV fame is like flash powder–it’s hot and intense but only lasts for a short period of time (i.e., until the TV show ends).
I think famous movie actors are rarer than famous TV actors (less movies made as compared to the number of TV shows) and thus have more prestige for being in a smaller club.
Having said that, I think there is some really good television out now while movies have declined. I think this is particularly true for women actors, who are more likely to find substantive roles on television versus the movies.
This is a meaningless statement, since the opposite is also true: “I daresay I enjoy well-made movies more than a lot of tv shows out there.”
I think that, for the most part, television does not provide much opportunity for “serious” acting. It tends to be pretty cookie cutter and disposable (there are exceptions, some of the HBO shows, for instance). TV actors don’t get a lot of chances to show their chops and the relative weakness of television writing compared to movies doesn’t help either.
I think another thing that plays into the dofferent levels of respect is that a lot of televison actors are associated with only one role or character, while film actors can actually build a diverse body of work and show range.
Not that meaningless. Shows overlap in genres. Consider that I do not like the acting on daytime soaps. Therefore, I do not enjoy the best daytime soap more than movies or primetime tv. The daytime soap genre, as a whole, is worse, in my opinion.
Diogenes, you make a compelling point about range, but some tv actors are on multiple series or play multiple roles or personalities in the same series. And some movie actors are similarly associated with only one role or character, or always brings the same personality. Quick examples: Keanu Reeves and Jack Nicholson.
There’s a saying in theatre:
Movies make you rich.
TV makes you famous.
Theatre makes you good.