Premiere just published their top 50 movie stars of all time. The top 10 are as follows:
Henry Fonda
James Stewart
Greta Garbo
Julia Roberts
Paul Newman
Ingrid Bergman
John Wayne
Tom Cruise
Marilyn Monroe
Cary Grant
While I didn’t post this to pit anyone, but Julie Roberts as #7? This seems pretty high considering, IMO, her resume isn’t really that great. She’s been in a few major hits but she’s had her fair share of forgettable movies as well. And I’m not convinced that she can still “open” a film. At one time maybe. I don’t know anyone rushing out to see a Julia Roberts film.
It seems to me that Marlon Brando (#15 on their list) is much more deserving of the #7 slot. Or Bogart (#13). Perhaps Audrey Hepburn (#18). But that’s just my opinion.
Anyhow, what do you think of their top 10? And just so you know, silent film stars, for some reason, were not included in the list. (I still think Charlie Chaplin should be there, he made a few talkies).
If Tom Cruise is #3 (and I agree that he should be in the Top 10), then why is Bruce Willis not even in the Top 50!? Bruce’s star power is very close to Tom’s IMHO.
And cmon, Pacino, De Niro, and Denzel @ #37, #38, and #39!? That’s a joke!
It’s annoying enough that Tom Cruise is at #3 and that no silent actors made the list (even if the magazine did explain why), but Sidney Poitier (#20) ahead of Clark Gable (#21) and Gary Cooper (#48 or so)? Are you @#@!#!@# kidding me?
I assume they’re going for some kind of commentary about “stardom,” as opposed to acting chops or whatever. There’s a level of glamour, etc., to movie stars that the folks in the top ten have that others – who might be far more competent actors – just don’t have.
I think Cary Grant is absolutely spot on as #1 (“Everyone wants to be Cary Grant. Hell, I want to be Cary Grant.” [Cary Grant]), and the only one of the top ten that I have a beef with is, interestingly enough, Ingrid Bergman.
I’m pretty sure the folks at Premiere have no idea what silent films are. Besides, then they would have had to put Mary Pickford, Lillian Gish and Charlie Chaplin in the Top Ten, and their poor readers’ heads would have imploded. “But where’s Tom Cruuuuuuise?”
Much as I hate to admit it, although she seems like a perfectly nice person, the common people love Julia Roberts. I worked at a Suncoast when America’s Sweethearts came out; crappy movie, couldn’t keep it on the shelves. They wanted to see Julia. Not in the theater as much (most of them were buying it sight unseen, which I found interesting) but in their homes. They buy it automatically. No kidding. They seem to really feel like they know her.
That’s true but I feel that Brando contributed much more to the craft of acting than Julia Roberts ever will. That doesn’t define a movie star, I know, but Brando extrudes some pretty major star-power as well. And has for over 50 years now.
If Katherine Hepburn isn’t in the top ten, it’s a joke. This is a woman who was a box office star for over 40 years and made more classic films than anyone on that list except Fonda, Stewart, and Grant.
Cruise has as much right in the top ten as George Arliss does. Feh.
Movies that were among the ten highest-grossing for the year they were released and starring or co-starring Tom Cruise:
Risky Business (1983)
Top Gun (1986) #1
Rain Man (1988) #1
Cocktail (1988)
A Few Good Men (1992)
The Firm (1993)
Interview With the Vampire (1994)
Mission: Impossible (1996)
Jerry Maguire (1996)
Mission: Impossible II (2000)
If George Arliss has a comparable record of box-office success, I would be very, very surprised.
Beat me to it. I couldn’t believe that the great Katharine Hepburn wasn’t in the top 10. And it doesn’t matter whether the main criterion is star power, or acting ability, or a combination, because she had it all.
And how the fuck does Dustin Hoffman get left out of the Top 50?
Anyway, no-one’s managed a link yet, so if you want to see the whole list, it’s at the bottom of this page.