English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

With the recent hooplah that's going on with Tom Cruise leaving Paramount, I was wondering if people actually care if a "big star" is in a movie they want to see or not.
For example; Would Pirates of the Carribean made as much money in ticket sales if Johnny Depp or Orlando Bloom hadn't been in it? Or would you have gone to see it if the lead roles were cast to lesser or unknown actors?

2006-08-24 23:58:06 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Entertainment & Music Movies

I'm going to set this one to vote because all the answers are too good. I can't choose.

2006-08-30 22:21:46 · update #1

8 answers

I am more likely to see a movie if it stars an actor that I like rather than unknown actors or ones that I'm not particularly fond of. For example, I'll watch any movie that Jason Isaacs is in, simply because I like him. I figure, even if the movie is lousy, at least he be entertaining in it. But, on the other hand, if the plot sounds good, I may go see a movie without any big stars in it. And, no; I don't think that Pirates of the Caribbean would have done very well at all if Johnny Depp and Orlando Bloom's roles had gone to other actors. A lot of their fans went to the movie strictly to see them.

2006-08-25 00:09:18 · answer #1 · answered by Kami 6 · 0 0

I think the industry feels that there needs to be at least one big star name on the marquee to draw the fans to theatre. Then they can put less well known people in, or newbies, or even experiments, for the other roles.

I think most people choose movies by whether or not at least one of their favorite stars is in it, unless, like "Narnia", there is a lot of hooplah played up about the story before it's release--and that one, by playing on the fact that it was a chidren's story, and a Christian one, could guarantee itself a certain audience.

If the story is strong enough, like "Schindler's List", you can use unknowns--Liam Neeson got his start there--but they still stuck in Ben Kingsley for good measure--a well-known and respected name, and a star in a category of such strength and brilliance that few stars ever enter it.

Personally, Tom Cruise no longer interest me as an actor. In Top Gun it was those eyes and that attitude that set him on his way.

I haven't seen Pirates of the Caribbean, although I admire quite a lot of Johnny Depp's work.

And then there's Kenneth Branagh, who puts lots of big stars together, not for the names, but for fun, and for the groupings, and still doesn't get the credit he deserves.

So, I guess the short answer is, Hollywood thinks that people think this way, and that's how they operate to get their money to the bank. And, by and large, although I deplore it, they are probably right.

Hey Ho, Maggie!

2006-08-25 00:15:36 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I do not care if big actors are in them. Sometimes it is fun to see big ones, but I am happy seeing independent films. I like all kinds. Now it is nice to see that Paramount will not be using Cruise. That is wonderful. I will be supporting them and seeing more of their movies since they are so socially responsible. Pirates I did not see it.

2006-08-30 00:32:47 · answer #3 · answered by adobeprincess 6 · 0 0

Yes, there's no doubt people have a tendency to go see their favorite stars. something about the character of the person, or their style, or personality shines through usually OR if not, then that fact as well.... how malleable they can be and successful in subsuming what you, as a viewer feel IS their personality, into the role... making you forget it's Jack Nicholson and seeing the Joker, or whatever. People connect with their stars via their "on-screen persona" as well as what you may see of them on the various talk shows as they sell the flick.

note: Maggie, Liam Neeson hardly "got his start" in "List" (see 'rob roy' among many others)

No, I think fewer adults would've gone to see Pirates without those guys. people who are into film respect Depp because of his acting ability and the choices and chances he takes, some for his prettiness...lol... but whatever it may be, people have their favorites and their habits and will be more likely to fork over their dough to see a fave.

one last example: Adam Sandler. some find him annoying as a comedian, some adore him. sometimes that's all you know about the movie mostly before you see it, be it dvd or theatre.

sometimes that alone is enough for you to decide. ever heard people talk about films? "what's it about?" "I think it's a bank heist movie, but it's got Bruce willis or denzel washington in it" or "It's the new 'so-and-so' movie."

2006-08-25 01:06:32 · answer #4 · answered by albany 2 · 0 0

I think the acting is what makes a good movie. You can have good actors and they don't need to be "big" stars. I'm sure if they are good they will eventually become big stars, but I would have seen Carribean without the names. The names just made it better.

2006-08-29 02:23:49 · answer #5 · answered by binojo2 2 · 0 0

Pirates needed Johnny's acting skills as Jack Sparrow. A movie doesn't need a big star to be good. it just needs to be a good movie to make money.

2006-08-25 00:04:50 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

Quite frankly don't care much about stars in the movies.
Though they do have much pulling power.
Tom Cruise has lost the plot, i used to like him and watch all his movies especially the mission impossible ones. I haven't even bothered to watch Mission Impossible 3, he bores me

2006-08-25 00:10:39 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I will not go to a Tom Cruise movie and other "stars" If a star has attacked GWB, I will not go to there movies and lost of my friends refuse to go to Tom Cruise Movies.

2006-08-25 00:07:07 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers