This has been going on forever.
People who really don't have any talent or don't bring anything to the table.
It's apparent now more than ever with all the reality stuff.
Some old school ones
Zsa Zsa Gabor
Kitty Carlisle
Charro
Some newer ones
Paris Hilton
All of the Kardashians
Who you can you name?
Jessica Alba
Mila kunis
Jennifer Lawrence
Chloe moretz
While none of these ladies bring a lot to the table IMO
they are still somewhat productive at their craft.
Think deeper croft.
Sylvester stallone
Will smith
Ben affleck
Not a fan of any of them but Smith and Affleck still do something.
Not good but something.
Believe me croft, I can't stand Affleck. Just trying to be fair.
Stallone may have very well crossed the line into this category.
He probably did a long time ago.
Sly wrote the script for Rocky, which was an excellent sports/underdog movie, and which also made a role for him that made him a movie star. He is past his prime. So is James Cameron, an action director whose accomplishments I enjoy and admire. We all decline; but I submit to you that decline in no way negates the respect due to the achievements of our prime.
shareI will agree with this but at what point is one or two things enough?
I haven't seen a Stallone movie that I've liked since 1982.
His best was in the 70's and very early 80's.
Even some of his best is sketchy at best.
I'm not sure Rocky gives him immunity from this category.
Rocky Movies: Director: Sylvester Stallone Writer: Sylvester Stallone Stars: Sylvester Stallone, screen writer: Sylvester Stallone, Screen writer for the Rambo movies, he is also worth 400 million dollars for his works, what a no talent SOB.
Zsa Zsa Gabor, Kitty Carlisle, Charo all actors and entertainers,
I love this post :p
I'm not saying he's not talented he's just not in my wheelhouse.
Don't you think there's a time that the "non" contributions overtake the contributions?
Let's say I was in a movie, just one movie and that's all I did.
Maybe even a small role in one movie. That makes me an actor.
If I never do another movie again but continue to stay in the spotlight
wouldn't I fall into this category?
"Don't you think there's a time that the "non" contributions overtake the contributions?"
I agree completely with this statement but that usually means they are in the public eye for something other than their acting work. In Sylvester Stallone's case, he's not out there appearing on talk shows or in social media to any large degree and what he is still known best for is his roles in movies like Rocky and Rambo.
When I think of people who's "non-contributions" take over, I think of people that may have been famous for minor roles but went on to a sort of second life in the public eye. For example Jm J. Bullock was famous for his role of Monroe on Too Close for Comfort and after that he had mostly minor television roles. But he also had a second life so to speak in the late 80s/early 90's as a panelist on Hollywood Squares. He was becoming much more well known as a game show panelist than he was for his acting contributions. The same may have been true for someone like Paul Lynde in the 70's. For someone that has reached the heights of Sylvester Stallone, that's really never going to be the case.
First things first.
When I woke up this morning I never thought I'd hear the name Jim J. Bullock or
Paul Lynde for that matter. So thanks for that!! No contest. Paul Lynde all day long.
This is the part that becomes a little subjective. As each person's opinion will differ.
I also consider non contributions as films or projects that are "bad".
When the person is making more "bad" films vs. "good" films.
Can 1 or 2 great rolls be enough to quantify a "great" career over the span of 50 years?
I would like to see a list of actor's movie who have lost the most money.
Not saying Stallone would be on that list but it would be interesting to see the numbers.
Haha definitely Paul Lynde!
I get what you're saying. For me it's less about the quality of the work and more about whether or not that's still what they're known for. The Expendables may not be a great movie franchise but I don't think any of the films were colossal failures and they were marketed in a way that people were aware of when and where they were playing. So Stallone (to stick to the example) is still known for being an action star and not just famous for being famous. The fact that he had an Oscar nom a few years back for Creed also helps his case.
But to stick to what you're saying and an example that may qualify would be Steven Seagal. If you look at his IMDB page, he is still making movies but I don't know anyone that watches them, they're not really marketed heavily if at all, and he seems to be more famous for being an all around bloated a-hole these days.
This seems to split a little but it looks like more people agree with you
regarding the phrase.
I also admit I might be a little biased when it comes to Stallone.
Not that I don't like him but I just don't watch his movies anymore.
Seagal is another good example. Another one that I don't watch anymore.
