Read the LA Times Article here. |
|
|
Then, write a well-developed argument paragraph that makes a claim about whether or not Angelica Jade-Bastien is correct in her assertion. Be sure to cite in MLA format with your key evidence. When you are finished, comment on one other student's post with your reflection on their claim. What do you agree or disagree with them about?
168 Comments
Bentley Huff
3/14/2020 07:06:05 pm
Many critics today have gained the opinion that large scale movies such as the Avengers films have prompted a halt in the development of big name actors. I however disagree, as the Marvel company and brand has opened up, there have been numerous new actors and actresses that have taken the world by storm over the (current) 19 movie span. In the article, "HAVE SUPERHEROES KILLED THE MOVIE STAR?" Angelica Jade Bastien, states that, "the actors I’m worried about are the ones rarely given a chance to play superhero characters in the first place." Which portrays a raw truth about many mainstream movies now: There are not enough roles to play. Although this is a rather jarring fact that points out a problem in the movie business today, along with the main point of the article, it does not help justify the argument that superheroes killed the movie star. Superhero movies, in fact, actually have opened up more spots for developmental roles, as that specific genre of movie has skyrocketed ion recent years. Although the movie industry has limited room for higher level jobs and leading roles, if anything, it is still opening up more jobs for the lower income and less developed actors and actresses.
Reply
Tatiana Sidorova
3/15/2020 12:18:07 pm
While I agree with Huff's claim that Bastein's argument is incorrect, I respectfully disagree with Huff's claim that a problem of the contemporary movie industry is that there are not enough roles to play. With the current speed of the releases of new movies,and with the sheer amount of movies being produced in Hollywood, there are enough roles for any actor. I would, however, agree with a somewhat refined argument: that there are not enough star roles to play.
Reply
3/15/2020 07:59:37 pm
Go Bentley for being our first poster! I am intrigued by any examples you have when you say that "superhero movies, in fact, actually have opened up more spots for developmental roles." Kumail Nanjiani and Chris Pratt are funny guys who have gotten recent opportunities to take their small screen funny guy personas to the big screen in the Superhero format, but most actors, at least to me, seem like big names we are already familiar with in order to draw the most numbers of seats in the theaters.
Reply
Mirakyl Drake
3/16/2020 02:26:13 pm
I agree with your claim that more jobs for lower income and less present actors and actresses are oping up in the changing industry. With higher numbers in audiences and more people wanting to watch more superhero movies, more job opportunities come up, which also means audiences want newer faces on the big screen. The more popular roles however, or as you stated the higher level and leading roles, are more challenging to get to which can call for bigger movie stars.
Reply
Tatiana Sidorova
3/15/2020 12:12:21 pm
Mrs. Bastein is incorrect in her assertion that superhero movies have "killed" movie stars, as there are still rising movie stars today. The way movies are being made has changed, certainly, in the past fifty years, and the composition of the movies being released changed as well. Modern audiences seem to prefer to watch superhero movies where interchangeable actors play a character, but that does not mean that actors playing are not gaining stardom from their roles. According to "Have Superheroes Killed the Movie Star?", "Most ticket buyers don’t go to... see Suicide Squad because of Margot Robbie’s skills", but that does not mean that Margot Robbie does not gain stardom and a fan base from her role. Evidence for this is the fact that in the sequel to Suicide Squad, Margot Robbie will play Harley Quinn again. If all actors were currently as interchangeable as Mrs. Bastein claims they are then Hollywood could have easily hired another actress, perhaps one that could be paid less than the now-famous Margot Robbie. Thus, the modern movie industry, though undeniably different from that of the past, is still bringing forth movie stars, some of them gaining stardom from even superhero movies, which is in direct contradiction with Bastein's argument (Bastein, Angelica Jade. "HAVE SUPERHEROES KILLED THE MOVIE STAR?" LA Weekly, September 23, 2016).
Reply
3/15/2020 06:05:57 pm
I agree with this comment, especially the example of Margot Robbie. This is similar to my argument, in which I used Robert Downey Jr. , to explain that the Iron Man movies would not have such a huge rating or huge fan base without Robert Downey Jr. in them. I agree that stars are not falling, and that on the contrary, each day they become more famous and develop greater fan bases as they continue acting and pleasing the viewers.
Reply
Allen Schiffer
3/16/2020 10:19:23 am
While I agree that actors are gaining stardom, and I believe Bastien would as well, when she wrote, "Most ticket buyers don’t go to... see Suicide Squad because of Margot Robbie’s skills," she didn't mean that the actress would not gain a fan base. When she wrote, "Each has achieved some level of popularity and even a somewhat dedicated fandom. But they have also been unable to translate the visibility their characters bring them into success elsewhere," she meant that the actors would not be able to get popular for other roles. An example would be Margot Robbie playing Harley Quinn, as it may be difficult for her to gain a following for her roles in other films.
Reply
Tatiana Cobos
3/16/2020 11:22:46 am
I agree with your claim and especially found it interesting that you brought up how movies have changed over time. I mentioned in my claim that although it is not a superhero series, the classic Hollywood series 007.The audiences cannot wait for the big reveal and events like these have been around for decades. I also agreed with your claim about Margot Robbie because she is a great example of an actress that has not been lost in the shadows of a superhero. She is known as many other roles as well as her charisma on screen interviews.
Reply
Alex Acosta
3/16/2020 11:57:48 am
I agree with this comment in the terms of why would Hollywood bring Margot Robbie back to play Harley Quinn again if actors and actresses are so interchangeable? Relating your example of Margot Robbie and my example of Robert Downey Jr., Hollywood brought these actors/actresses back because of the impact they had on the movies they starred in before. This allows me to agree that the idea of movie stars are not weakening, but they are becoming stronger and developing larger fan bases as the continue to provide pleasure to the viewers.
Reply
Swami Kajale
3/16/2020 03:06:08 pm
I agree with Tatiana as this also goes along with my response that the movie actors are a huge part to what a movie is and people acknowledge the actors that are playing in the movie not just the character.
Reply
Jordan Karim
3/16/2020 08:19:33 pm
I 100% agree with this comment because she uses the example of Margot Robbie which proved that the movies do improve based on the stars and their impact on that particular movie. The same could be said for an actor like Will Smith who we don't only see as his role, and helps the movie better just by his presence.
Reply
3/15/2020 06:03:04 pm
It is false that movie stars would not be successful if it wasn’t for the characters they are in charge of portraying in many Hollywood films. Many of these famous stars have great skills and professions that are vital and that create their fanbase. Not only that, but also, it is highly unlikely that famous stars are famous just because of one single character they have acted as. Most stars have acted in several movies and as different characters, and still get as many fans and viewers to see the films. According “Have Superheroes Killed the Movie Star?”, Bastien claims that stars are only famous because of the personas they act as in movies: “It becomes undeniable that the actors aren’t the stars, the characters and the property are.”
Reply
McKenna Clary
3/16/2020 11:09:50 am
I agree with the claim you argued in your response. I also used the same example of Robert Downey Jr. and his role as Iron Man in the Marvel franchise in my argument as it provides evidence against Bastien's claim. The Actor's roles in Superhero movies does provide a fan base that follows them throughout their acting career, and their fan base won't change when the actor plays another role.
Reply
Khemille Brown
3/16/2020 11:16:41 am
I agree with Jocelyn that the actor does define the role and makes it more interesting as a viewer to see the progression of an actor. However I disagree that stars cannot become famous off of one role because many actors have become famous off of one film such is the case with Daniel Radcliffe(harry potter) and Matt Leblanc(Joey from friends).
Reply
CarolAnn Norris
3/16/2020 11:25:29 am
I agree with this argument because the idea of the impact that each star still has on people is incredibly important and different. Some movies would simply not be the same. Often Brie Larson is referred to as a casting mistake in Captain Marvel because the role wasn't given justice that the comics held, and it is ultimately each person's individual ideas that determine that.
Reply
Reagan Schooler
3/16/2020 02:38:37 pm
I agree that the actors bring certain skills to a role. Without these skills the actor brings, the character may not be as impactful to a wider audience. And, if the actor didn't matter then there would be no reason to continue paying high rates for a specific actor for that role.
Reply
Mackenzie May
3/17/2020 03:24:24 pm
I agree because of course actors are known for the personas they play because they are a good actor. You know Mark Hamill as Luke Skywalker because he played the role well and he is the main character. The author doesn't seem to mind how we only remember Leonardo DiCaprio as Jack in "Titanic" or Keeanu Reeves as John Wick.
Reply
McKenna Clary
3/16/2020 10:45:16 am
Superheroes have affected the images of movie stars and the criteria in order to successfully be one but haven’t “killed the movie star” (Bastien). Newer actors are becoming well-known due to joining the comic franchises, but this prevents those individuals from having “the ability or time to craft their own star image” (Bastien). Though I agree with this argument, those individuals will reach stardom through those superhero roles. Actors gain a following due to these roles, which provides credibility that may help secure a future role. These roles also provide acknowledgement for life where viewers recognize actors who played superheroes in movies of a different genre. For example, when a viewer watches the newly released Dr. Dolittle, they will recognize Robert Downey Jr. as the actor who played Iron Man, a movie produced by Marvel. It is very rare for someone to see Robert and recognize him as the five-year-old boy in his debut film Pound released in 1970. Angelica argues about how the actors who play leading roles as superheroes are secluded to playing that one role for years, “skewering their ability to craft any sort of image outside of the familiar heroes that they play.” Though this is correct, these actors are still building reputations and popularity through that role and will be considered as a credible, talented actor and a star.
Reply
Tamaiya Anderson
3/16/2020 12:18:20 pm
I completely agree with your sentiment about actors still building their reputations. Becoming a movie star takes time and being in a superhero role can help these actors flourish.
Reply
Megan Moran
3/17/2020 11:45:22 am
I entirely agree with Mckenna's points. In my paragraph, I defended Bastein's claim that superheroes have killed movie stars, but I think Mckenna put it into terms more clearly. People will watch other movies and recognize characters that are not in that cinematic universe, such as her examples of Robert Downey Jr. Actors are still able to gain popularity, but it will be by playing these characters. Their characters will be recognized in other movies even though they are not playing that same role.
Reply
Vernard Martin
3/18/2020 07:00:30 pm
I agree with this comment and like how you referenced Robert Downey Jr not being known for his earlier movies.
Reply
Khemille Brown
3/16/2020 11:08:32 am
Today our entertainment system and the people within it have become a major part of our society with new music, movies, and characters making appearances regularly. Some people criticize that superheros in film are crushing our perception of what a star is and leaving other actors unimportant and drab in comparison. Writer Angelica Jade-Bastien explorers the concept of superheros taking away from the fame of other celebrities. I agree with this argument and add to it by saying that superheros, while they may overshadow some actors, have changed the face of stardom by making it a more competitive field. As stated in Jade-Bastien’s argument traditional stars change the movie just by being a part of it, Jade-Bastien used the example of Ben Affleck as Batman and his success as Batman being based on him playing a character that is known by everyone; nevertheless Ben Affleck has been featured in many successful movies not involving playing a superhero. In addition to this Jade- Bastien explained that when we watch movies featuring household names we remember earlier performances from them and it affects how we view their films. "Bankability is often the easiest answer to the question of what makes a movie star”, Jade- Bastien said, leading the audience to believe that stars may focus on what a film can bring them. By informing that actors' measure of success is proven by past roles and how much money is made proves that superheros are redefining what it means to be a movie star because stars now have become strategically driven in the roles they pursue in an effort to find what will make the most money, which often times are superhero roles, making the movie world more competitive.
Reply
Austin Regan
3/16/2020 11:28:11 am
I don't agree with your statement, but I do see your point. I feel that Marvel does a better job at allowing actors overshadow their superhero counterpart then DC. I also used Ben Affleck as an example in my paragraph as well. Your statement about other roles that are more famous than the actor's superhero counterpart is also correct.
Reply
Tatiana Cobos
3/16/2020 11:12:11 am
Angelica Bastien's claim in the article "Have super Hero's Killed the Movie Star" is a misleading assertion of the superhero industry. Since the beginning of movie series the concept of changing actors was always been seen as different and in many cases an exciting event for audiences. Premiers full of fans, actors, and media generate millions of dollars and expose actors to the spotlight. A popular classic is movie series 007 which changes actors every couple of years.This announcement brings attention to the franchise and creates a tradition for fans that await the reveal. To many actors playing roles such as 007 or Spider man is a massive honor which these actors have dreamed about for years. Take for example Tom Holland, he is the latest actor to play Spider Man, he is also well known for his magazine appearances and has been featured in movies other than Spider Man. In the article Bastien suggests that actors that play superheros only jeopardizes "their ability to craft any sort of image outside of the familiar heroes that they play". However the amount of projects for example, that Tom Holland has started has lead him to be known to the public as a model and the voice of a character of a new Disney movie. Actors who play superheros are not stuck in the shadows of the role but instead, they are given an important platform.The spotlight to create new projects for the public and variety of roles these actors play only keep audiences wanting more.
Reply
Austin Regan
3/16/2020 11:13:56 am
It is false that the movie characters are more famous then the actors themselves. The reason why people come to the movie theaters to watch superhero movies is how the actor portrays them. An example of this is "The Suicide Squad" Joker (Jared Leto), "The Dark Knight" Joker (Heath Ledger), and Joker (Joaquin Phoenix) from "Joker". All of the actors are playing the same character, but they portrayed them in different ways, and the way the actors portrayed them effected the movie. With Phoenix though he was the main character, but it does not stop the fact that he played his role very well. The same comparison can be said for Batman. Ben Affleck was suppose to be an older and more tired Batman. While Christian Bale's was a younger and fresher take on the character. Banstein stated, "Most ticket buyers don't go to "Deadpool" because they're enamored of Ryan Reynold's charm". The reason why ticket buyers go to see superhero movies is to see their favorite heroes on screen, and then the fans decide if they like the character or not. Banstein statement about popularity being a factor is not true. Robert Downey Jr. was arrested for drug possession, and his career went downhill. When he was first cast as Tony Stark many critics were saying that the movie would be a bust due to Iron Man during that time was not known as well as Spiderman. Although when the movie came out people were captivated to Robert Downey Jr. and the movie became a huge success.
Reply
Gideon
3/16/2020 11:26:46 am
I agree completely, and I thought the idea of bringing up multiple different actors playing the same role was a good idea. I partially did the same in my argument. I also thought using Iron man and Robert Downey Jr. as an example really helped your argument.
Reply
Tyler Richardson
3/16/2020 01:23:40 pm
You have lots of grammatical errors, but overall the claim is very solid. I think that the use of Robert Downey Jr. in Ironman as an example was good.
