Love his politics, hate his politics, I don’t care. Please be objective.
Was just wondering…
Based solely on his acting career, which ended around 1964, iirc, how would he be remembered today, had he not went into the political arena (disregard his tenure as President of SAG as well)?
Name some other actors from his generation whose level of acting talent was commensurate with his own for me to use as a benchmark.
Do you think he would have wound up in low budget movies/telemovies or lame one-season sitcoms in the 70s and 80s?
Would he be remembered today by:
a. the average movie-goer?
b. self-identified film fans?
c. Dopers only?
d. Eve and that guy who runs the Entertainment Insiders site?
I think he would barely be remembered and mostly known for the trivia of being the Gipper.
Robert Cummings was kind of a similar actor. How many remember him?
He may have had a patriarch role on late 60’s, early 70’s TV, but probably not a sitcom.
Though I’ve never seen any of his movies, I’m curious to hear answers to the OP’s question too.
Given how long and healthily he lived, I’d guess that if he hadn’t gone into politics, he would have at least tried to stay active on the big (or maybe small) screen. Who knows whether he would have lucked into a big role.
(Gee, imagine if he’d wound up with Leslie Nielsen’s career.)
I asked a similar question in another thread, trying to figure out what modern actor is of a comparable level of fame and talent. Someone replied that Kurt Russell would be an appropriate match.
I like to think I’m pretty film literate, and have made an effort to watch a lot of the classics. I’ve never seen a movie with Ronald Reagan in it. Looking at the list of movies he was in on imdb, I only even recognize a handful of titles (Dark Victory, This is the Army), and in those he appears to have only had a supporting role. So based on my experience, if he hadn’t become president, I don’t think very many people at all would remember him today. I have to even wonder how many people had heard of him back then. People make comparisons to Arnold Schwarzenegger when he became governor of California, but I think Arnie is much more famous – bona fide superstar. Reagan doesn’t appear to have been anywhere near that category.
I have heard of Robert Cummings, and can even picture him in my mind’s eye. Of course, the only movie I’ve ever seen him in was “Saboteur.” It’s too bad that Reagan didn’t make one decent picture with one of the old great directors – Hitchcock, Capra, Ford, etc. – because I think that would have cemented his cinematic fame far more than all the B movies he ever made. I’ve long thought that movies are better remembered for their directors than their actors, even if people don’t think of it that way. Cary Grant, for example, is remembered for his Hitchcock, Cukor and Capra movies (among others), while the majority of the movies he made with mediocre directors have been long forgotten.
Yeah, maybe you’re right. Because Kurt Russell has a couple major hits under his belt, and I think he’s still pretty well known, and will be for a while. Pullman, Paxton and Daniels are a bit fuzzier in my mind.
No, not to my mind, really. It’s not too hard to think of Kurt Russell movies – the “Escape From…” ones, “Breakdown,” “Big Trouble in Little China,” the old Disney ones (Strongest Kid in the World, or something like that?). Then again, I was a kid during his heydey, when I was more likely to watch his movies. Don’t know if his stuff will continue to be remembered, or be forgotten like Reagan’s.
I think Reagan was more well-known than you’re giving him credit for. The man was in 60 different movies. He was the spokesman for GE, back when that was a gig for a fairly big star. He was a big enough star that his testimony in front of HUAC made national news. He was president of SAG. Granted, only one or two of his movies would be considered ‘A List’ movies at the time, but a lot of them were solid, popular B movies.
I’d guess that he might have been around the stature of someone like Alec Baldwin, James Garner, and the like.
Well, here’s the thing. Reagan stopped acting in the 1960’s because leading man roles were drying up for him. At the same time, though, a political career was opening up.
Had politics not worked out for Reagan, he could easily have gone back to acting. He was talented enough, and he aged pretty gracefully, we can all agree.
There would have been roles for older guys, and he would have been good for them.
The actor I always compare Reagan with is Van Johnson–nice and pleasant enough in comedies, okay but not a real heavyweight in dramatic roles. I think if he’d continued his acting career, he’d be remembered at about the same level Van Johnson is today: not one of the Hollywood Legends, but a name that people who know their movies would still recognize, and you might have seen him every now and again as a special guest star on TV into the 1970s and '80’s.
If he got a long-running TV series, maybe. But all the things you mention are not things the average filmgoer would remember (Quiz – off the top of your head, who else testified before HUAC? What other SAG presidents can you name?).
If Reagan had stopped making movies at the time he quit, he would have been just an obscure actor – few hits or memorable roles. However, there is the chance he would have gotten some TV gig. If the show had been successful enough to go into regular syndication, that’s how he would have been remembered.
So that explains why Ronnie went into politics. We can credit the fall of the Berlin Wall to the guy who tried to feel up Joan Crawford in Mildred Pierce
Don’t forget he also starred on TV. He starred on “General Electric Theater”, which was a popular show that ran for 8 years, and was on “Death Valley Days” numerous times.
I think that’s a fair comment about Reagan’s talent, but Van Johnson was in bigger, better movies. I think a better comparison would be Robert Stack, if Stack’s career had ended after The Untouchables, and he hadn’t gotten a second life with Unsolved mysteries and Airplane.
I had always heard his career was stalling when he went into politics. If so, I don’t think he would have been famous.
Eve would have had to announce his passing around here.
I think he would have been such a minor celeb that no one would have complained when his death was noted in Entertainment Weekly with an unpictured “Passing” entry.
UNLESS, he had a second act. Leslie Neilsen was a good dramatic actor who probably would have been forgotten had it not been discovered that he is the funniest man ever to live.
If Reagan had gotten a role as a kind (or grumpy) old grandpa on a sitcom in the 70s, he may have been a MODERN television icon.