Or ever really. He's done movies, TV and shown his face in MMA.
Somebody's still paying him and he does seem to pop up every now and then.
Dewey, we don't agree on this. Please explaine the success of The Expendables to me.
People keep pretending that The Action Movie died in the 1980s. Please explain, then, how the comic book and video game movies of the contemporary era are not action movies. They are shitty and uninvolving action movies, to be sure. They are action movies framed around fantasy characters rather that protagonists made of actual flesh and blood; but they are action, nonetheless. The oldest surviving work of fiction in human history, Gilgamesh, is an action story, featuring Enkidu, the Wild Man, the precursor of almost every superhero and action star. Do I need to remind you that Stallone MADE himself a star by writing the script for Rocky, and then having the physical moxie to play the part?
Then let's turn to First Blood, well into the 80s: a poignant, real action-movie examination of PTSD syndrome in vets of the Vietnam War. In the novel that was the basis for the film, John Rambo dies. The author said it was the only possible plot resolution, and I agree; but, in true Hollywood capitalist greed tradition, they changed the ending to allow all and sundry to make more money. Is First Blood a great movie? No. Is it a great action movie with an actual brain? Hell, yes. Is Sly Stallone Clint Eastwood? Hell! no! Clint may as well be Odin in the Hollywood pantheon of stars. But Sly will never be "a celebrity.
You know, Bill Shakespeare hasn't done much, lately; neither has da Vinci.
I'm the first one to say these views are subjective.
There will always be action movies. This genre will never die.
Especially when you load it up with "stars". Not necessarily actors but stars.
I just choose not to partake. For me they're all the same.
Super Hero movies- Bad guy tries to take over the world. A group of good guys try to stop them.
Action movies- a bunch of guys run around shoot people and blow things up.
They also try to be funny with a bunch of one liners. It's been the same blueprint forever.
For me I've already seen most action movies years ago. Different faces but still the same.
As for Stallone he has done some good things in his career.
Nobody cold have played Rocky like he did.
I just feel that at this point the negative has out weighed the positive.
I know this is a business but just because it's popular doesn't mean it's "good" IMO
I watch my share of mindless movies but I know what I'm getting.
I want to be challenged and have to think when I watch most movies.
Not a remake or a reboot or a blueprint movie.
I don't want to watch a vexatious movie.
For me these movies bring nothing of substance to the table.
Just as it is in science, success in entertainment is based on a formula that provides predictable results. The same can be said of retail, hospitality, medicine, prostitution and probably hundreds of other industries of which I know nothing. I think your breakdown of the slight difference between comic book movies and action movies is astute. You mentioned subjectivity being a factor in what we appreciate. Years ago, I saw a documentary on the three top action stars of the time: Clint Eastwood, Sylvester Stallone and Arnold Schwarzenegger. One question the documentarian asked each of them was, "What do you fear?" Sly's answer was "Poverty," and my heart went out to him. I thought, "Here is a self-made man who literally made a career for himself by writing an Oscar-winning movie with a starring role for himself, and he hasn't been able to let go of his poverty consciousness. He does not see how much talent he has." That's just me, Dewie.
shareThat's a good point and I agree with that analysis.
I think it's fair to point out many retail stores also went bust using that same formula.
Some of the more successful doctors don't always follow that formula.
They have a patient who's not getting better they need to change it.
I would assume that even prostitutes who go above and beyond the formula may be more successful.
That's a nice story and it does go to show a lot about his character.
Especially if that's where he came from. Always fearful that he could loose it at any time.
As usual I always respect and like to hear your opinions.
First, thank you, and I, as well, always respect your opinion. I want to add, that, as part of that documentary of the the three consummate action statrs of the 1970s, the film makers asked Clint Eastwood , "How do you feel about aging?," and he said. "I love it. It means that I can play parts that I couldn't play before." How many other thespians do you think would have embraced aging as gracefully and intelligently as Clint? My guess is, "damn few."
Arnold, Sly, they fucking ROCK! But Clint Eastwood was THE MAN in action movies! This man had
more smarts than, in my
opinion, any other male movie star
in
history.
You have me intrigued by this documentary.
I'll have to look for it.
I really enjoy these types. When great people at their craft get together and talk.
I just watched a documentary with Hitchcock and Truffaut sitting around at a table
And discussing their visions as film makers.