Reply
CarolAnn Norris
3/16/2020 11:20:30 am
Overall, the concept of "HAVE SUPERHEROES KILLED THE MOVIE STAR?" is incredibly flawed. The idea of a "Movie Star" is a social construct, which the definition of is difficult to determine. Despite the vagueness of a "Movie Star", the article defines it as, "A true star, in essence, is a potent mix of sex appeal, mystery and relatability all spiced with the ability to surprise and a certain something extra that no one else has." (Bastien). The definition proves itself to be subjective and displays little actual value when determining stars. For example, saying "relatability" is very broad, and not everyone can or can't relate to 1961's Holly Golightly, despite Audrey Hepburn being a "Movie Star", while still being unknown to some people. The author later mentions about movie stars,"The activism of Harry Belafonte and George Clooney brings attention to causes that many would like to forget." Although the activism that both actors had was phenomenal, more recently, actors like Leonardo DiCaprio have been an active fighter of climate change, yet he is not necessarily known for it at all. It is all about what a person focuses on in the media. Therefore, It's difficult for superhero movies to kill movie stars if it is only mere subjectivity. Actresses and actors can still be a "movie star" if they are in superhero roles, it just adds diversity to their character. Margot Robbie has shown this with her performances in films such as "Wolf of Wall Street", and more recently, "Bombshell". These movies included many acclaimed "Movie Stars" and Margot Robbie is one of them, despite her superhero movie performance. Lupita Nyong'o showed a beautiful performance in "12 years a slave", winning Oscars for it, yet she still is featured in "Black Panther". Although I do agree that in many superhero films, there are many roles cast as "cash grabs", there is still impact given by actors and actresses. Samuel L. Jackson was cast as a well known figure in nearly every Marvel movie, despite his role being ultimately irrelevant, his performance still becomes iconic and his face is now seen as a vital part of the Marvel Cinematic Universe. It ultimately comes down to each person's idea of a movie star and what impact it has on them individually because a 10 year old's perception about who is a movie star is not very similar to a 50 year old's perception of a movie star.
Reply
madelyn nomura
3/16/2020 01:33:39 pm
I strongly agree with the points Carol Ann's made in her argument.
Reply
Caroline Anglin
3/16/2020 05:48:16 pm
I completely agree with your argument. A ‘movie star’ is supremely vague and the definition of one varies depending on the person. Additionally, I believe it is true that actors who participate in more than just their superhero role will add to the diversity of their career.
Reply
Amelia Orr
3/17/2020 02:20:17 pm
I strongly agree with these points. Fame and stardom are concepts with no definitive definition and the idea that one genre alone can “kill off” such a major concept is oversimplification. Roles, film and art are always growing and changing and ideas of success and fame change with them.
Reply
Gideon Hawk
3/16/2020 11:21:32 am
We are currently living in a time of rising numbers of superhero movies, highlighting comic book characters as well-known as Superman and lesser known characters such as Green Lantern. Some actors have played their character in multiple movies and some characters have been played by different actors across multiple movies. The article “Have Superheroes Killed the Movie Star?” wants to tell us that the popularity of a star relies on the character they play. I wholeheartedly disagree with this mindset. In the article Bastien says, “ Most ticket buyers don’t go to Deadpool because they’re enamored of Ryan Reynolds’ charm…” I don’t agree, in fact I asked 20 people who had seen both Deadpool movies what drew them to it. 18/20 said it was for Ryan Reynolds. I do believe that an actor can prevail, and shine through despite the character. And this shows in other actors careers such as Chris Pratt, who went from first playing as secondary characters, to playing probably the most memorable character in Guardians of the Galaxy. After his successful role in a marvel movie he then went on to Jurassic world, another big name production. Since all this he has recently received a Hollywood star, and has a very sturdy fan base. In conclusion despite claims in “Have Superheroes Killed the Movie Star?” I believe that Hollywood is producing more stars than ever, and also that a handful of them are from franchises such as Marvel or DC.
Reply
Lewis Wheaton
3/16/2020 12:04:07 pm
I agree with your claim. The point about people going to see movies because of certain actors is something that I used in my reply as well. I also liked your example of how 18/20 people went to see Deadpool because of Ryan Reynolds, which really helped your argument.
Reply
Stryder Pietraszuk
3/24/2020 02:11:29 pm
While I agree with what Gideon is saying I think that his example is not the best as both Deadpool and Ryan Reynolds are Both highly beloved by people. So the example I feel falls flat because using a well know character and well known actor don’t show much of a contrast.
Reply
Alex Acosta
3/16/2020 11:49:37 am
Although Mrs. Bastien makes many agreeable points involving today's view on actor/character popularity, I however disagree in her accusation of "superheros "killing" the [present day] movie star" (Bastien). If anything, the roles actors have played involving superheros have increased their stardom, making them more of a known figure in the movie industry. From an excerpt in "Have Superheroes Killed the Movie Star?", author Angelica Bastien states that "most ticket buyers don’t go to see Suicide Squad because of Margot Robbie’s skills". She says this while forgetting the fact that due to Margot taking on the roll of Harley Quinn, she gained an astronomical of fans and good feedback, ultimately resulting in her portraying the roll again in the sequel, Birds of Prey. This also goes against Bastiens belief that all actors/actresses are interchangeable in the roles they play. If they are so interchangeable, why make another movie with Margot playing the same roll or make over 8+ movies with Robert Downey Jr. playing his well known role of Iron Man? In conclusion, while actors and actresses continue to succeed in their many roles, building reputations and popularity while doing so, their talent and credibility grows to great lengths, making them movie stars known by many.
Reply
Abigail Nwachukwu
3/16/2020 12:24:31 pm
I agree with this statement and how actors gain popularity and build their reputation. I like how you described superhero films as a form of a building block to someone's fame, and how it can increase stardom.
Reply
Lewis Wheaton
3/16/2020 11:59:59 am
The claim that superheroes have changed what it means to become a star is completely false. Many moviegoers see movies because of the actors in them. An example of this is many people going to see John Wick 3- Parabellum because of the actor Keanu Reeves. Another example would be people coming to see various Avengers movies to see actors such as Robert Downey Jr., Chris Evans, Chris Hemsworth and Scarlett Johansson. Banstein states that "That’s the danger of new, hot actors joining comic franchises that lock them into absurd seven-picture deals: They don’t have the ability or time to craft their own star image." This is not true as many actors, especially those who act as superheroes play their characters for multiple movies and build a large following. Even for actors that have not played their character for all of their movies can still become very famous. For example, Tom Holland has only played Spider-man in a handful of movies, succeeding other big name actors like Andrew Garfield and Tobey Maguire. Not to mention, there is no one definition of a 'movie star'. A person who has not seen that many films may believe someone who was in 1-2 films is a movie star while someone who has seen dozens may not consider them to be.
Reply
bella hancock
3/17/2020 02:51:29 pm
I like that you used a lot of specific examples to support your claim, they connected it to a lot of familiar figures that many people have seen before, as well as making you sound more credible and knowledgable. I also liked the sentence you included at the end about how people's perceptions of what a movie star is are varied, this further refutes you counter claim.
Reply
Kishan Patel
3/17/2020 11:40:10 pm
I strongly agree with your claim. I think that the use of many real life examples helped enhance the argument and back up each of your claims. I really like how you discussed how many actors play their roles in order to build a fanbase/following and credibility.
Reply
Tamaiya Anderson
3/16/2020 12:10:24 pm
Angelica Jade Bastien makes a correct claim by pointing out the fact that people are more drawn to the characters and not necessarily the actors in superhero movies. She notes that, "Most ticket buyers don’t go to Deadpool because they’re enamored
Reply
Jade Valeris
3/16/2020 01:23:06 pm
Even though I don't fully agree with your claim, I do agree with the example you used about Chris Hemsworth in Men in Black: International. His acting didn't differentiate much from his acting in Thor: Ragnarok, which made watching MIB: International feel a little odd to me.
Reply
Trinity Klock
3/16/2020 01:30:07 pm
I agree with most of your statement and do believe that many actors and actresses have done better at distinguishing themselves as more than just a superhero. However, I disagree with you saying that people are more drawn to the characters than the actors themselves. I believe that actors such as Chris Hemsworth and Ryan Reynolds can and have managed to be both superheroes and other characters outside of the superhero universe without allowing their previous roles as Thor and Deadpool to intervene with their new roles as Agent H and Guy in their most recent movies. The two of them being in the action packed superhero movies has likely drawn more attention to the new movies because most people admired their acting in their previous films and want to see more.
Reply
Abigail Nwachukwu
3/16/2020 12:19:30 pm
Entertainment is a growing industry that continues to affect society. Angelica Jade Bastien argues that the growth of superhero films is “killing” the idea of movie stars. However, I believe her claim is false. As these films gain popularity, as do the actors. Children especially may be infatuated by the idea of superheros and solely love the characters, but social media and award shows allow the actors to thrive. According to Have Superheros Killed The Movie Star, “Chris Pratt… has found success leading Jurassic World and Guardians of the Galaxy.” As these major action films contributed to his success, Pratt has many projects that were also supported due to his great acting skills and large personality. If characters like StarLord were played by another actor, the movie would be completely different since Pratt is a very unique actor. Fellow superhero actor, Tom Holland, is currently working with Pratt of a Pixar film. These two actors continue to show their range and are separable from their beloved superhero characters. Their projects continue to do well because of who they are, not just their character.
Reply
Kenna Armitage
3/16/2020 01:36:04 pm
I agree with your statements about several actors gaining fame from their talents and roles as stars in different movies. While reading this article, I immediately thought of Tom Holland and how people love his sense of humor and talents that he uses within his acting. This goes along with what Abigail claimed because Tom Holland is a lovable actor that many people follow after he gained fame starring as Spiderman.
Reply
Lawrence Kimani
3/16/2020 01:47:34 pm
I agree with your claim, and I like how you used the term "range". It shows that just because these actors and actress are playing superheros, it doesn't mean that they are restricted to only superhero movies. A lot of them have shown success in other types of movies. For example Robert Downey Jr and Benedict Cumberbatch in their portrayals of Sherlock Holmes. Also Michael B. Jordon in the Creed movies and Just Mercy. These are skilled actors who shouldn't just be labeled as superhero actors.
Reply
3/16/2020 10:25:17 pm
I agree with your claim that projects continue to do well because of the actors themselves, and not the characters that they play. This claim and article made me think of Lupita Nyong'o. With the mention of her near the end of the article on being a movie star that impacts the of the movie evolution, and statement by Angelica Bastien that claims that Lupita Nyong'o and Michael B. Jordon have " no midbudget pictures to give them the chance to create their own legacies". Which I believe is extremely false when you take a look at the successful careers that these actors have built with multiple different movies, not based on who they played in a certain super hero film, but by their personality and skills alone. This is in agreeance with your claim that actors are separable from their characters.
Reply
Trinity Klock
3/16/2020 12:57:13 pm
In the article “Have Superheroes Killed the Movie Star?”, Bastién makes a point in saying that superhero roles define an actor and actress, however, that statement isn’t entirely true. Although many stars become famous through these big superhero roles, for example Tom Holland playing Spiderman, this doesn’t necessarily make or break who that actor is on screen as well as off screen. In the article, Bastién says that “The superhero characters they take on subsume their image.” This would mean that actors and actresses would only be known for their role as a superhero and would only be recognized as this hero. This is entirely false. For example, Robert Downey Jr. is well known for his role as Iron Man in many of Marvel’s movies. However, Robert has successfully conveyed his personality while playing Iron Man as well as adding his own personal twist to the classic comic book character. In addition to being known for his role as Iron Man, Robert is also known for his acting in Sherlock Holmes and Dolittle, as well as many other movies. Overall, while he may be best known for his role as Iron Man, that role hasn’t shaped him into the actor he is today, and it hasn’t made it so that he has been constrained to only being a part of the Marvel Universe. In addition to saying that superhero characters make an actor or actress, Bastién claims that “directors seem to jump directly from small independent films to gargantuan would-be blockbusters, and with so much money on the line, there’s no room for experimentation or for directors to push themselves and their actors in bold directions.” This is a statement that is partially agreeable. Due to so much money on the line it is understandable that there is little leeway as to how much a director or an actor can let their personality shine through the characters in the film. However, this doesn’t completely prevent actors and directors adding their own flare to the film through their acting and directing. A great example of this would be Tim Burton. He is a well-known director that is commonly portrayed as one who directs scary, fascinating, and mind-boggling films that often leave the audience in awe. Tim Burton has directed many classic horror films such as Edward Scissorhands, The Nightmare before Christmas, and Beetlejuice. However, what many would not expect is that Tim Burton also directed the Disney classic, Dumbo, during which he still managed to add a little bit of his spooky flare. This further proves the point that a certain movie/genre cannot define an actor, actress, or director, meaning that the claims that Bastién made in her article are mostly false.
Reply
Claire Kinsinger
3/16/2020 03:19:37 pm
I completely agree with your statement! We both mentioned Tom Holland's career but I like how you highlighted on Robert Downey Jr. as well because it really benefited your argument. I also like how you included the second claim about the independent films to blockbusters film.
Reply
Jade Valeris
3/16/2020 01:14:53 pm
While it is true that movie-watchers tend to associate actors with superhero roles that they have played, superheroes have not "killed the movie star" (Bastien) because of this. Superhero movies have added to the amount of stars present in the movie industry because even though the characters may be well-known, the characters add to the actor's fame rather than controlling it. For example, many DC fans did not like Jared Leto's interpretation of Joker in Suicide Squad and openly said that they preferred Heath Ledger's Joker instead. However, Ledger was also in the midst filming The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus shortly before his death, which was not connected to his character as the Joker or to superhero movies at all. This proves that while the actors can control the characters they play based on how well they performed, the characters cannot control the actors because the roles that the actors have played add on to their overall stardom. Of course, the actors might be best-known for their performances in superhero movies, but the actors still have the ability to expand into other movie/television projects unrelated to superheroes.
Reply
Eryk Glod
3/16/2020 04:35:57 pm
I agree with your claim and think it is very effective. I liked the use of the performances of many people as the joker as an example. When reading the article that was something that I had personally thought about and I'm glad that somebody else had the same idea when writing.
Reply
Shani Clark
3/16/2020 11:50:02 pm
I agree with your claims, and I have a very similar viewpoint! I believe your strongest point in your argument was the example with Jared Leto and Heath Ledger due to the fact that while they play the same character, people seem to find Ledger’s interpretation as the better interpretation. I also believe that the actors are in control of their own stardom due to how well that they perform in their roles.
Reply
Tyler Richardson
3/16/2020 01:19:43 pm
The claim that superhero movies have changed and devalued the role and way in which stars participate in their roles is more or less true. However, the superhero blockbuster has not killed the idea of a movie star, being that the cultural role of the movie star has become more individualized. In "Have Superheroes Killed The Movie Star?" it is stated that, "Most ticket buyers don’t go to Deadpool because they’re enamored of Ryan Reynolds’ charm or see Suicide Squad because of Margot Robbie’s skills.". This is a generalization that is simply misleading. While most people will not see a movie for a demonstration of the particular actor's prowess in playing such a role, a particular minority of people will. This is a direct result of social media, which allows small cultural communities of people to thrive more than they ever have before with the idea of an "influencer. This can be enlarged to an explanation of the role of movie stars and how, while every blockbuster movie star could be replaced with any other similarly looking one, it's the in the hearts of small communities of dedicated fans that the idea that "the movie star is dead" doesn't really apply.
