The other day my fiancé and I (whom I may be considering dumping) got in a little heated argument about who the bigger movie star was/is between Angelina Jolie and Sandra Bullock.
She told me that Sandra was/is the bigger star and I laughed then told her she was crazy and out of her mind because there is no way she would believe that. Anyway do we all agree that Angelina Jolie is clearly the bigger star?
Jolie's been in more Summer blockbusters so she's the bigger star but Bullock is definitely the better actress between the two.
She would instantly make any role that Jolie has played over the years that much better imo except maybe Girl, Interrupted. That movie in particular was perfect for Angelina.
You obviously didn't watch Jolie's earlier work like Foxfire, Mojave Moon, Gia, Hell's Kitchen, etc. I absolutely can't picture Bullock delivering these kind of renditions. She (Jolie) cherry picked big money productions after she started becoming pretty famous (around the time she adopted her fist child too) in order to make as much money as possible for her children and to help oversees (taking her goodwill ambassador position very seriously). Had she not done that, with that raw talent she's got, she might have become the greatest star in the business if she wanted it.
Bullock is good. But Jolie could have made any of her roles. The other way around is not possible.
Yeah well I disagree with you. Bullock > Jolie at acting, facial expressions, character development, etc. Angelina is good but Sandra is on higher level.
shareBut that’s a really good reason for dumping the woman you asked to marry you.
share[deleted]
Angelina keeps getting headlines touting her net worth of $160+ million, yet when I look up her filmography her last Big Box Office hit was "Mr. & Mrs. Smith" which never produced any sequels, she was also a costar opposite her soon to be husband Brad Pitt.
She's done voice work in Kung Fu Panda and played Malificent in a twist role but those weren't THAT big of a hit.
She also lives a jet-set lifestyle all year-round so it amazes me that she maintains that net worth with all of those expenses but not very many box office hit.
Sandra has had more critical and financially successful films compared to Jolie though.
Different career trajectories. Sandra started earlier, reached a high level and has more or less stayed there. Angelina's ascent started later, achieved a higher level for a while but has since dropped below Sandra's. That's the way I see it anyway.
shareSandra by a mile. Jolie's films are all mostly forgettable. Though I'll always love her in Hackers.
shareIt's an interesting comparison.
If you go by the numbers, it seems clear to me that Bullock has a stronger commercial record. It's consistent and longer. She's also much more likable.
Jolie is like Pitt for most of his career: Their fame far exceeds their returns.
But this sort of cuts at what it means to be a "star." Stars are bright and remote. Jolie is far more glamorous than Bullock. She's tabloid fodder. This also probably helps her get roles even though she has less impressive returns. I think she was their first choice for Gravity, but went with Bullock when Jolie passed.
Bullock, it's no contest
share