Rogue588

Listening to Oprah's pre-introduction during today's show, she said he's a mega, mega, MEGA SUPERSTAR. Titanic was mentioned as being a great film that grossed over 1 billion dollars and then mentioned Catch Me If You Can and Gangs Of New York as almost an afterthought.

Is he really a MEGA superstar considering that most of his movies after Titanic haven't really done that good.

Now, i'm not trying to equate box office with acting talent, however, if you wish to, feel free.

So, what'dya think?

fumanstan

I think you need more poll choices. Or at least something between MEGA SUPERSTAR and overrated. He's a star, but there are bigger names out there, like Pitt and Depp.

The Cow

Agree that there should be more choices, but on the otherhand I would put him in the same class a Pitt and better than Depp.

There are no MEGAstars (ones that I would go to a movie just because of who was in it) anymore that I can think of. But he is not overrated.

Jackskeleton

I think he is world known and world loved. so that would qualify him for that sort of position in the large scale of things.

Geofferson

Agreed.

PopcornTreeCt

He's a terrific actor who needs better roles that could broaden his range.

Sessa17

I can't stand the guy, & don't understand how so many people think this guy is a great actor. He always just plays himself, I've never seen a movie where he transformed himself or really becomes a different character.

That said, yes, he is a mega-superstar. He is as big as it gets, in that elite character with Tom Cruise, Mel Gibson etc etc. He is a household name, & instantly brings a global recognition & fanbase to anything he touches.

jaeufraser

He's a good actor, he's also a big star.

Yeah, after Titanic he's only had a couple of films make money. But let's see, he only made 7 films (including The Aviator) post Titanic.

The reason he hasn't been a huge blockbuster star was his own choice. Celebrity was a Woody Allen movie, how much money could that make. Don's Plum wasnt even released, he wasn't the star.

So really you have The Beach, The Man in the Iron Mask, Catch Me If You Can, and Gangs of New York.

Each had a certain amount of success.

The Beach - 40 US, 100 Internaitonal
Man In Iron Mask - 57 US, 126 International
Catch Me If You Can - This was a bonafide blockbuster. 164 US, 186 International
Gangs of New York - 77.6 US, 112 International

What can I make from those numbers? Well, first off Leo doesn't attach himself to typical movie star fare, so expecting consistent 200 million dollar blockbusters is rather insane. Nonetheless, he still makes money, and in the last couple years seems to be starting to flex his box office muscle. I would say he's similar to Brad Pitt in stardom (his overseas popularity is rather strong also), though in truth I would venture to say he's the better actor. Looking at his upcoming choices of films, and this year's The Aviator, one can't deny Leo is hooking himself up with good films and good filmmakers, and is really doing well on carving up an interesting career.

Big star? Yes. Biggest star around? No, and I doubt he ever will be as long as he avoids the typical action movie or sweet emotional films that put many at the top of the box office charts. But he's got a firm place as a pretty damn big star nonetheless.

Matthew Chmiel

His films make a profit domestically.
His films make a bigger profit internationally.

I wouldn't call him a MEGA superstar, but he's a superstar nevertheless. He's never going to have Titanic-like success again (then again, who does?); but his films will still make money.

riley_dude

If you look at some of his older films he did a really great job in the roles and then he fell into the Titanic Hype and it did very well so he may have labeled Mega star but I dont think any of his movies since have done great so it may take a few movies before people see him as a "Good Actor." If he can get rid of the Growing Pains stigma he can do anything.

Hello? What's eating Gilbert Grape, I dont think he was really playing himself.

Matthew Chmiel

Come on. That film was no Titanic.

Rogue588

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Cow

Agree that there should be more choices, but on the otherhand I would put him in the same class a Pitt and better than Depp.

Pitt's class? Yes. Better than Depp? Strongly disagree.

Yeah, every actor proves his acting range by playing a mentally retarded person..

I'd have to agree with Sessa17. Everysinglerole is Leo playing...Leo.

jaeufraser

Hmm, for some reason the characters in The Beach, Catch Me If You Can, Gangs of New York seem nothing alike. And they're not really like Jack Dawson. Yeah, he speaks with the same voice in each, but they're all drastically different characters. He's not a chameleon type actor, slinking in and out of roles so no one notices him. But he does have a broad range of comic, dramatic acting that encompasses all these films. How anyone can relate his GoNY performance to Catch Me If You Can is beyond me. Completely different characters.

Kal-El

I think you guys mean he always plays the same character considering no one among you knows him in real life and hence can't really say he "plays himself" much like some people have incorrectly said about Jack Nicholson.

Sessa17

You know exactly what I mean. Playing "mentally retarded" or along those lines IMO is the biggest way to NOT show acting skills or diversity. It's the easiest thing to do IMO, & the most "PC" thing to do in Hollywood, play a challenged character & it's a gauranty for Oscar buzz.

Leo always plays Leo, how many freakin movies has he been in with the same stupid voice over starting the movie explaining things. Basketball Diaries, Titanic, The Beach, Man in the Iron Mask, Gang etc etc, different settings, but he just plays himself in all of them.

Sorry Leo worshippers, IMO he just isn't a good actor. BUT, I disagree with most here, I do think he is at the top of the mega-star list, as big as any movie star there is.

jaeufraser

While I agree those type of roles can be oscar bait, can be the "PC" thing in Hollywood, what exactly makes it easy? Sean Penn, Dustin Hoffman, Leo, Forrest Gump have played mentallly challenged characters and received accolades for it. But they're also excelelnt performers. Do you really believe any actor could convincingly portray a mentally challenged person? For some reason, I doubt that it's as easy as you make it out to be. It's a type of role hat draws attention to itself, no doubt, but I'd hardly equate it as easy from an actor's perspective.