Reply
Lawrence Kimani
3/16/2020 01:39:39 pm
Entertainment is an industry that affects a variety of people. I disagree with Angelica Jade Batein with her claim that superhero actors and actresses wouldn't be as successful if it were not for the character they are playing. Batein claims "The superhero characters they take on subsume their image. The movie going public has a hard time seeing these actors beyond the comic book and legacy franchise characters they play. These performers get stuck playing characters that all seem crafted from similar molds." Fitting into a role that has a character already made and has been recognized by the public for over 30 years is hard to do. At the same time it is also hard for an actor to build his or her character from nothing, for example, giving them a personality and way of living. As stated in the article, when we go see a Brad Pitt or Keanu Reeves film, we are seeing a character that has been either built for the actor or a character that either actor has built themselves. We do not know what to expect when it comes to those types of movies. But, when a characters personality and way of living has already been set in stone, it becomes hard for these actors and actresses to meet and live up to the standards. This is because of the millions of fans behind the superheros. Actors do not want to let the superhero's fandom down with a poor performance and at the same time they know the backlash they are going to get for not living up to the standards the character has already set. This may ruin their career. When Chris Evans was offered the role of Captain America he actually denied the offer multiple times. He said he denied it out of fear. Evans understands and acknowledges the history of Captain America and what it would mean to play someone so important to the Marvel Universe. If didn't perform well in the movies under his contract it would have had a negative affect on the future of his career. So as stated before I disagree with the claim that superhero actors would not be as successful if it were not for the superheros/characters they are playing, they are successful because the actors playing them portray the characters so well it almost seems real.
Reply
Kenna Armitage
3/16/2020 01:46:22 pm
Within Angelica Bastien's article, "Have Superheros Killed the Movie Star", I agree with her claim that many actors are often associated with the character they portray. However, I disagree with her statement that "most ticket buyers don’t go to Deadpool because they’re enamored of Ryan Reynolds’ charm or see Suicide Squad because of Margot Robbie’s skills." Actors are often followed by fans through their admiration of their personality and skills. For example, Tom Holland is a fan favorite of many and is followed in other movies such as "Spies in Disguise" because of his charisma and talent. Another actor followed throughout her acting journey would be Zendaya. After starring in "Shake It Up" and "KC Undercover" fans have followed her throughout many other movies such as "The Greatest Showman" and "Spiderman Far From Home." Although actors may be known for their roles as famous charactors, they are often followed by fan bases in other movies due to their talents and skills as an actor and not just for the role they play.
Reply
Emma Pearson
3/16/2020 03:13:48 pm
I agree with your statement that actors are followed by fans and that yes people do go to see movies because a certain person is in the movie. I do think that the author didn't mention that side of the movie industry that includes superfine of actors or actresses in the roles.
Reply
Mirakyl Drake
3/16/2020 02:16:34 pm
In the article "Have Superheros Killed the Movie Star", Angelica Jade Bastein makes a claim that in superhero movies we all love the stars of the movies are the characters the actors are portraying, not the actors themselves. This is a claim that I disagree with because it takes a specific person with a certain charisma and personality to bring a character to life, especially if the character has never been portrayed on screen. Bastein states that "Most ticket buyers don’t go to Deadpool because they’re enamored of Ryan Reynolds’ charm or see Suicide Squad because of Margot Robbie’s skills", which only applies to a minority of the population who watch these types of films. Using the previous stated examples, characters such as Deadpool, who is played by Ryan Reynolds, and Harley Quinn who is played by Margot Robbie, are characters that take a foundation of a personality and charisma to accurately display how the characters have previously been shown in the comics that people have seen first. Anyone can put of makeup or a mask and read a few lines, but it takes a certain person to make you feel something about that character and relate it back to your previous ideas about the character.
Reply
Cayenne Jonkam
3/16/2020 04:46:39 pm
I fully agree with the claim you are making because it does take a certain amount of charisma to pull of such big rolls such as superheroes. Your claim wad very similar to mine, although i didn't consider the amount of work it takes for an actor to portray the roles already set in comic books.
Reply
madelyn nomura
3/16/2020 02:21:35 pm
In the article, "Have Superheros Killed the Movie Star?" written by Angelica Jade Bastien, the argument is made that the recent increase of superhero movie roles has the diminshed and belittled the concept of what it means to be a 'movie star'. Although Angelica makes valid points in her argument, this statement is grossly inaccurate. In the article she states, "That’s the danger of new, hot actors joining comic franchises that lock them into absurd seven-picture deals...The superhero characters they take on subsume their image. The moviegoing public has a hard time seeing these actors beyond the comic book and legacy franchise characters they play" (Bastien). While it may be true that actors and actresses cast into superhero roles are enforced to fit into a certain mold defined by the comic books and adaptations themselves, this does not mean that they will be associated with this image forevermore. In fact, many actors/actresses such as Hugh Jackman, famously known for his role as "Wolverine" in X-men, he has gone on equally famous roles in "Les Miserables", and "The Greatest Showman". Furthermore, his superhero role did not define him as an actor, but rather provided a foundation for him to go to play other roles and become a well-rounded, well-known 'movie star' in his own right. Additionally, Angelica discusses the film "Black Panther", and how whether or not we will see its actors, such as Michael B. Jordan and Lupita Nyong’o, have the oppurtunity to go outside their superhero roles and develop their own image by collaborating with directors and playing in "midbudget pictures to give them the chance to create their own legacies" (Bastien). However, she is ignoring the many films that both of these actors have stared in that have helped them to develop more intimate relationships with the audience. For example, Michael B. Jordan in the award-winning film "Fruitvale Station". and also his stardom in the "Creed" movies. In addition, Lupita Nyong'o's role in the Academy Award-winning film "12 Years a Slave"; all of these films have culminated to each of these actors powerful images, both in the media and in their direct, intimate relationship with the audience.
Reply
Reagan Schooler
3/16/2020 02:51:43 pm
In Angelica Jade Bastien's article "Have Superheroes Killed the Movie Star?" she claims that the actors playing superheroes are much less successful on their own. I disagree with her claim. The level of success that superhero movies reach is huge, many other movies and genres may never reach that level of success. They are a super popular type of movie so it is expected the actors in them also reach a great amount of success. For example, Bastien states, "Chris Pratt — now trading in the rugged American machismo that drew us to Harrison Ford — has found success leading Jurassic World and Guardians of the Galaxy. But it’s hard to argue that he is successful on his own and not just replicating a bland approximation of actors before him." While it is hard to argue that his role is unique and not similar to ones before him, he adds his own spin on the roles. He has had success before in the form of "Parks and Recreation" a popular TV show. The level of success is not as comparable to his newer movies, but his new found popularity brings attention to the older show. And it would do the same if Pratt decided to join a movie cast of a different genre. His popularity would bring success to other roles. Superhero stars do not have to rely on their hero roles for success.
Reply
Arashel Brown
3/16/2020 04:47:17 pm
I agree with your claim in the sense that Chris Pratt's superhero character, along with many other actors who play superheros, brings attention to his older films/series. Actors who may have been underground are now much popular because of their superhero roles, which not only brings attention to their old films, but also their future ones.
Reply
Swami Kajale
3/16/2020 02:58:43 pm
The article "Have Superheroes killed movie stars?" by Angelica Bastien introduces the ideas that people don't go to the movies because of the actors but rather for the characters they play. This idea isn't entirely false as people do go to the movies to see the character and story but they also have interest in the movie because of the character. A major example of this is the actor of the Spiderman movie there are three different people who played the same character but people choose one over another not because of the character of the movie or the story but because one person is better than other and this goes for multiple movies and actors not just Spiderman. The actors also bring a lot of things that appease to the crowed that makes them want to watch the movie like stated in the article "With true movie stars, we bring baggage to every performance we watch — the emotions we attach to their early performances, their triumphs and their downfalls" (Bastien, 2016). The emotions, diction, etc. that certain actors do makes the movie better to watch and make the audience hooked onto the movie.
Reply
Emma Pearson
3/16/2020 03:04:51 pm
Angelica Jade Bastien makes the claim that superheroes are the real stars not the actors that portray them in the article," Have Superheroes Killed the Movie Star?" I agree with her claim to an extent. I agree that the roles acts portray get them where they are and provide a platform for them to thrive on but i do not agree that movie stars are only famous because of the roles they play. Bastien states that " it’s hard to argue that [Chris Pratt] is successful on his own and not just replicating a bland approximation of actors before him." I disagree with this because transforming a role in a new, modern way isn't replicating roles from the past. In the article she used Chris Pratt and Harrison Ford as examples of replicating actors. I believe that taking inspiration from actors before you and working from their experiences provides you with a sort of new generation of fans to inspire. I also believe that if everyone takes this notion that the roles you play are what makes you famous then certain actors will be stuck playing specific roles and the diversity in Hollywood will be more limited and constricted than it already is. Having diverse actors play every role will allow the public to see superheroes in a more universal way than having it more one sided.
Reply
Jadyn Payne
3/16/2020 06:50:04 pm
I strongly agree with Emma's points, especially her points of roles actors play providing platforms. I also like her view of keeping diversity of roles with actors so that there isn't limitations within the movie industry. She has many important points that can easily be overlooked if one isn't reading the article closely.
Reply
Emily Smith
3/16/2020 06:58:12 pm
I completely agree with Emma's claim here. While certain roles acted as kick-starters for certain actors, I believe they can still be someone else. I also agree that re-casting and modernizing films is not so much replicating old films but adding to the art that is acting. Without the revamping of older films, the film industry would find themselves losing viewers because its always nice to see the modernization of classic films.
Reply
Caleb John
3/24/2020 12:38:24 pm
I firmly agree with Emma's points. Specifically where she points that actors aren't necessarily replicating actors from the past but more drawing on their experience to make the new production better. I feel like the reboots that are popularly seen in Hollywood today are imperative because it is a modern reflection of older great movies that help connect the two generations.
Reply
Claire Kinsinger
3/16/2020 03:08:45 pm
While Angelica Jade Bastién does make a well argued and backed-up claim in her article titled “Have Superheroes Killed the Movie Star?”, I have to disagree with her statement that superheroes have “killed” movie stars. Although some may say that fame comes from the fictional character played in such movies, many fans follow their favorite actors and actresses through other movies they are in because they admire their skill and enjoy their on screen value. It may be true that some actors and actresses become famous because of roles they starred in such as Tom Holland’s success with Spiderman, but this is never the case for others. There have been other actors that played the role of Spiderman, yet Tom Holland’s likeable character went along with his role, which really boosted his acting platform. Although Tom’s role in Spiderman may have boosted his career, the fictional character Spiderman was absolutely not the reason he became famous. Because of his overall presence in movies and acting skills in such a popular movie, he then acted in other marvel movies while also voicing for Spies in Disguise and Onward. Bastién states in her argument that “it becomes undeniable that the actors aren’t the stars — the characters and property are.” This is unbelievably false. Every actor has their own charisma and inner character like no other. Their fame and overall admiration among their fan base is set on those qualities and absolutely not the character they act as in the movie. Another claim in the article states “Most ticket buyers don’t go to Deadpool because they’re enamored of Ryan Reynolds’ charm or see Suicide Squad because of Margot Robbie’s skills.” This definitely is a misleading and un-factual statement. This all falls back to enjoying movies because the fans enjoy the skills of the actor.
Reply
Aidan Kleine
3/16/2020 07:23:41 pm
I definitely agree with you that some actors do not gain fame entirely from playing a popular superhero. And your example of Tom Holland is a good one, as he has played a popular superhero and has amassed a large fan base as himself, that rather than the superhero he plays. However, on your claim for the spider man movies, one of the reasons the actors who played the character before Tom Holland may not have become as famous for many reasons, such as the writing of the movies or their marketing. Additionally, you mentioned a few other movies Tom Holland was in. However, both of those movies, and the spider man movies Tom Holland acted in, were all owned by Disney, so he may not have been casted in all of those movies due to sheer popularity.
Reply
Kaliyah Marballie
3/16/2020 04:22:31 pm
Angelica Jade Bastien's claim in her article "Have Superheroes Killed the Movie Star", that actors are only known by the character they play in movies. I agree that actors are the people who make up their character, they add their own acting skills to each role that's why we recognize them so much. When they play a role well they get more roles similar to the one they played. I also disagree with her statement in paragraph 10, "They don’t have the ability or time to craft their own star image." With social media being a big platform in this generation, stars are allowed to show who they truly are. It is up to the people to differentiate the stars from their character. Fanbases are not fans because of the roles the star plays but how that star acts outside of movies and shows. Actors can also refuse to do a part if they feel it does not suit them.
Reply
Heisenberg Regis
3/16/2020 07:36:43 pm
I agree with your claim that fanbases are not idolizing the character the actor plays but the person they are in general. Even though being casted as a very familiar character is vital to the foundation of the fanbase, the fans soon begin to consider the real person and the character being played SEPARATELY.
Reply
Arashel Brown
3/16/2020 04:23:01 pm
Angelica Jade-Bastien's claim in "Have Superheros Killed the Movie Star" is agreeable in the sense that a superhero role gives them a title in which they are most known by and kills many other chances they have of one-upping that role. Her well constructed and evidence built argument is contradictory by, while it may be true that superheros played by actors such as Robert Downey Jr., Chris Hemsworth, Mark Ruffalo, and Scarlett Johannson are widely recognizable through their superhero films, it also brings attention to other films they may star/ co-star in future films. For example, Chris Evans role in Knives Out released in November of 2019 received a 97% fresh rating according to Rotten Tomatoes and was nominated for 2 Golden Globe awards. Angelica Jade-Bastien's assertion about star's failure to bring them success elsewhere besides their superhero films is debatable. When Bastien states, "But they have also been unable to translate the visibility their characters bring them into success elsewhere", she fails to acknowledge the audience's movie choosing capabilities. Each movie goer has different preferences on picking movies to see, some may be impacted by actors, story lines, directors, ratings/critics, or even genre. A person's movie preference is not only impacted by if they recognize that actor in which they played their favorite superhero character, but if they enjoyed that actor's screen time, personality, and charisma. If anything, the success an actor's character brings in through a superhero film creates more popularity for them, sparking greater interest for them in their future films. Therefore Bastien's argument needs to be more oriented towards how many factors go into people's movie choices, not so much on assuming people choose movies just because of the actor's previous blockbuster superhero role.
Reply
Eryk Glod
3/16/2020 04:29:55 pm
The claim made by Angelica Jade Bastién in her article "Have Superheroes Killed the Movie Star?" although the argument is effective, it is is based on several misleading assumptions of the movie-going public and is thus flawed. Within the article she explains "Most ticket buyers don’t go to Deadpool because they’re enamored of Ryan Reynolds’ charm or see Suicide Squad because of Margot Robbie’s skills."(Bastien). Though this may be true of many there will always be groups of people who do go to see these films due to the presence of their favorite actors in these films. Access to social media has allowed actors to become influencers as well as film stars and gather a "cult following" of fans who attend films to see them. In addition to this later in the article it is said that "actors... they’re interchangeable enough that choosing any will do"(Bastien) this claim grossly devalues the many incredible acting performances that we have received from superhero films which, in the eyes of the public were made great by certain characters rather then the story. The performance of Heath Ledger as the Joker in "The Dark Knight" comes to mind, the story itself and most of the acting were not as memorable as the single performance of Heath Ledger. Heath ledger made the joker his own role and other performances haven't managed to capture the quality he has in that role. His performance was most certainly not interchangeable and had the joker been part of the sequel people would have gone just to see him reprise his role.
Reply
Daniel Mathew
3/17/2020 10:33:20 am
I agree to your argument that people do go to see people for their favorite actors, like for the example you just explained. However, I still think that more people would be saying 'The Joker' instead of 'Heath Ledger' because of how the use of these main characters by film-making companies devalues the star in the film.
Reply
Caleb John
3/24/2020 12:43:33 pm
I fully agree with your argument. Furthermore, Bastien's claim is most definitely due to your reasoning as I know many people including myself that see a movie starring my favorite actor and it draws me to go see it. The Heath Ledger argument was a great inclusion, as many people know of his amazing performance and you tied it into your counterclaim nicely.
