I having been waiting for this guy to have his career defining flick for ten years or so. I think that he is a pretty high quality actor and is just waiting to explode into mega stardom. He very rarely disappoints in his movies.
I know he is already a “star” but I am waiting for him to blow up like Tom Hanks did after Forrest Gump. Does anyone else think he has it in him to rise to the $20, 000, 000 per movie level?
I think he does, he just needs to right vehicle to get there.
Tom Hanks was 38 when he did Gump. Not much difference between 38 and 44.
That being said though…I have never heard a good word about Kevin Bacon. I’ve always heard that he is one of the biggest assholes in the entertainment industry, right up there with Chevy Chase and, well, whoever else is highly hated.
Tom Hanks has a charm and humour to him that is natural, and is part of what makes him the star that he is. As does Bruce Willis. Kevin Bacon doesn’t have that quality. He’s a little more hard edged. That limits his appeal, quite significantly I think.
Tom Hanks was a megastar at least a year earlier, since in 1993 he did both Philadelphia and Sleepless in Seattle. Yes, there is a big difference between 37 and 44. If you don’t make it by the time you’re 40, you probably won’t make it in Hollywood. Sorry, but that’s the way it is. For that matter, has Kevin Bacon even done any film that was as popular as Splash, which came out in 1984, when Hanks was 28? And there’s no way that Bacon can do the roles now that made Hanks a megastar, like Splash and Big, since Bacon is now too old for them.
Kevin Bacon had his leading man shot in 1984 with Footloose. but he took too many roles in lousy movies like Quicksilver to be considered for leading roles. It’s just as well because all leading men, like Paul Newman for example, become character actors eventually.
I thought Kevin Bacon’s door to superstardom came when he did Tremors… too bad he didn’t stick around for the next two (or, if IMDB is to be believed, three) sequels.