Sessa17

That is EXACTLY my point, of coarse they are going to receive accolades for it, it's the PC world we live in, no major critic is going to knock the performance of a known actor playing a challenged character in a major motion picture. All the roles you listed are exactly my examples, major star + mentally challenged character = guarantied oscar nod or consideration. I know I'm in the minority, but I don't see what the big deal with Hoffman's Rain Man performance was, it was just a very likeable character in a touching movie but I've seen a million comedians do that character just as well. he has had WAY better roles in his career.

I totally disagree it's extremely easy to do, & it's the editing, music, script that make it work, not the actor. I've taken acting classes & I in one class, the entire class got into an argument over this b/c our teacher said exactly what I'm saying, he was outraged at Sean Penn getting so much praise over such an overrated performance in that Sam movie, so we all did an exercise where we acted out challenged roles, I'm telling you it's the easiest thing in the world. Any actor can do it, it's just my opinion, but when an actor wants to get Oscar hype, or try to fool people into thinking he can really act, they will take a "challenged" character. And to stay back on topic, Leo can do 2 characters, a retard & then Leo, that is not a good actor IMO.

jaeufraser

Well, we'll just have to disagree. I haven't seen I Am Sam, so I can't really judget that one. But Forrest Gump, Gilbert Grape and Rainman had characters that went beyond the simple mannerisms and vocal patterns. It was their ability to use those things to create an actual character, not just mime the movements. And they were successful. There's more to those roles than just funny voices and retard speak. Miming is one thing. I'm sure lots of people can sway around like Ray Charles, but Foxx took that and made it a character, brought it to life. Turning that into a convincing character is something completely more complex. I'm sure your whole class was fine with miming the actions of a mentally challenged person. But I doubt all of them could convincingly pull together a fully developed character under those pretenses.

Anyway, how does the character in Catch me if you can in any way relate to Howard Huges, and for that matter relate to the thug in GoNY or in any way relate to the guy in The Beach. Different motivations, different people, different stories and very different roles. Now, I don't even love the guy, he's not the best actor in the world. But he's got more range than most actors. He's not a character actor, though, that's true. But one doesn't have to be a character actor to be talented and have some diversity.

Sessa17

That characters don't relate in any of those movies, but we aren't talking about the characters. We are talking about the actor & his performance, I look at GONY, Basketball Diaries, The Beach (which I actually like), & his other movies that I've seen & all I see is Leo playing Leo, I just don't see the range. Yes, different movies different context, but I see the same performance in every one of those films, he just plays himself put into the setting.

Someone here said he is better than Depp, that is INSANE & a good comparison for our debate. Look at Depp, go from Fear & Loathing toDonnie Brasco to Ed Wood to Pirates of the Carribean to Chocalate to Benny & Joon I mean, holy crap, that is some acting range IMO the maybe the single best actor of our times. He completely transforms himself into that character, I see Ed Wood & I don't see Depp, I see Jack Sparrow & I don't see Johnny Depp. I look at Leo in every single moviei I see, & he gives the same performance with the same lack of range, he is just Leo Di Caprio in everything. I think Rogue 588 knows what I mean, maybe he can explain it better.

jaeufraser

Well, I won't argue with you there. Depp is one of the best actors period, I wouldn't crown Leo with such a distinciton. Depp is that rare actor that is able to be both character actor and leading actor, and does it with amazing talent.

Nonetheless, I still feel Leo gives some really solid performances. He's not a character actor, he's somebody who takes a role and uses his abilities to embody it. Similar to a Hanks or Cruise or others, in many ways I will concede that it is Leo taking himself, and putting himself into a role and persona, but keeping many of his own characteristics. While that is true, I just don't think that makes it bad acting. Most actors are like this, and Leo is very effective in his dramatic and comedic performances, in creating whole characters even if on a surface level they maintain the Leo persona, mostly in terms of mannerisms and such. But I won't be able to convince you it's all opinion. We can solidly agree on Depp's talent, so I'll drink to that.

DonnachaOne

Wait, so he DID play himself? I'm confused.

Big Quasimodo

I have read, and it strikes a resonance of truth with me, that these roles ARE the easiest for an actor. The argument is that it is easier to inhabit and convey a character whose mannerisms, voice, thought processes are so exaggerated and dramatic than it is to "play" a more common character.

Kind of like big boobs and make-up to a porn star..... or not

Rogue588

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sessa17

That characters don't relate in any of those movies, but we aren't talking about the characters. We are talking about the actor & his performance, I look at GONY, Basketball Diaries, The Beach (which I actually like), & his other movies that I've seen & all I see is Leo playing Leo, I just don't see the range. Yes, different movies different context, but I see the same performance in every one of those films, he just plays himself put into the setting.

Someone here said he is better than Depp, that is INSANE & a good comparison for our debate. Look at Depp, go from Fear & Loathing toDonnie Brasco to Ed Wood to Pirates of the Carribean to Chocalate to Benny & Joon I mean, holy crap, that is some acting range IMO the maybe the single best actor of our times. He completely transforms himself into that character, I see Ed Wood & I don't see Depp, I see Jack Sparrow & I don't see Johnny Depp. I look at Leo in every single moviei I see, & he gives the same performance with the same lack of range, he is just Leo Di Caprio in everything. I think Rogue 588 knows what I mean, maybe he can explain it better.

Nah. You did a pretty good job of explaining the tao of Leo.

rexinnih

Overrated but not vastly. He is getting better and I'm waiting for the Aviator.

krazykat72

I think the person said he was a bigger star than Depp (which he is)
not a better actor (which he's not)

-Paul Jacobi-