Cayenne Jonkam
3/16/2020 04:41:15 pm
Angelica Jade Bastein made some pretty compelling arguments in her article "Have Superheroes Killed the Movie Star?", however I strongly disagree with her claim that the actors who portray these roles are unsuccessful without the character. To be an actor it takes and extreme about of charisma to pull off such a massive role, which is why superhero films are rather successful. For example, Bastein mentions that "most ticket buyers don't go to Deadpool because they're enamored of Ryan Reynolds's charm or see Suicide Squad because of Margot Robbie's skills." When customers go to see a movie and they see an actor who does not regularly portray the role of a character, it is weird and it makes us feel disoriented. Taking an actor out of a role diminishes the role's value and role because the actor is who sells the role to the audience. Although unrelated to the topic of superheroes, this was seen when the role of Aunt Viv was changed after 3 season of the show 'Fresh Prince of Bel Air". Many supporters of the show were devastated to see the original actor leave after such a long time portraying the role. Additionally, Bastein states that "the characters they take on subsume their image. The moviegoing public has a hard time seeing these actors beyond the comic book legacy and legacy franchise they play." However, many actors have so much charisma and talent that their fan base would not mind what role they acted in. For example, Tom Holland stars in "Spider-Man: Far From Home". After it hit theaters, fans could not wait to see what else he had inn store because he made the role of Spider-Man his own. Overall, I disagree Bastein's claim that superheroes have "killed" the movie star because of reasons stated before.
Reply
Justin Shearman
3/16/2020 07:42:07 pm
I partially agree with your statement that superhero movies do not kill the movie star because as you stated people get attached to a certain actor portraying a certain character. However I also believe that superhero movies have the ability to kill the movie star because the increase in superhero movies has led to a decrease in other movie types, therefore "killing" certain movie stars.
Reply
Caroline Anglin
3/16/2020 05:30:27 pm
In Angelica Jade Bastién’s article “HAVE SUPERHEROES KILLED THE MOVIE STAR?”, she claims that actors and actresses playing roles in superhero movies are only known for that role. I disagree with that statement. Basteín states that “most ticket buyers don’t ... see suicide squad because of Margot Robbie’s skills.” Margot starred in one of the most anticipated movies of 2019, “Once Upon a Time... in Hollywood”, and there is no doubt that a huge sum of people went to see that movie to see her. Another great example is Emma Watson. She played Hermoine Granger in the world famous series “Harry Potter”, but has also made her face known in other movies like “The Perks of Being a Wallflower”, “Noah”, and “Beauty and the Beast”. These two actresses, along with many others (and actors as well) go to prove that one superhero role doesn’t define who they are in their career.
Reply
Kierstyn Smith
3/16/2020 07:11:02 pm
I agree with the argument that other roles can alleviate connotations about actors in famous roles in popular franchises or movies. However, notorious roles tend to stick with an actor. Creating an expectation for the actor to stay within similar roles based on their performance in one movie or franchise. For example, Chadwick Boseman became popular for his role as Black Panther in the Marvel franchise. Even with other promising roles portraying Jackie Robinson or James Brown, the media keeps pushing about his role in Black Panther. More people still recognize him for his role in Black Panther than any other projects. Overall, certain roles can stick with an actor and create a restriction for actors to pursue various roles.
Reply
Kierstyn Smith
3/16/2020 06:03:49 pm
Angelica Jade-Bastien’s assertion in her article, “Have Superheros Killed the Movie Star” seems correct to the standards of film today. Actors have relied on newly-adapted concepts to shape their image rather than readaptations of previous storylines and plots. Classics including Pulp Fiction, Napoleon Dynamite or the Notebook receiving large cult following and remaining in pop culture today. Certain roles can progress an actor to stardom while other roles follow an actor, never allowing the actors to show versatility. In the article, “Have Superheros Killed the Movie Star”, Angelica Jade-Bastien states, “the best stars often subvert, fight against, or deconstruct their own image” (9). Meaning doing something different than what is expected. I’ve learned from acting coaches, that actors will try roles that are normally not how they are portrayed in real-life to show how an actor can change and be different people. Following the same storyline with the same character development remains bland and does not distinguish actors from other performances. Adaptations of previous works can be more tricky for the actor, creating contrast and comparisons to different performances. The audience will always expect something better from original works. Sticking with the same character description solidifies an actor to stick with a certain role, never allowing them to do something different. For example, Robert Downey Jr, has played Iron Man since 2008. Pushing him into more adaptations in the Marvel Universe. However, during his time with Marvel, Downey never took on roles with huge followings or box office success. Even with his contract with Marvel close to expiration, he is still going to be recognized for Iron Man instead of new roles or roles while playing Iron Man. Although, superheros have solidified new names in Hollywood and remain within today’s pop culture. From Marvel's first adaptation of the Black Panther comic series or actors who’ve benefited from superhero films. Such as Zendaya, Tom Holland, Chris Hemsworth, etc. A star will keep trying to adapt to new roles that offer something new for audiences rather than sticking with a safe storyline.
Reply
Jadyn Payne
3/16/2020 06:44:37 pm
Angelica Jade Bastien represents a large amount of society today due to her opinion that actors are only as successful as they are because of their movie character. Although she is very confident with her statement, I believe she isn't looking deep enough into her topic. "The superhero characters they take on subsume their image" (Bastien). In a sense, this is true. Yes, the script is prewritten and the actions of the superheroes are already chosen for them, but what truly makes the character? What builds a character up to their full potential? The true outcome of the character lies in the actors hands. That goes for every movie, not just superhero movies. An actor has one job, to act the assigned part. Even though it sounds as simple as playing the part, actors need a certain level of internal character and personality to truly pull it off. "With true movie stars, we bring baggage to every performance we watch — the emotions we attach to their early performances, their triumphs and their downfalls." (Bastien). True movie stars, especially superheroes, build themselves up in multiple different perspectives, not just from one movie or one character. For example, Kevin Hart, who has acted in "atleast 46 movies" (wikipedia), has a worldwide fan base. He didn't just earn it by playing one character. He earned it throughout numerous movies. He built the image he desired. In fact, he even engages in his own comedian talk-shows, which has gained millions of viewers. This shows that he decides what the world perceives of him, and if he doesn't like it, he could easily change it. This is just one example from the millions of actors within the movie industry. Overall, I can understand Angelica's argument to an extent, but if she went further in depth with her research she would have determined a more defensible opinion.
Reply
Bentley Huff
3/16/2020 07:05:18 pm
I agree with your claim that superheroes did not kill the "movie star" and i find the evidence related to Kevin Hart very intriguing as it portrays vivid evidence that big name actors can play multiple characters. Which is on the contrary to the articles claims.
Reply
Emily Smith
3/16/2020 06:47:31 pm
Bastien is correct in her assertion that the role of superheros essentially sabotages an actor's ability to be both that character and any other they may portray within their acting career. In her article, "Have Superheros Killed the Movie Star", Bastien states that.."With true movie stars, we bring baggage to every performance we watch — the emotions we attach to their early performances, their triumphs and their downfalls". When you think of Daniel Radcliffe, you think of his role as Harry Potter, not his movie Jungle, which was released in 2017. Nobody is going to bring up Radcliffe in a conversation and say "You know, the guy from Jungle!". Because of his role in Harry Potter, Radcliffe will forever be known as, the boy who lived.
Reply
Allen Schiffer
3/16/2020 07:01:37 pm
Angelica Jade Bastien is correct to a certain degree in saying that superheroes have killed the movie star. She wrote about how actors that play superheroes aren’t necessarily given the credit they deserve. Bastien wrote, “Watching one superhero film after another, it becomes undeniable that the actors aren’t the stars — the characters and property are.” This means that people do not recognise the actors a lot of the times, and instead recognise the characters. Many actors who do play these superhero roles are only known for those roles, and actors that want to broaden their career find trouble because they are seen as the characters they formerly played, not as the character they are trying to be. Bastein writes, “Most ticket buyers don’t go to Deadpool because they’re enamored of Ryan Reynolds’ charm or see Suicide Squad because of Margot Robbie’s skills,” which is true. Sure the actors both have become famous and gained a following because of their roles, but these are going to be the roles they will be most known for. It will be difficult for them to change how they are known if they do not
Reply
Aidan Kleine
3/16/2020 07:07:34 pm
Although superhero films can assist actors in gaining popularity, they still hinder the idea of movie stars. For example, Jade-Bastien makes the claim that “the actors aren’t the stars — the characters and property are.” Personally, whenever I see someone who played a character in a Marvel movie in another movie or TV show, I often think, “oh, it’s Thor,” rather than “oh, it’s Chris Hemsworth.” When people act as a specific character for so long, it can become their image rather than the actor shaping their own image. And with the sheer amount of superhero films being made, others are often drowned out, including “the mid-budget adult drama,” as Jade-Bastien mentions. The over saturation of superhero films in the industry can limit the range of roles actors can play, and the range of actors themselves. For example, an actor who may have a skill set best suited for said mid-budget adult dramas may not have as much of a chance to be casted in as many films.
Reply
Chancelor Gordon
3/17/2020 12:14:12 pm
Although the claim that "the characters and property" are the actual stars is valid, I disagree. The movies and characters would not be the same without the actors that play them. The actors are what make the characters. Many people that have no prior knowledge of the superhero comics grow to love the characters because of the actors. We may think of their roles in these movies when we see them in another setting because their character is a big part of them and they left lasting impressions in those roles. We would also do the same to actors in other movies that we enjoyed their performance in, such as many people do with Zac Efron and thinking of him as Troy from High School Musical. I do agree that there is a large number of superhero films being made, but there is also a large number of different types of films being made as well.
Reply
Heisenberg Regis
3/16/2020 07:31:06 pm
Angelica Jade-Bastien's argument is actors are getting famous through superhero personas. I believe she is correct in her assertion. In this day and age, people tend to pay attention to uniqueness, when there isn't much of it, viewers tend to look the other way. This concept is elaborated on when the author states, "The stardom of Sidney Poitier gave white audiences a peek into the black experience and perhaps the ability to see the humanity of African-Americans " (Jade-Bastien). Stars are people who are in the minority in society. People who fall into a minority tend to be acknowledged sooner by the majority. This is further explained when the author writes, "Stars can start trends in fashion, affect political conversations and leave an important footprint in American culture " (Jade-Bastien). Actors who do not fit in this mold, however, resurface into public view from being casted in superhero movies. This is simply because superhero movies such as Endgame have gotten so trendy in the media.
Reply
Njambi Karobia
3/16/2020 08:15:41 pm
I somewhat agree with your view. Although many superhero’s do grow their name through these comic franchises, they also are able to grow their names on their own. Take for instance Tom Holland who has turned Spider-Man into a fun lovable character and has put a whole new twist on the character through his personality as an individual. This goes to state that sometimes, portraying a superhero can build your name rather than kill it.
Reply
Justin Shearman
3/16/2020 07:33:42 pm
Angelica Jade-Bastien claims that the increase in recent superhero movies has caused fans to pay much more attention to the character that an actor portrays rather than the actor themselves. I somewhat agree with Angelica's claim however I do not believe it to be ENTIRELY true. While it is true that most people no longer watch a movie just for it's cast, I believe that superhero movies have helped to build the movie star rather than kill the movie star. For example, if Chris Pratt had not been cast in the movie guardians of the galaxy I would never have cared to watch others movies, such as the passengers, that he had starred in. While superhero movies have built many careers for men in America, most woman have not been so lucky. Angelica Jade-Bastien claims," the rise in comic book movies is an integral part of the disappearance of an important kind of film: the mid-budget adult drama..." (2016). Therefore because of superhero movies the mid-budget adult drama, where many successful women had their starts, has drastically decreased. This decrease means that many talented women who wanted to be movie stars would not have opportunity to do so.
Reply
Mira Fleming
3/16/2020 08:32:07 pm
I agree. Even if people go watch the films for the characters and story line instead of the cast, having the successful actors and actresses playing the roles makes it even better. I love how you stated that having big roles helps build up an actor, increasing their credibility. Chris Pratt is an excellent example of an actor who is becoming a very well known personality.
Reply
Jesuana Buabeng
3/16/2020 10:13:46 pm
I agree with your claim on how Angelica's claim about how the characters of superheroes in movies are killing actual movie stars isn't "entirely" true. When you described your own personal experience with the actor Chris Pratt, I could clearly see why you only agreed with part of her argument.
Reply
Peyton Stack
3/17/2020 12:42:44 pm
I agree with the argument you presented regarding that this claim is not entirely true. I believe that this assertion is true for the majority of actors in the superhero universe, but there are definitely minority examples. I like how you incorporated the rise of comic books and how they influenced the industry. All in all, I think you did a great job presenting and defending your argument with evidence.
Reply
Njambi Karobia
3/16/2020 08:08:59 pm
Angelica Bastien’s claim that to play a superhero kills the actor/actress that portray them is quite arguable. Big box names such as Marvel and D.C. comics have been around for a long time and often build up names and the credibility of the actors/actresses that play the role of a superhero. Take Chris Evans for example, who has portrayed the role of “Captain America” for 8 years, acting in 10 Marvel films. Mr. Evans has built up his name by getting the opportunity to play Captain America. As he leaves the Marvel company his reputation of having a large fan base not just for his character, Mr. America, but for his name, Chris Evans, will allow him to draw attention to any new roles he desires to play. Also take me for example. I did not know who Chris Evans was before he began playing Captain America, but now that I have grown fond of him I will most likely watch other films that he may take up besides the Avengers movies. This goes against the statement made by Bastien that “That’s the danger of new, hot actors joining comic franchises that lock them into absurd seven-picture deals: They don’t have the ability or time to craft their own star image.” However, when Mr. Evans came into Marvel he was able to build and craft his own image and persona. Moreover, as comic franchises take over the movie industry, I believe that the opportunity to impersonate a superhero could build up one’s name in Hollywood rather than kill the star.
Reply
Angelina
3/17/2020 12:06:30 am
I disagree. Evans may be well known, but so are the other "Chris's" who play roles in the Marvel movies. They are often confused with one another, but their characters are not. While this may be contributed to them sharing a first name, this is also true in the case of Tom Cruise and Tom Hanks, but they are not often confused with one another.
Reply
Molly Clark
3/17/2020 12:23:08 pm
I disagree with your claim because people know Chris Evans as Captain America, not as an actor. He would not be where he is today in the terms of credibility or popularity without the role of Captain America. The superhero he plays has become all he is known for. He has become Captain America to the public`s eye, not Chris Evans.
Reply
Jordan Karim
3/16/2020 08:09:20 pm
The author of the article "Have Superheroes Killed The Movie Star?", Angelica Jade Bastien creates a fallacious narrative by insinuating that superheroes have killed the movie star because the actors who play these superheroes do not develop an identity as the viewers see them as the beloved character they're playing instead of themselves as the actor. As she proclaimed "Watching one superhero film after another, it becomes undeniable that the actors aren’t the stars — the characters and property are."(Bastein). I do not agree with her statement because when viewing the landscape of our present day society as a whole, and the impact social media has on our lives, we tend to view these celebrities in a completely different aspect of life. We see them in their day to day life on a regular basis. So when we see these actors doing all these cool things in their life, it makes the character they play almost secondary to the actual actor themselves. I would agree with her statement if we were living in a time-period to where we didn't see much of the actors besides their actual role, but that is not the case in our present day society.