Also three of the greatest hitters in baseball history talking about the art of hitting.
Extremely fascinating.
I Agree about Eastwood. A true legend.
One of the best actors ever not to mention a top notch director.
A feat few have accomplished.
First, I completely agree with your advice to "Alice." He never lets a COMPLETE lack of understanding what the fuck is going on to prevent him from making yet another useless alleged contribution.
Second, her name is Chole Grace Moritz, and she has done more to make the world happy than "Alice" has. She even appeared in a movie, Dark Shadows, with Alice Cooper, the only man of whom I can think who can call himself Alice and not look like a fucking obsessed asshole.
Third, to respond to this topic's actual question: I nominate everyone who has ever been on a so-called reality *cough*scripted*cough* TV show, and Angelyene, the hot broad who had billboards all over L. A. 20 years ago, but who never actually got into show business, not even porn.
First, I'm putting it in a bubble and letting it float away.
Second, See above.
Third. Agreed. I had totally forgotten about Angelyne.
She was everywhere. Even some movies that I remember. Not good ones.
Even though I did like Earth Girls . At least I remember liking it.
She very well missed her calling if she didn't do any porn. That would have been her ticket.
As usual, another contribution that nobody else would have thought of. Very nice.
[deleted]
Lol. I love it when people correct other people incorrectly.
shareIn that case I think you're being too harsh on Charo. She can definitely play the guitar, that's how she started out.
Here's just one example:
https://youtu.be/yMcdFV1kNv4
She definitely was talented. I remember being surprised the first time I saw her perform.
I just think she became more famous for her looks, her broken English and her "cuchi-cuchi"
That's how I remember her at least. I think more people remember her for this and not her music.
Could be totally wrong though.
No, I don't think you're wrong. I only knew her from her silly act on The Love Boat before discovering she was a talented guitar player. But according to her, it brings in the cash.
shareI remember that.
Wasn't she a stowaway or something.
She also was always on every variety show. Back when they had variety shows.
Plus, you know, The Cuchi-Cuchui. Very much like Abbe Lane's backup to Xavier Cugat's Brazil '66!
sharenot yet
shareThe "Friends" cast.
Everyone on reality TV.
Brad, Ang, and George Clooney
I'll agree on everything but Brad and Clooney.
At least they've had some good things. IMO
Maybe not recently but still enough for now at least.
Jolie is moving in that direction
shareThis isn't going to go over too well is it.
I looked at her filmography.
I've actually only seen a few of her films.
I don't think I actually liked any of them.
Jolie's career as an actress seems to be winding down, the only hit she's had in recent years was the terrible "Maleficent". But if she wants to direct instead she's welcome to try, I'm just not seeing anything she puts out after the night "By The Sea" came on HBO. Godawful self-indulgent mess!
And yeah, Clooney and Pitt are heading in that direction, if they aren't there already. Clooney hasn't had a hit in years and seems to be considering a move into politics, Pitt has been more successful as a producer than an actor, and is currently much more famous for his private life than any films he's appeared in.
I'm not really a fan of Pitt or Clooney although I have liked some movies.
I also don't watch all their movies. Only the ones that interest me.
Both seem to do their share of movies but only one out of every 5 or 6 are worthwhile.
Neither one of them are putting hit after hit for sure.
I liked Hail Caesar! but wouldn't consider it a success by any means.
I'll still give them the benefit for now.
Romanian actors and actresses counts?
shareIf they fit into the category then they count.
shareThe second I saw this, my first thought was Zsa Zsa! She actually did make a few movies like "Women from Outer Space" back in the fifties and she appeared on Gilligan's Island.
There were a number of celebrities on the old game shows who seemed to be famous for being on game shows. I used to like The Match Game. I always thought it was funny when the announcer called them "stars", people like Brett Somers whose claim to fame was being married to Jack Klugman and appearing on The Odd Couple as Oscar's wife. Wonder how she got that gig? hmm
I just watched Three Ring Circus which was a Martin and Lewis movie.
Zsa Zsa was in it. Didn't do much but she was in it.
You and me both thought of game shows. The Match Game was perfect.
Brett Somers, Charles Nelson Reilly, Fannie Flagg, Joyce Bulifant, Bert Convy, Elaine Joyce,
Orson Bean, Patti Deutsch, Dick Gautier, the list is endless.