Reply
Becky Peña-Rubio
3/16/2020 09:45:37 pm
I politely disagree with Jordan's claim that social media makes the characters that actors play secondary to the actors themselves. Many people tend to follow actors only after watching them in a movie and the social media of actors is filled with posts promoting their movies or using their character as propaganda for companies and their products.
Reply
Mira Fleming
3/16/2020 08:18:38 pm
Angelica Jade Bastien made many fine arguments in her article regarding the superhero franchise and effects on the actors involved. However, there were a few arguments in which I thought to be incorrect. I agreed with her statement saying that, "Most ticket buyers don’t go to Deadpool because they’re enamored of Ryan Reynolds’ charm or see Suicide Squad because of Margot Robbie’s skills. Perhaps that’s why it’s disorienting to see traditional, undeniable stars like Will Smith and Ben Affleck play characters like Deadshot and Batman. Stars of their caliber alter the films they’re in by their mere presence, as if they have a gravitational pull (Bastien)." However, the superheroes we know and love today have all been played by a wide cast of actors and actresses throughout the years. Some have more years of experience, meaning they have been around longer to establish a well known persona that fans know and love. So, of course there are certain actors who have a larger fan base due to their work and not the characters they portray. Being a popular actor or actress does not happen after one or two movies are released. It often takes lots of time and several job opportunities. Therefore, it takes time to build up a famous personality. It also does not make it easier considering the huge amount of actors and actresses and the may wonderful talents that they bring to films.
Reply
Becky Peña-Rubio
3/16/2020 09:37:38 pm
Angelica Jade Bastien claims in her article, "Have Superheroes Killed the Movie Star?" that actors who play superhero roles are only given an identity by the comic character they play and that their chance to create a legacy is taken away. While I do believe Bastien is correct when saying that "The rise of superhero films has taken some great actors off the table for years, skewering their ability to craft any sort of image outside of the familiar heroes that they play," I also don't agree with her claim that rising actors aren't given an opportunity to craft their legacy beyond the roles that they adapt from comic characters. I believe that the comic characters that they adapt give them more opportunities by making their name known to the Hollywood world. After Lupita Nyong’o starred as a powerful female character in Marvel's Black Panther, her name sparked the interest of many and she has even been offered many more roles. However, actors that have played their comic characters for years are known predominantly for those precise roles. After so much time spent playing a specific character, it becomes hard to adapt another role since they're so accustomed to the personality of their comic character. While playing a comic character does make rising actors more well-known, opening doors for more roles, after spending so much time becoming immersed into one character, it can limit the actor's ability to play different roles.
Reply
Cass Smith
3/17/2020 10:04:26 am
Thank you for addressing the idea that these movies and gigs can lead to a rise in stardom, that wasn't something I thought about in mine but it is a very good point!
Reply
Chloe Malcolm
3/17/2020 02:37:09 pm
I agree with your claim that rising actors can make a name for themselves in Hollywood after portraying a superhero character. The evidence that you used was similar mine, and I believe that when actors play a well-known comic book character, it does open up more opprutinties for them which can help them gain more noterity.
Reply
Jesuana Buabeng
3/16/2020 09:50:57 pm
In the article "Have Superheroes Killed The Movie Star?" by Angelica Jade Bastien, Bastien made the argument that superhero movies have "killed" or moved the attention of the audience from the actual actor to the character they play. I do not completely agree with her argument on this case. I do believe in her claim that movie watchers have shifted their attention more to the superheros seen in movies rather than the actual actor that plays the actor. For example, movie goers don't go to see movie like "Deadpool because they’re enamored of Ryan Reynolds’ charm" (2016), they for the comedic attributes of the superhero Deadpool. But I also believe that actors are improving and growing as stars from the superheros they play. Chadwick Boseman role as Black Panther has increased his perspective as an star. People do not only follow him or watch because he was Black Panther but for the legacy he and the rest of the cast made in the movie industry for the black community. Another example would be Dewayne "The Rock" gained his stardom from WWE, but increasing lead roles in popular movies such as Jumanji has boosted his media platform in multiple positive ways. Angelica Bastien's claim on how superheros are killing movie stars is understandable but i do not entirely agree with it.
Reply
3/16/2020 10:55:09 pm
In the article "Have Superheroes Killed the Movie Star?", Angelica Bastien introduces and attempts to support a false claim that the superhero that is portrayed by a certain actor is carried and attached to the actors persona going forward in their career, and that this role played is inevitably not going to give an actor a good starting role and fame in the acting industry. She supports this by stating that "The superhero characters they take on subsume their image" (Bastien). Meaning that Bastien believes that the superhero's image blends into the actors image, which inadvertently draws people out to watch the superhero itself, and not the actor, which is extremely false. With the up and coming social push for movie inclusion and a diversity of casts, a range or switch of a norm of actors that play certain established super hero roles has created a response that makes people more inclined to watch a movie solely because of a favorite actor, a different gender, and/or a different race because they see self representation, or even personal preferences in the new rendition of the super hero movie. Bastien additionally goes on to claim "But they have also been unable to translate the visibility their characters bring them into success elsewhere". I disagree with this statement. For example there are actors like Michael B. Jordan, or Lupita Nyong'o that Bastien references, that have such a varying range in their movies and performances combined with their personal backgrounds, that even though they were bot in Marvel movies and played super hero roles, they are still separable from their work. With all of the mass media production that goes into advertising these movies, and bringing light to new faces on veteran characters, individuality and consumer exposure to the person behind the character is able to rain triumphant on the restricting label of being someone on screen.
Reply
Shani Clark
3/16/2020 11:35:14 pm
As a representative for all of us movie-goer’s, Angelica Jade Bastien claims that superhero movies cheapen actors and ruin their potential to become movie stars, in her article “Have Superheroes Killed the Movie Star?” While she does make some valid points, what she doesn’t note is that these same superhero movies are exactly what build fanbases and attract popularity to actors that otherwise, would certainly not get this attention. While yes, in some cases people do pay more attention to the actual character than the actor, the opportunity to play the role is what can jumpstart a career into super stardom. Without these superhero movies, while actors might be able to explore more diverse roles, they also would not have nearly as much publicity as they do now. In the article, Bastien states that “Most ticket buyers don’t go to Deadpool because they’re enamored of Ryan Reynolds’ charm or see Suicide Squad because of Margot Robbie’s skills. “ While it may be true that the initial attraction is on the character, the actor will be recognized and remembered for their role if they perform well, and gain more and more opportunities to reach super stardom. Without these superhero movies, a lot of actors wouldn’t even be considered popular, let alone movie stars. It’s too soon to assume that an actor can’t become a movie star simply because they’re associated with a superhero movie, considering that the same movie is what truly started their career in the first place.
Reply
Serena Xu
3/17/2020 10:50:38 am
Shani, I definitely agree with your point that the superhero roles actors play can actually strengthen the actor's notability and recognition so that they're able to gain more opportunities in film options. I think the main point Angelica Bastien missed was that these superhero roles actually bring many positive opportunities for the actor if received well and I agree that many of these actor's careers have been kick-started by the success of the superhero films they've starred in.
Reply
Angelina Sisouphanh
3/17/2020 12:01:16 am
Jade Bastien is correct in her argument that an actor's portrayal of a superhero affects their status as a movie star. In other words, Bastien contends that an actor's role as a superhero is attached to their image and their fame only sprouts from there. She supports her assertion by claiming that "Each [of the Marvel Chris's] has achieved some level of popularity and even a somewhat dedicated fandom. But they have also been unable to translate the visibility their characters bring them into success elsewhere"(Bastein). When you think about Chris Hemsworth, your mind automatically goes to his role as "Thor." Even during Red Carpet conferences, when you see him there, you think of Thor and feel the Superhero ambiance from the character. Seeing him in normal clothes instead of an iron chest plate feels somewhat juxtaposing, and you don't think of him as the australian father with a wife and three kids or even as the actor who played a role in "The Heart of the Sea," you think of him as Thor. Furthermore, she also explains how the Chris's can be used interchangebly (Bastein). Many do get them confused, and this goes to show that their characters are more remembered than they are.
Reply
King Bailey
3/17/2020 10:41:37 am
While it is true that because of their portrayal in superhero movies many of the fandom that currently follows them do so because they recognize the hero they play this is the same with all actors who careers spring forward due to playing a role in a highly popular film but this intentional form of reorganization allows the actor a chance to build a brand of their own through social media or other films they might play after or during their role as a superhero.
Reply
Cass Smith
3/17/2020 10:02:33 am
Jade Bastein brings up good points, yes, but she is incorrect in her assumption that companies such as Marvel or DC comics are more about the heros than the actors. Her assumption that "the various Marvel Chrises (they’re interchangeable enough that choosing any will do)," (Bastein) is almost completely false as each has done other works as well and plays their own role quite differently. Her assumption that people go to movies like Suicide Squad/Birds of Prey or any of the Iron Man movies for Harley Quinn or Tony Stark is also untrue, as most internet searches will show you that people are just as enthusiastic about the actors themselves as they are the individuality of the characters. However, I will not disagree that their superhero role does make up a big part of what they are known for. But actors such as Chris Pratt and Zoe Saldana are also known for their roles in shows like Parks and Rec and movies such as Avatar, thus not keeping them tied only to the Guardians of the Galaxy franchise.
Reply
Kallahari Edwards
3/17/2020 12:02:15 pm
I mostly agree with your comment Cass; yes, the fact that Marvel or DC superhero actors are mainly known by that role isn't really debatable. However, many of those actors had roles in other shows or movies before, like you stated. Then again, the main reason why people would go to see movies like Iron Man or Birds of Prey is because of the actor's role as a superhero. Otherwise, there would likely be less interest due to the lack of the fictional character, no matter how big of a fan someone may be.
Reply
Daniel Mathew
3/17/2020 10:23:26 am
Angelica Jade Bastien, made good points in her article, "HAVE SUPERHEROES KILLED THE MOVIE STAR?" She claims that today's film industry is lacking 'movie stars' as most companies use actors for their heroes rather than for the actors as Hollywood had done in the past. "Having this sort of crafted narrative is important; without it, stars don’t exist. That’s the danger of new, hot actors joining comic franchises that lock them into absurd seven-picture deals: They don’t have the ability or time to craft their own star image. The superhero characters they take on subsume their image. The moviegoing public has a hard time seeing these actors beyond the comic book and legacy franchise characters they play" (Bastien). Although there are some stars that you see today, that are recognizable without a superhero attached to their name, they are not many. Although, a person like me who does not know much about the film industry and struggles to know more than a couple actors out of their roles; people back in the day would easily recognize these actors because of how companies groomed them and made them into undeniable celebrities.
Reply
Camden Carpenter
3/17/2020 11:08:09 am
I understand completely what you are saying. However, most stars I can list have had previous roles in other blockbuster hits and are certified stars. Zoe Saldana, who plays Gamora in Guardians 1,2 and Avengers: Infinity War and Endgame, had previous roles in movies such as Avatar, which is the second highest grossing film of all time, behind Avengers: Endgame (ironic how Zoe Saldana is in the top three highest grossing movies of all time.) Chris Evans and Brie Larson both played monumental roles in Scott Pilgrim vs The World. Robert Downey Jr has been in movies such as Weird Science, all the way back in 1985. Idris Elba has been in Star Trek, along with Chris Hemsworth. All this to say, most of these actors are known to people who dedicate themselves to movies and flim, such as myself, and people like me view them more than just the character they represent in the films they're in.
Reply
King Bailey
3/17/2020 10:31:10 am
In her article Angelica makes a claim that due to the increase in superhero movies actors are attached to the role they play and are unable to shape their own careers unlike previously during times like “Hollywood’s golden age” when actors were able to build themselves up using lower to mid budget films. While her claim that many people who watch these movies do so because of the characters and not the actors who play them this still allows for a starting part of many actor's careers who otherwise might not have gotten the chance to play an important role in a big budget film. For instance, Robert Downey Jr who plays Iron Man in all the Marvel films says at the premier of Avenger's infinity war says that before he was given the chance to play Iron Man he was facing “30 years of dependency, depravity, and despair” before his life turned around. Now while he is no longer playing that role any other role, he is cast in he will have the advantage of being widely recognized just the stars that Angelica mentioned in her article. Also, even while playing these roles some of these actors still can play other roles for instance Chris Hemsworth who plays Thor and Tessa Thompson who plays Valkyrie both ended up staring in men in black Internation which profited over 200 million internationally thanks to both actors being widely recognized for their roles in Marvel movies. This article underestimates how much playing a superhero role can benefit an actor's long-term career or allow new actors a chance at become stars and have the same appeal of the stars that came before the superhero movement.
Reply
Ollie Fairlamb
3/17/2020 12:28:54 pm
I agree with your statement. I like and agree how you included the two main characters of Thor Ragnarok being successful in other movies that were similar to Thor. Thompson and Hemsworth play comedic roles well, and in the end Marvel did help them grow their fame. Hemsworth had minor roles before the first Thor movie, but now he has grown in fame all because he landed the role of Thor. I agree that Marvel changes the lives of actors and their popularity has grown which leads them to major jobs that end up doing financially well. So yes, I can agree with your statement as Marvel actors and actresses are given fame, then can later develop a title for themselves and be able to have a platform where they can work to what they believe is their best acting genres.
Reply
Serena Xu
3/17/2020 10:45:46 am
In the article "Have Superheroes Killed the Movie Star?" written by Angelica Bastien, it is stated that even though actors have acquired fame from roles of famous comic book characters, they've also limited themselves by not being able to further branch out into different genres or films. First of all, I do agree with Angelica Bastein's claim that "The superhero characters they take on subsume their image. The moviegoing public has a hard time seeing these actors beyond the comic book and legacy franchise characters they play." There are instances when seeing a familiar superhero actor playing an unusual role, people levitate towards remembering what they've already seen from the actors beforehand. When watching the Dolittle trailer, I couldn't help but to recall RDJ's role as Iron Man. However, I disagree with Bastien's main argument that actors who have played a superhero role have limited themselves to one genre or role. I think actors with a superhero role have been given the opportunity to be recognized and noticed. With this recognition comes more opportunities to determine what type of films the actor could branch out into. Take Tom Holland, for example: after starring as Spider-Man, he's gained notability and recognition, thus being able to branch out to many different film options (future movies like Uncharted or animated movies like Spies in Disguise). All in all, I believe that playing a superhero role mainly develops the actor's recognition so that they're able to branch out into the film community with more options.
Reply
Hannah Gresham
3/17/2020 10:39:27 pm
I agree with your statement and talked about some of the same things you did. Actors who play the roles of superheroes will be able to gain recognition and more opportunities from their performances. I think after watching these movies though, that the public will often have a hard time separating the superhero role and any roles the actors may play later on.
Reply
Camden Carpenter
3/17/2020 11:01:46 am
Many claims have been made stating that actors, namely those who star in multiple superhero movies (like the Marvel Cinematic Universe or Detective Comics Extended Universe, just to name a few), aren't real stars and are just known for the character they play. While there may be some actors who have their first starring role in these movies, most of these actors are stars in their own right and aren't just seen as a superhero. Bastién states,"Chris Pratt... has found success leading Jurassic World and Guardians of the Galaxy. But it’s hard to argue that he is successful on his own and not just replicating a bland approximation of actors before him... Pratt is a good model of someone who is popular but has yet to become a true star"(Bastién 7)This statement is blatantly wrong. Pratt has been known for several years for being in the hit T.V show, "Parks and Recreation". He has all the capabilities of a star. In Parks and Rec, he plays a lazy character, but as seen in Jurassic World and Guardians Of The Galaxy, he can change his acting skill and body, from being mildly fat to a slim, fit body for different roles. In his most recent film, Onward, he isn't even visible, he has the talent to voice act, which is a talent on its own. All in all, stars such as Chris Pratt and others deserve to be called greats even though they may have a massive role in a superhero movie.
Reply
Megan Moran
3/17/2020 11:35:37 am
In Angelica Jade Bastien's article "HAVE SUPERHEROES KILLED THE MOVIE STAR?", she makes a compelling argument that claims that due to the "cookie cutter" story lines of these super hero movies, it ruins the chances of most upcoming actors who don't fit the super hero image to have successful careers. Additionally, it also alters the actors who do fit these superhero characters because they have to adapt their real life personality to fit their character or limit their acting opportunities to a certain genre. Within this article, she states how the lack of mid-budget films causes less chance for risk and variety in movies (Bastien 2016). As a result of this, directors want to stay close to the comic book story lines that essentially tie the lead actor to the role forever. These types of story lines have proven to be extremely successful, so it makes sense as to why directors often want to stay close to these types of stories. Based on audience's reactions to seeing these actors in other films, I strongly agree with this point. Many people who see these actors such as Ryan Reynolds or any of the Chrises that are typically in these superhero movies respond to these movies by saying stuff such as, "I didn't know Captain America had a desk job" or "So that's what Deadpool does in his free time". Granted, these are said as a joke, but it does show how audiences view these actors who are essentially tied to these characters for the rest of their careers. These people therefore are not viewed to have their own personality, or rather extremely similar personalities to their most popular character. Though I'm sure many of these actors have different personalities than the ones they portray, audiences view these actors extremely similarly to how they act in movies. For example, in interviews, many actors may act similarly to their characters, such as Ryan Reynolds cracking jokes similar to Deadpool to please audiences.This goes back to the evidence Bastien stated in the article about how old movie stars such as Marilyn Monroe was viewed as a character herself (2016). Because of this, old Hollywood actors often times would help directors and producers change the script or alter story lines to better suit their own personalities (2016). Modern day stars are not able to do this because they are altering themselves to better fit the characters, not the other way around. Ultimately, this stunts their ability to become a big time star themselves. By playing these characters, the actors are gaining tons of notoriety, but it's because people fall in love with the characters that are essentially from a comic book. However, they are not the ones suffering the most. Black Panther is used as an example of this within the article. In order to create opportunity for black actors or those who do not fit the "rugged, white, young male with a dark past" persona, they must adapt comic book characters for these actors to play instead of letting them create their own characters and personas (Bastien 2016). To conclude, I think super heroes have greatly altered the movie star by limiting actors to a certain genre of type of character and by limiting the types of personas that are acceptable for movie stars to have.
Reply
Chancelor Gordon
3/17/2020 11:48:17 am
Hollywood’s movie industry is ever changing with new trends, favorites, and actors. The prominence of this industry has changed over the years as well. Some, like Angelica Jade-Bastien of the LA Times, believe that the lack of movie stars with the popularity of franchises like Marvel is hurting the industry: “But movie stardom — once an integral part of the Hollywood ecosystem — has arguably taken its biggest hit ever, thanks to the current dominance of onscreen superheroes” (Bastien). Although there are valid points to the assertion that superhero films are restricting actors from becoming stars, the opposite is true. Since the beginning of the movie industry, one thing has always been seen among the biggest movie stars: “Having this sort of crafted narrative ... without it, stars don’t exist” (Bastien). Many people have read the comics that superhero movies are based off of, and many have not read them. It is a challenge for actors to bring justice to the original comics while drawing in new audiences. The best actors are able to do both, simultaneously molding them self to the character. Without the actor the character would not be the same. Superhero movies are popular because of the stars and what they have built over the years, crafting their individual image while giving people feelings of nostalgia. There are also many people in the world that do not like superhero movies. Comedies, romance, and horror are other genres that produce movies all of the time. With many of the stars from superhero movies often being tied to “seven-picture deals” or other similar contracts, there is room for the emergence of different stars (Bastien). In the current society, the movie industry is very different than it used to be. Trying to restore the way it used to be with big Hollywood movie stars would be unsuccessful because that is not what people want to see anymore. There will always be stars; however, what society considers a movie star will continue to change
Reply
Kallahari Edwards
3/17/2020 11:54:51 am
I somewhat agree with Angelica’s argument, but overall, the idea that the popularity of superheroes is “killing the movie star” is inaccurate. There is a plethora of potential movie stars in this day and age, especially as various streaming services output new content. She is correct in her argument when it comes to actors mostly being known by superhero roles, (if they have that kind of role) but it doesn’t mean that those superhero roles discredit them for all of their other work. Robert Downey Jr., for example, is well-known as his role as Iron Man--a superhero--but is also well known for his role in Sherlock Holmes (2009). One thing I don’t completely agree with however, is Angelica’s statement that “Midbudget studio films are often where stars have been able to craft themselves…but now directors seem to jump directly from small independent films to gargantuan would-be blockbusters…” (Jade-Bastién). She’s basically saying that most popular actors have less opportunity for early acting experience, or didn’t have experience before. This obviously isn’t true, as many popular actors today, including those who largely play superhero-based roles, had past acting experience, whether it was for large or small films.
Reply
Braden Coats
3/17/2020 02:29:13 pm
I agree with your statement because of how it does not disable these actors and actresses from getting other roles, but enabling them to be more successful. Although most people assimilate them from their previous or most famous roles. I strongly agree with these statements and thought it was well phrased, and explained. This could also be associated to movies such as the terminator series.
Reply
Ollie Fairlamb
3/17/2020 12:13:17 pm
While Angelica Jade-Bastien does make a valid claim that superhero actors do not get to learn who they are as an actor, I believe that Marvel actors have been able to experiment as actors and explore different acting techniques and genres. In the article, Bastien talks about the Marvel Chrises and focuses on Chris Hemsworth, as he found his style of acting from trial and error (Bastien). After this article, when Thor Ragnarok came out, you could see that they gave Hemsworth a comedy, and it portrayed Hemsworth as an enjoyable guy that people already thought him to be. Other stars do have some elaborate contracts, but we have seen most Marvel actors work outside of the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Thus, they get to try new roles and experiment in types of acting. This could be seen with the multiple types of movies that Chris Pratt has been in. Marvel did help his career grow, but Pratt already had had some successful roles on TV shows, such as Parks and Rec. In that show, he established his comedic value and how he is able to play a comedic role. Marvel actors use these superhero movies to boost their career and fame, and then after their contract is up, they are able to move on to other movies and areas that fit their personalities best. Bastien’s original statement made a valid argument, however, it does not account for the other successes that Marvel actors have had outside of the Marvel Cinematic Universe.
Reply
Rakin Khoja
3/17/2020 12:32:17 pm
I see what you are saying, but I just have to say that even though Chris Hemsworth might have a career outside the superhero industry, he is still most known as "the guy who plays Thor" in the Thor movies. That's what he's most known for and not as himself. Most people see him as his character of Thor and not of the other film's he played. This is the same with other actors mostly in the superhero industry. They are known as the heroes they play as and have fame because of the heroes. If they were shown in other movies, the movie probably wouldn't have as much success as their superhero movie does.
Reply
Rakin Khoja
3/17/2020 12:23:43 pm
The meaning of a movie star always changes, but a star is someone who if seen, people know what they stand for. Every film of theirs has a meaning behind it and people already know what the film will rotate around as soon as seeing the actor. Stars are people who stand out and can change the whole popular culture. Studios do need stars because stars symbolize their films and show the true meaning behind the film. Without stars, a movie would just be a plain common movie like every other in people's eyes. Stars are lost when everyone plays the same part such as when three different actors play the same superhero in three different movies. They become known as that superhero but not as themselves. When seen, people would say "that's the man who played batman" but a lot of people probably would not even remember their names. Stars are being lost in today's society as superhero movies rise in fame. The only stars that are left right now are the superheroes themselves. Stars aren't actually stars if they aren't known for themselves, and that's why I have to say that superheroes have killed the movie star.
Reply
Shawn Mazyck
3/17/2020 02:28:21 pm
Although you bring up an interesting perspective, i disagree with your claim. When you said: "When seen, people would say "that's the man who played batman" but a lot of people probably would not even remember their names." that isn't really true. When people watch movies and become invested in the series, they also become invested in the actor and becomes a true fan. That's why actors have success in their other movies because fans become invested in them and support them in other projects. Superheros have not killed the star.
Reply
Miriam Hein
3/17/2020 11:25:32 pm
I completely agree with your claim that stars should be seen as people who stand out from pop culture. And with the way these actors are getting famous so quickly just because they played an important role in a superhero movie, makes it so that the actor is getting the glory when most of the work was done by the character itself. A lot of "stars" are known from superhero roles and that to me isn't deserving if the actor has not actually earned it.
Reply
Peyton Stack
3/17/2020 12:36:16 pm
When comparing movie stars today to those 60 years ago, one can find that superhero movies or movies that have pop cultural characters in general (ex: Luke Skywalker, Harry Potter etc.) tend to overshadow an actors career. In the article ""HAVE SUPERHEROES KILLED THE MOVIE STAR?" by Angelica Jade Bastein, Mrs. Bastein's assertion that superhero movies have "killed" movie stars is correct. When viewers hear the name Tobey Maguire or Robert Downey Jr, most respond with their famous counterparts, Spiderman and Iron man. This is a direct result of the overproduction of movies in Hollywood, and the failure to seperate actor from the stardom of the character. Over the course of film history, a certain dynamic to movies have been lost. "Now directors seem to jump directly from small independent films to gargantuan would-be blockbusters, and with so much money on the line, there’s no room for experimentation or for directors to push themselves and their actors in bold directions" (Bastein). Superhero movies have ultimately created more uniform films, and demote the unique qualities each one has. For those who state that this assertion is false, are more focusing on outliers, like Chris Hemsworth who appears in multiple films, rather than the majority of actors. (Bastein, Angelica Jade. "HAVE SUPERHEROES KILLED THE MOVIE STAR?" LA Weekly, September 23, 2016).
Reply
Cecile Davila
3/17/2020 05:11:41 pm
I really like how you argued your point with evidence from the text and how you weaved it into your paragraph. While I disagree with what you are trying to argue, I can see your side to the story. I can see how we connect the actor to the role they play and the pop culture of today influencing the media and movies we watch. But the fact that these actors aren't movie stars is something that is questionable.
Reply
Molly Clark
3/17/2020 12:40:09 pm
Angelica Jade-Bastien makes the valid claim that Superheros have killed the actors. I can see both sides to this claim, but agree with the point she is making. Famous actors, like Chris Evans, are lost in the world of popularity because they are not know unless they are tied to their screen name. The superhero roles do not discredit actors like Chris Hemsworth or Scarlett Johansson for their other work as actors, but you only know them from their superhero role. Even though many Marvel actors have played other parts in their careers, they would not have the same platform or fame as they have now without their super hero roles. Although actors like "Chris Pratt [have] found success leading Jurassic World and Guardians of the Galaxy" (Bastien) they still are not considered stars. Their characters are stars in the Hollywood world, but the actors who play the stars are not as famous as the characters. The character Chris Pratt plays, Star-Lord, could be played by anyone, it did not have to be Chris Pratt. The characters that Brad Pitt plays have to be played by Pitt because people would not pay to see the movie if a random actor was in it. People did not pay to see Guardians of the Galaxy because Chris Pratt was the main actor, they paid to see it because of Star- Lord (Pratt`s character). In conclusion, I agree with the claim that Superheros killed the movie star.
Reply
Lisbeth Martinez
3/17/2020 02:06:57 pm
I honestly disagree with your claim regarding acting success. Yes, it has caused a direct tie with an actor and their role in this massive franchise, but since the rising popularity of these films has led to fans going deep into an actor's history, highlighting their past roles or giving new actors a pedestal of opportunity from their built "acting skill set credibility" in these superhero movies.
Reply
Kathleen Miller
3/17/2020 12:52:26 pm
I do not agree with Angelica Bastien's claim that superheroes have ruined the movie star. Like other movies that have come before the actor is what makes or breaks how the audience views the superhero as a character. Take Robert Downey Jr for example people didn't just adore Iron man because he had a cool suite and he was powerful. It was how Robert portrayed him as being arrogant and confident which made people love the Iron man movies. Actors also do I have a lot of room to experiment within these high budget blockbusters. Take Loki who started out as a malicious monster who wanted to destroy everything ended up by the end being Thor's friend and sacrificing himself for his brother. If there is no experimentation going on then why didn't they leave villain's like Loki as just another malicious bad guy with no motive.
Reply
Margo Griffin
3/17/2020 01:27:56 pm
I agree that people love actors like Robert Downey Jr who have a significant role in superhero movie. But what about actors that are just starting out their career? They are going to get placed in a superhero movie and have a small role, and then no one is going to notice them, even if they were someone very similar the Robert Downey Jr. Actors who have had their name out there for a while are going to have an easier time distinguishing themselves apart from their character, but others who are just getting into the show business might have a harder time.
Reply
Kilian Pfeiler
3/17/2020 06:33:16 pm
I completely agree that these actors are the main reason why characters in movies are so loved. They give the movies initial attraction to their fans. Robert Downey Jr. is a loved actor and isn't just known as his superhero role. It is him that gives the audience the compassion for the character. These actors are still needed
Reply
EJ Jones
3/17/2020 09:21:47 pm
I agree that actors can be the reason why characters are so liked such as a make or break moment. The actors give a face to a person with lines and a costume and hooks viewers in to watch more and more and all the series with that actor. Or can leave people disliked and say he or she can’t act and break the character and the storyline completely.
Reply
Margo Griffin
3/17/2020 01:22:28 pm
It is correctly assumed that superheroes have killed movie stars, which is the claim that Angelica Jade Bastien has made in her article. When watching superhero movies, it is the hero that you care about, not the actor. In Bastien’s article, she states, “Watching one superhero film after another, it becomes undeniable that the actors aren’t the stars — the characters and property are”. If it is the characters that people care about, then the stars are going to start going unnoticed, and will have a harder time building their career as an actor. Angelica says, “the actors I’m worried about are the ones rarely given a chance to play superhero characters in the first place” (Bastien). Since it is the superhero roles that define an actor, the ones who are not getting to play in hero movies will struggle with their career and with being successful as an actor. Actors are also having a harder and harder time being recognized apart form their superhero movies, especially new stars. Bastien says that, “They [new-coming stars] don’t have the ability or time to craft their own star image. The superhero characters they take on subsume their image”. These young stars are going to have their whole career defined by the one superhero that they play, and then that is all they will be remembered by. If film directors do not start realizing this soon, then the careers of actors that play superheroes is just going to get even worse.