I loved that show.
The Match game was one of my favorites. Charles Nelson Reilly could make me laugh without saying a word.
To be fair, some of people did have acting credits. Some were known for the stage or nightclubs. But most of them were hardly "stars". Why that word was applied to them, I'll never know!
Some of the guest stars on game shows were actually the hosts of their own game shows. I always thought Bill Cullen was funny.
CNR was spectacular.
He was also in Lidsville which part of H.R. Pufnstuf. A whole show about characters that were hats.
Only in the 70's.
Also remember him from The Ghost and Mrs. Muir and he was in a few episodes of Love American Style.
He makes me think of Paul Lynde.
Bill Cullen was great. Bert Convey had his own game show too. Tattletales I think.
Remember John Davidson from That's Incredible? I think he had his own talk show too.
Oh, I remember all those people. John Davidson did a lot of Hollywood Squares. Sometimes I watch it on youtube. I had forgotten how he used to act like the male version of the dumb blonde. He only pretended to be confused, but he usually got the right answer.
But some of those famous celebrities like Arlene Francis and Peggy Cass seemed to be best known for being celebrity panelists.
John Davidson also did his time on Love Boat and Love American Style.
He was also in in a TV show with Sally Fields I remember.
She had ESP if I remember correctly.
ESP was huge in the 70's. lol
There WERE a lot of those people that were mostly known for game shows.
Nipsey Russel and his poems, Avery Schreiber who I remember doing a Doritio commercial,
Jo Ann Pflug, Debralee Scott.
There were so many weren't there.
OH yeah, "The Girl with Something Extra"
I loved Nipsey Russell's poems. I always waited for the host to ask him to recite one.
Jo Ann Pflug made a lot of guest appearances on TV in the seventies, but she never seemed to rise to star status. She had another connection to game shows. She used to be married to Chuck Woolery.
That's the show.
Nipsey was great wasn't he.
I never knew she was married to Chuck Woolery.
Seems like he had his share of wives.
Also seems like so many of these stars were on game shows, The Love Boat
and Love American Style. I have no Idea what that means.
Just a sign of the times I guess.
Pamela Anderson. Just take any pretty girl and put some sillicons in her boobs and lips.
Now that I think about it, almost the entire Baywatch cast!
I never really thought of her as pretty or attractive. Just not my thing at all.
She might be most famous for her video with Tommy Lee.
I don't know that it fair to lump Carlisle and Gabor with Hilton and Kardashian. At least the old school ones attempted to be something and in defense of Carlisle quite a few actors prefer the craft to being a celebrity hence they prefer the stage to the screen. Kardashian is simply a marketing tool and to my knowledge has never to attempt to make a film of any gravity. Satan is preparing a special new ring (level) for when Kim K arrives on his doorstep. He has not had to do that since the advent of the super dictators during the 20th Century.
shareIt's true that Carlisle and Gabor did attempt things including acting.
They won't be remembered for that though. They were more well known for being a socialite or debutant
or marrying rich men.
I also think at some point certain people who aren't contributing can fall into this category.
If Somebody did something 30 years ago and hasn't done anything since.
Being a "has been" it not the same thing as being famous for being famous. I always looked at somebody such as Carlisle as more in the category of being a "personality" versus being a celebrity implying the person is recognizable although not "top rung." Dean Martin more fit my criteria for what a celebrity was in that he was far more recognized than Carlisle. Some other poster talked about Stallone and others and as far as Stallone goes I would say he falls into retired but not by his choice. He simply outlived the genre he made popular as a action character. I would have said hero but Rambo really is more of an anti-hero as he was an outsider to the establishment in his movies.
shareI know what you're saying and it isn't necessarily the same thing.
I still think that at some time you can cross that threshold.
With an actor for instance. If people are following him around and taking pictures etc....
and he hasn't done a movie in 10 years or a meaningful one in 30 years, the only
reason they are following him is because he's famous.
At some point people will ask why is this person so famous.
Kind of like star vs actor. Hollywood is full of stars but not many actors.
People who study their craft and challenge themselves and the audience.
Technically they are still all actors.
Of course this is all just the way I look at it.
Kardashian is simply a marketing tool and to my knowledge has never to attempt to make a film of any gravity