Reply
Lisbeth Martinez
3/17/2020 02:01:56 pm
To say that this rising industry of live-action comics is killing stardom in Hollywood is laughable. Actors, such as Robert Downey Jr, who was once "arrested multiple times for drug offenses"(AAC), have turned their lives around and created a 'dynasty' out of the success of these movies. Their names and skill have become a brand in themselves, recognized all around the world and admired by multitudes of fans. Though some may argue this success only comes from their superhero roles as they are forced to "adapt [into] characters that have existed in comics for decades"(Bastien), one can look closer and see that these movie-adaptations actually served as a window for other works from these actors, highlighting their skills and giving them a strong credibility as their names become a part of households. Just as Bastien asks about "[giving actors] the chance to create their own legacies", she proves her own point as she fails to see past Marvel; these movies have pushed actors such as Michael B. Jordan on a higher pedestal, gifting the opportunity to expand on roles, becoming multi-faceted through recent movies such as the adaptation of "Fahrenheit 451" and more impacting, memoir "Just Mercy". So, "Have Superheroes Killed the Movie Star?" can be met with a no; the outcome of this rising genre has instead created a new era of stardom and acting opportunity.
Reply
Ochuwa Garuba
3/17/2020 08:22:28 pm
I agree with your claim that actors and superheroes, such as Robert Downey Jr. and Michael B. Jordan, have been able to branch out of Marvel and create a new, well-versed set of roles in other movies and films. However, there are very few actors who are able to accomplish this while maintaining a prominent status of stardom. True stars need to be utter game changers; they need to be able to shake cultural values. Robert Downey Jr., for instance, still fails to appeal to audiences outside of Marvel, as most people still only know him as Iron Man. He does not seem to fill the gap between 'bankability' and riveting cultural views. Bastien emphasizes the importance of cultural relevance by stating that "stars can start trends in fashion, affect political conversations and leave an important footprint in American culture." Yet, Robert Downey Jr. has simply done none of those.
Reply
Shawn Mazyck
3/17/2020 02:21:49 pm
Super hero movies have become an integral part of our pop culture as a society in the 21st century. These same super hero movies have skyrocketed the careers of the actors that portray our favorite superheros.With that being said, I disagree with the claim made by Angelica Jade Bastien that superheros have killed the star. The popularity of super hero movies has opened up doors for many of the actors to play in other major roles. According to Bastien, "Chris Pratt ...has found success leading Jurassic World and Guardians of the Galaxy." (Bastien) With that information, it is now known that actors like Chris Pratt and his colleagues have played in other big roles because of the success of their super hero movies. Bastien says: "Pratt is a good model of someone who is popular but has yet to become a true star." That claim is flat out untrue. Pratt has earned many awards like Best Actor and Best International Actor (IMDB) He has proven many times that he is able to play in movies of any genre. Superhero movies haven't killed the star, they have propelled them into success in their careers and greatly help them.
Reply
Chloe Malcolm
3/17/2020 02:27:16 pm
Ms. Bastein does present a logical opinion that is presented with logical evidence. However, it still is an opinion, and it is an opinion that frankly, I do not agree with. While we often portray actors with a certain popular character they play, I believe that it does not hinder them in terms of expanding their careers. Portraying a superhero will actually help the actor make a name for themselves, because while playing this character the audience will see their skills grow and develop overtime and will come to admire them for their abilities on the big screen. While Bastein claims that, “The superhero characters they take on subsume their image. The moviegoing public has a hard time seeing these actors beyond the comic book and legacy franchise characters they play. These performers get stuck playing characters that all seem crafted from similar molds…”, That is not the case for most actors. For example, take Tom Holland. He was virtually unknown before he began playing the role of spider man. (Rotten Tomatoes). However, unlike what Bastein claims in her article, playing that well-known superhero character provided Holland with more opportunities in Hollywood. In fact some of Holland's popular movies such as Onward and The Lost City of Z are movies he played in after his debut as Spiderman and they are both movies that are not in the superhero genre (Rotten Tomatoes). Thus, by playing a popular character that is the product of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, a well-known movie studio, that essentially gave Holland the push he needed to start his journey of becoming a big name actor. In conclusion, by being associated with a well-known and loved superhero brand, actors are able to gain notoriety, which can help them land more roles in the future that do not have to be related to superheroes. So, unlike what Bastein says, superheros do not kill the movie star. In fact, landing the role of a superhero character can give them a major jumpstart in their career.
Reply
Mackenzie May
3/17/2020 02:39:38 pm
In her article "Have Superheroes Killed the Movie Star?" by Angelica Bastien,I do not entirely agree with Angelica's argument that superheroes are ruining movie stars. Angelica argues that superheroes are killing movie stars because the stars can't move beyond the superhero persona that they play," The rise of superhero films has taken some great actors off the table for years, skewering their ability to craft any sort of image outside of the familiar heroes that they play." (Bastien)., and that, "The superhero characters they take on subsume their image."(Bastien). However, i disagree. Of course actors like Robert Downy Junior will be seen as Iron Man, or Chris Evans as Captain America, because they are good at being those characters. When you think of Leonardo DiCaprio you think of his role as Jack in "Titanic" because he so masterfully played the role of Jack that he is specifically recognized for how good he was. To make a film isn't about finding an actor it's about finding the character, an actor who fits the role. Bastien chastises Hollywood for not giving good actors a chance to be recognized, "the actors I’m worried about are the ones rarely given a chance to play superhero characters in the first place." (Bastien). and that," Ultimately, I’m not worried about the white male actors... They will get chance after chance to prove their worth as stars even if they can barely inhabit the superhero roles they play, let alone figure out and craft their own public images." (Bastien).What Bastien fails to recognize is the nature of marvel films. The superhero characters in the movie already exist, coming from a long, successful line of beloved comics. The characters and their personalities have already been created and explored, the movies are about bringing those characters to life and to do that you need to find actors who can do exactly that.Of course white, male actors are going to get a huge opportunity, because at least 80% of all marvel heroes are handsome, white males. Bastien states,". It’s actors like Michael B. Jordan and Lupita Nyong’o who offer the most interesting opportunities for the evolution of movie stardom. But with no midbudget pictures to give them the chance to create their own legacies — rather than adapt those of characters that have existed in comics for decades — will we see them get that opportunity?" (Bastien). You can't just change an already existing character. When Captain America first showed up on the big screen he had to be white because you can't just make a character African for the sake on inclusion because it has to make sense story wise. At the end of "Avengers: End Game", the new Captain America actually is African because, in the story, the original Captain America is old and has to hand the mantle off to someone who can become the next Captain America, making the Captain African was implemented into the story so that is make sense story wise. In her article Bastien criticizes directors by stating, "Will they be able to develop the intimacy with their audience that a great star turn can achieve if they’re stuck vacillating between big-budget films that offer little to no narrative risks" (Bastien). Superhero movies can't take big narrative risks because of continuity. The directors have to find actors who can bring already existing characters to life, that's what all movies based on books strive to do. With huge overarching storylines, directors have to stick with the same actors, you can't just change around a cast mid-way through. Yet they are still making efforts to take risks by making Captain America African American in "Avengers: Endgame" or killing off a majority of beloved characters in "Marvel: Infinity Wars".Mark Hamill is mostly know to play Luke Skywalker in StarWars both because he was an amazing actor who brought the character to life and because he played the character across 5 different beloved StarWars films. Today people don't like the new StarWars trilogies because they take take such massive narrative risks that make the story lose any sense, the stories on themselves are fine but when put into the in-universe lore things don't go in a good direction. Unlike marvel who still took risks but still kept the story consistent. My biggest complaint is how Bastien seems to undermines the abilities of the actors because their just their for marketability, "If even stars as big as Will Smith now rarely bring the kind of box office results that justify their huge paydays, do the studios really even need them? From the perspective of the executives, what is the point of a movie star beyond marketability?" (Bastien). The point of a movie star is to make a good movie. Bastien asks the question, "what makes a movie star beyond box office appeal?" (Bastien), when the answer is simply, being a good actor. Jared Leto had huge marketability in his role as the Joker in "Suicide Squad", raking up huge hype for the movie.
Reply
Mackenzie May
3/17/2020 03:10:41 pm
(Continued). However, Leto proved to be a terrible Joker and thus the movie was a huge flunk. The point of a movie star is to make a good film, Bastien even says this themself, "Movie stars can make good films masterpieces, electrically charge a close-up and alter our understanding of a film due to their image." (Bastien). Heath Ledger has gone down in history as one the of best Jokers and actors in history due to his masterful work in "The Dark Knight". He was a good Joker because he wanted to be a good Joker. Those who play characters such as Iron Man, Captain America, or Thor already are movie stars because if they weren't then every Marvel Movie they starred in would have been bad. Just because an actors career is set around one acting role doesn't mean their a bad actor. Bastien's definition of a movie star is that stars gave a cultural impact, "Stars can start trends in fashion, affect political conversations and leave an important footprint in American culture. But most powerful is how they affect the medium itself"(Bastien), and uses some examples of good stars, "The great stars challenged the studios and America itself. Marlon Brando, Montgomery Clift and River Phoenix helped us question what it means to be a man in this country. The stardom of Sidney Poitier gave white audiences a peek into the black experience and perhaps the ability to see the humanity of African-Americans. The activism of Harry Belafonte and George Clooney brings attention to causes that many would like to forget." (Bastien). The way Bastien describes good movie stars is one of my biggest pet peeves with this argument. Of course actors like Clooney or Belafonte had such huge cultural influence because they starred in movies EXPLICITLY DESIGNED TO HAVE A CULTURAL IMPACT. Do you think that Jurassic Park, a series about resurrecting dinosaurs, is going to spark political conversations? Or that Marvel movies will cause the latest fashion trends when all the characters wear fancy, skin-tight suits and flowing capes. Of course not. Movies like Marvel are not designed to have a hidden meaning. A movie about African slavery is designed to show the humanity of Africans, works such as "The Tortoise and the Hare" are literally designed to have a deeper meaning and teach the audience a lesson. This isn't to say Superhero movies don't have any impact or no meaning at all, but that's not the point of the movie. Literary works such as Harry Potter or Eragon are designed to tell a story about dragons,wizards and magic, to stimulate the imagination, not make you think about the intricacies of life under a corrupt government like "Fahrenheit 451". It's literally the equivalency of comparing a story about a knight fighting a dragon to save the fair princess, to a story that literally asks you, "What happens after death?", and then wondering why the fairytale didn't start a second Crusade or a religious war that split the human race apart. Or why Snow-White didn't lead to mass approval of African American civil rights and liberty that ultimately sparked a new era of racial equality and acceptance like Martin Luthur King's, "I Have a Dream" speech. It's because they weren't made to make you have an existential crisis. Superhero movies are not made to make you question the meaning of life; it's like wondering why a legless horse came last in a NASCAR race. Don't compare "Thor" to "A Handmaid's Tale".
Reply
bella hancock
3/17/2020 02:43:55 pm
In the article "Have Superheroes Killed the Movie Star", Angelica Bastein argues that iconic, nostalgic comic book superhero roles limit an actor's potential to build an image of their own outside of that character role. While I agree with this point, I believe that this happens for actors in roles other than superheroes as well, and that this in no way limits an actor or actress' fame or fan recognition. While we may look at "the marvel Chrises" and see only Thor, Steve Rogers, or Peter Quill, the same happens when we see John Krasinski; 'That's Jim from The Office'. Any television or cinema role that comes to be considered 'iconic' or 'classic' triggers the same reaction in viewers, tying actors to their most iconic roles. While this can indeed limit an actor's potential to build a reputation outside of their character, or work outside their typical cinematic archetype, it can also help them gain support in newer projects and endeavors. For example, if a new movie was coming out starring Lupita Nyong'o, a marvel fan might recognize her from Black Panther and see the new movie because they thought she performed well in Black Panther. This means that actors can use their reputations as superheroes to build a fanbase outside of their most recognized franchise.
Reply
Natalie Joseph
3/17/2020 05:39:10 pm
I agree with your claim that any role, not necessarily a superhero role, an actor plays can have an adverse effect on their ability to create their own image. I like how you supported your claim by including outside evidence, for instance, showing that Krasinski's image may be overshadowed by his role in the office. I also like how you contradicted the author's claim by explaining how Nyong'o's recognition from her role in Black Panther would make people more likely to see her other films.
Reply
Jamie Hockey
3/17/2020 09:30:59 pm
I agree with your claim that there have always been actors who have been "limited" to their roles and that it isn't a new concept started by Marvel. I like how you used evidence from real actors who have been put in this mold and have managed to later diversify their career to back up your claim that it doesn't completely limit actors.
Reply
Braden Coats
3/17/2020 02:48:51 pm
Although certain actors and actresses could be most famously known and associated with their superhero films, i disagree with Angelica due to the fact that this would not stop these actors from acting in other movies. Most people may know them from the superhero series and it could draw in certain people to the other movies. I do not believe it restricts the actors to who they are or want to be because of the fact that they could still explore those options and genres of films. The actors that have played in the movies of Spiderman have changed numerous times but have continued to stay popular. Although certain stars make certain movies as good as they are I do not believe that they have a great enough impact to ruin a series enough to not produce movies.
Reply
Eric Lu
3/17/2020 04:22:37 pm
I agree with your statement where many actors may be defined by their roles in superhero movies, but they aren't limited to only staring in those movies. Many other actors have phenomenal acting in other movies which may have been more popular than there superhero movie.
Reply
Amelia Orr
3/17/2020 04:00:46 pm
Fame, as well as art itself, is an idea with no certain definition or criteria. In Bastién’s article “Have Superheroes Killed the Movie Star”, the author lays out an oversimplified argument that superhero genres of movies are “killing” movie stars as a concept. I disagree, as her point does not account for the nuance of the film genre. Art of all kinds sees different styles and genres gain popularity with new audiences, new interests, and new artists. For example, in visual arts, modernism, which gained popularity in the 1960s, was seen as a “killing” of traditional art and artists, but has become a much more respected style in more recent years (Kuiper). More comic and less self important genres, such as comic book movies, have seen a surge in popularity in the last few decades; for example, The Marvel Cinematic Universe was the highest grossing movie franchise in 2019 (Watson). More serious drama movies have continued to be popular with critics and award ceremonies, but it seems as if the average viewers tend to enjoy comic book movies. The stars in these movies have caved out their own niche, which is not much of a niche anymore seeing it’s popularity, and grown successful in their field. Success and stardom can not be measured with outdated constructs, and we should instead be glad there’s some new faces in the movies.
Reply
Sheila Ganley
3/17/2020 06:54:24 pm
I find it interesting how you connected a form of art to your argument. As far as the actors who acted in superhero movies I think that they have made their fame doing that and commend them for gaining those roles. However, when they move on to another genre or movie it's hard to see them as anything but their role in the superhero movie personally.
Reply
Eric Lu
3/17/2020 04:17:49 pm
In the Article "Have superheroes killed the movie star" I disagree with Bastien. For example she states that "Most ticket buyers don’t go to Deadpool because they’re enamored of Ryan Reynolds’ charm or see Suicide Squad because of Margot Robbie’s skills.", but many people have favorite actors such as Ryan Reynolds who go to all of his movies to see him. These superhero movies may help shape the way of the actors path, but they don't define it. For example, many may have enjoyed watching Ryan Reynolds' acting in deadpool and go to other movies that he is the star in because of his outstanding performance as deadpool. These stars may be more widely known as 'the one he played deadpool' but they aren't limited to only superhero movies.
Reply
Chelsea Josue
3/17/2020 04:23:49 pm
In the article, “Have superheroes killed the movie star,” The author Angelica Bastein, argues that these well known superhero stories have limited the variety of roles an actor can pursue. Looking at the article I can agree with Angelica’s argument about how these movies can mold a celebrity’s actions and decisions. For example, most popular movies that star Chris Hemsworth are mostly action movies. Not only does this apply to superhero movies but any type of media. When you hear Zac Efron you immediately think of High School Musical. He is tied to that role, and will always be associated with that role whether or not he likes it. All movie stars can be tied by their most popular role which may then restrict them from expanding in their careers.
Reply
Ruth Luulay
3/17/2020 06:20:36 pm
I agree with your statement because i to believe that certain movies can mold a celebrity’s actions and decisions. Obviously not all actors have become this way but with movie industries like Marvel and DC comics it has become more uniform and less unique
Reply
Bakhita
3/17/2020 10:46:51 pm
I agree that actors are often tied to their iconic/debut role in the film industry, and that the personality of that character that made them known will be the same personality that will stick with them as they expand to new characters within their career from then on. I personally think it also dooms the actor and keeps them from expanding their horizons of playing different personalities, but for the good of the actor/tress's career, it's not bothersome. :) (hi chelseaa)
Reply
Cecile Davila
3/17/2020 05:03:28 pm
There is no doubt that the introduction of on screen movie adaptions of superhero comic books has changed the way stars in Hollywood are seen. In her article, “HAVE SUPERHEROES KILLED THE MOVIE STAR?”, Bastien argues that the introduction of movie companies such as Marvel and DC Comics has killed the image or reality of a movie star such as Marilyn Monroe and Audrey Hepburn because people are not supporting the character of the movie rather than the actual actors themselves. While I agree with the fact that more movie goers are going to see the story of the main protagonist, this does not mean that the stars acting in these roles haven’t made a name for themselves. Chris Hemswoth, the actor for Thor, and Robert Downey Jr., the actor of Iron Man, are now very popular and have a large fan base due to the roles they played in Marvel’s movies. The fact that these specific actors play their roles for their designed superhero brings people into the cinema seat. This contradicts Bastien's statement that “Most ticket buyers don’t go to Deadpool because they’re enamored of Ryan Reynolds’ charm”, but in fact go to the movies to see how they act in their roles that they are so familiarized with.
Reply
Natalie Joseph
3/17/2020 05:28:34 pm
In the article, “Have Superheroes Killed the Movie Star?,” Angelica Jade Bastién argued that movies and cinematography has experienced significant changes over the years that has consequently changed the idea of “movie stardom.” Bastién argues that due to the cliché roles that actors repeatedly play, as well as the lack of unique mid-budget movies to launch careers, actors are unable to create their own image aside from the characters they play, are often overshadowed by the popularity of their role, and are unable to escape their previous characters to to take on new roles. However, these claims are not entirely accurate. Bastién says, “They [movie stars] don’t have the ability or time to craft their own star image,” claiming that the superhero roles that these actors play prevents them from ever creating their own image or branching out into different roles. However, this can be disproven when examining the careers of several Marvel actors, such as Tom Holland. While he acted in movies prior to his appearance as Spider-Man, it is true that Marvel films truly increased his popularity. However, contrary to Bastién’s claim, his superhero role allowed him to establish his own image and expand to new roles. Different marketing events associated with his movies allowed him to share more about himself outside of his role. Now, he has or will star in many films outside of the Marvel franchise, from Pixar animations to both dystopian and historical films, further launching his career and stardom. The article also discusses the movie Black Panther, and her concerns regarding the actors’ lack of mid-budget films to establish their own legacies (Bastién).
Reply
Ruth Luulay
3/17/2020 06:15:43 pm
Angelica Jade Bastien wrote an article that claims that superhero movie industries have altered the images we associate with certain actors and has made them tied to the movie industry rather than the character. Movie industries like DC comics and Marvel comics have made the actors known for their association with the movie rather than the actor/actress themselves. In the article, Bastien supports this claim by saying, “it’s hard to argue that he is successful on his own and not just replicating a bland approximation of actors before before him”. How could I argue with this claim. More and more movie actors have become known for the movie or brand they are with rather than how they changed and interpreted the film into something unique. However, I am not saying that these actors don’t exist anymore, because they do. Actors like Kevin Hart, Will smith, Dwayne (The Rock) Johnson, Tom Hanks, Leonardo DiCaprio, etc. continue to elevate the film industry but this has become less and less likely. Marvel and D.C has discouraged actors to become creative and explore acting opportunities and for this reason, actors like Chris Evans, Chris Hemsworth, Robert Downey Jr, etc have only become known for their role in these movies. It has molded these actors decisions and creativity into something that has become so uniform and predictable. All in all, the movie industry has altered the images we associate with certain actors and has tied them to certain movie films rather than the character.
Reply
Kilian Pfeiler
3/17/2020 06:28:54 pm
The claim made by Angelica Jade Bastein saying that superheroes have killed the importance and the rise of movies stars is false. Big actors are still a major reason why people go to watch a certain movie. The movie star brings initial attraction to the movie. Angelica Bastein believes that; “[new-coming stars] don’t have the ability or time to craft their own star image. The superhero characters they take on subsume their image”. This is not true. Actors still have a lot of small projects available to work on their skills, small characters in other movies and projects, and acting schools to perfect their art. These points don't show the entirety of an actors career. Actors are still growing to be bigger than their character or role. In the new Netflix release 6 Underground, Ryan Reynolds plays a main character. Even with this major character in the movie, Ryan Reynolds' name sticks out to gain attraction to the movie. Reynolds (the movie star) is more recognized than the actual role he played. As many superheroes are becoming major figures in the movie business, it still wouldn't be possible without the actor who played the role.
Reply
Sheila Ganley
3/17/2020 06:46:58 pm
In Hollywood the importance of real stars fade as actors become known only for their singular roles in superhero movies. Angelica Jade-Bastien is correct in assuming that superheroes have made the importance of real movie stars fade into the background. She states in “Have Superheroes Killed the Movie Star” that “it becomes undeniable that the actors aren’t the stars - the characters and property are.” People now go to movies just so they can see more of the famous heroes such as Batman or Iron Man versus really wanting to see Robert Downey Junior. Now most true movie stars are older and the films they’ve acted in are legendary because of their presence, not just the characters in the film. Such an actress is Maggie Smith. She started out her career not being very well known, but was able to grow into an actress that’s recognized around the world. Hollywood will not be able to grow unless people work they way up towards becoming famous movie stars.
Reply
Ochuwa Garuba
3/17/2020 08:00:23 pm
As the media is rapidly changing what it means to be a true star, it takes more effort than ever to be one. In the article "Have Superheroes Killed the Movie Star?", Angelica Jade Bastien is correct in her assertion that Hollywood is taking a dramatic hit due to the prevalence of superheroes, as the characters are the true stars, not the actors in the movies themselves. The significance of what it means to be a star is blurred by commonplace superheroes and bland reboots. Currently, Hollywood struggles to find the perfect balance between sustaining a lasting cultural impact in society and having a high "bankability"; Chris Pratt is one of the prime examples of this because, despite his high level of financial success, he has failed to be a "true star". Robert Downey Jr. is another example of a celebrity who is unsuccessful in presenting a well-rounded and star-like image of himself, in which most people only know him as Iron Man. To be a true star like Keanu Reeves, one must be able to craft a convincing audience and capture fans and audiences around the world on and offscreen. According to Chris Rock, there is an utter lack of unique cultural identity in Hollywood: "there are only four real stars, and the rest are just popular people". Rock demonstrates that there are not enough celebrities leaving a profound mark on people today. Therefore, the world is urgently due for stars like Marlon Brando and River Phoenix who are capable of expounding prominent and unforgettable rifts in society.
Reply
Hannah Gresham
3/17/2020 08:21:39 pm
Entertainment is a very prominent and thriving industry in today’s society, one that has changed a lot over the years. Angelica Jade-Bastien claims that there is a lack of stars and diversity in this field, and she made a compelling argument by stating when actors gain popularity through a famous superhero role or comic book character they effectively limit their future career in many ways. In her article “Have Superheros Killed the Movie Star?” she wrote, “But movie stardom — once an integral part of the Hollywood ecosystem — has arguably taken its biggest hit ever, thanks to the current dominance of onscreen superheroes” (Bastien). In some ways I agree with her claim. Flourishing actors who suddenly take on a new role may be immersed in that character, and due to this, “the moviegoing public has a hard time seeing these actors beyond the comic book and legacy franchise characters they play” (Bastien). This claim though, is not entirely true. On many occasions moviegoers will remember the other roles a popular actor had when watching them in a new movie and they will be associated with that, yet it does not restrain them from branching out. These stars are able to create a brand for themselves when they take on superhero roles and are given new opportunities and recognition. Real actors are able to subsume themselves into the character in order to do it justice, and still have successful careers. So, playing superheros does not ruin the movie star, it gives them an opportunity to advance their skills and be recognized by the public.
Reply
Janice M
3/17/2020 08:43:07 pm
I disagree with the argument made in this article regarding movies killing movie stars’ opportunities to create a more pronounced legacy for themselves. In the article, “HAVE SUPERHEROES KILLED THE MOVIE STAR?” Angelica Jade Bastien argues that movie stars are able to grow their image through multiple movies by realizing what character is best suited for them. In Marvel movies, most people go to see the character and not the actor (Bastien). However, through these movies, the characters have images that can be interpreted by the actor- for example, the Spider-Man movies are all the same character but Peter Parker is interpreted by the actor differently. The actors who portray Peter Parker each add their own charm to the character. However, the author of the article anticipated that people would use the actors of white main character in an argument against her claim; white male actors usually do not struggle to find a different image in other films. However, Zoe Saldana, a hispanic woman who played a deuteragonist/ love interest to the protagonist (especially in later films) has had multiple films that are different to the character she portrays in her Marvel film “Guardians of the Galaxy”. Not only has she had films like Colombiana, but she is active in progressing her career. Her role as a Marvel character has not prevented her to roles like that of Gamora in Guardians of the Galaxy- unless she wants that to be her image. Overall it boils down to the fact that “star power” is a bias and each actor/actress is bringing to life characters with their own interpretation of that character. We would not continue to watch Marvel movies without the star power already contained in these movies because of the actor/actress’ hard work and talent. While I see that some actors get typecast (casted by their success in a certain role), it is not impossible for them to break out of those roles in other big films.
Reply
EJ Jones
3/17/2020 09:11:51 pm
As the aspects of the entertainment industry changes the roles of actors in superhero movies have now changed to become based around the physical attractiveness and popularity of an actor. Angelica Bastien’s argument is correct such as when she says “it becomes undeniable that the actors aren’t the stars” . For example Denzel Washington is a great actor but because of his looks and fame people will go to see one of his movie just because he’s on the front cover of the movie. Even when it’s not the viewers preferred movie genre, just by seeing one of their favorite actors on the front cover of a movie that can sway their decision. This can also be seen in other aspects of the entertainment industry. For example race and appearance can be more important than the acting, such as if they need a gangster or thug to be played in a movie or rap video an African American male is 60 percent more likely to become picked. While in Avengers movies white males play the majority of superhero roles and people of color play side kick roles. In which to become a true star one must secure a strong fan base and keep up their physical appearance.
Reply
Jamie Hockey
3/17/2020 09:23:51 pm
In the article “Have Superheroes Killed the Movie Star” the author, Angelica Jade Bastien, argues that superhero movies have “killed” the idea of the classic movie star and have caused the actors playing these roles to have little opportunity to diversify their career. Although I agree with this claim, I don’t agree with the argument that superheroes are all the blame or have ruined the traditional movie star. There are several other roles actors have played that have limited their over all careers. For example, Emma Watson will never be able to be seen as anyone but Hermione, Jennifer Aniston will forever be Rachel. Any actor playing a large role with an iconic character over a period of time will become associated with that character. This has been occurring for years but has recently been amplified due to the rise of iconic roles and movie series, which is associated with superheroes. In the article Bastien writes “The rise in comic book movies is an integral part of the disappearance of an important kind of film”, when in reality these films are still being made, they just aren’t as popular as they once were. Audiences watch what they like, and the “hype” around certain films has shifted along with what its audience wants. The new Movie stars known among young people are now these superheroes, that doesn’t mean the “Hollywood star” idea has been “killed”, it just means its adjusted to fit the ideals of a new generation.
Reply
MiChé Hines
3/17/2020 11:20:37 pm
I definitely agree with when you said that "any actor playing a large role with an iconic character over a period of time will become associated with that character." This is also seen in our generation when we immediately associate Zac Efron with Troy Bolton and Tom Holland with new Spider-man.
Reply
Entertainment is an ever changing and evolving aspect and necessity of human society. I agree with the claims made by Angelica Jade Bastién that the newer modernized actors being commercialized as superheroes is damaging the movie industry to an extent through the individual talents and marketing plans of the actor/actress playing the said role, however, I disagree with the fact that it is a bad thing that needs to be changed. In today's world, people are more interested in seeing the character come to life rather than who's playing it. This means that the actress doesn't have to necessarily shine nor execute their talent as whoever they play, but rather fit the character well, and simply appeal to the audiences eye and become an icon and face of the said character. This can be shown when Chris Hemsworth is viewed as "someone a bit funnier and more subversive than the straight-up heartthrobs his physicality may lead us to expect of him" (Bastién), which is a personality made up of the characters he's played rather than having a largely diversified character field. This makes acting easier while setting up a more easy to advertise personality, as stated by Chris Pratt being " a good model of someone who is popular but has yet to become a true star, the kind who is either bankable in original films or in possession of a star image that alters the film around him" (Bastién). Superheroes aren't killing the industry, they are changing it's meaning. No matter how hard it can be tried, the entertainment industry cannot remain static, and this rapid change is occurring because of newer communication sources such as social media, and the birth of 'trends'. It's easier to advertise an actor if they keep a reoccurring personality in the characters they play, and that's what today's audience demands. Concluding this, the film industry isn't being killed, it is only undergoing a beneficial and new revolution.
Reply
MiChé R. Hines
3/17/2020 11:13:22 pm
Although she makes some valid points within her defense, I will have to respectfully disagree with Angelica Jade-Bastién's overall argument that "Superheroes Killed The Movie Star." This claim implies that there are no more rising actors or new stars out there, when that is, in fact, not the case. Take Michael B. Jordan for example. Although Bastién mentions him in her article, she does not acknowledge the fact that Michael B. Jordan is a great example of normal actor turned movie star. Although Jordan has been in the industry since the late 90's, he became more popular from the 2015 film "Creed", which grossed about USD $170 million. Then, in 2018, Michael B. Jordan played the main antagonist in the highest grossing superhero film of all time, Black Panther. When Jordan reprised his role as the main character in "Creed II" in late 2018, the film grossed about USD $50 million more than its prequel. The influence of Black Panther led to the stars being cast in many other subsequent movies which did well, such as: Us, 21 Bridges, and Queen & Slim, to name a few. So, in conclusion, superheroes can't "kill" the movie star, they can make the movie star.
Reply
Chelsea Josue
3/19/2020 01:20:31 pm
I agree that superheros can somewhat expand an actor's career for more roles in other media, however the generic genre is the same. For example, Michael B. Jordan preformed exceptionally well in Black Panther, but in his recent movies and shows it is clearly recognized that they revolve around action and supernatural topics.Superhero movies may get actors and actresses more roles, but ultimately their options are limited to action based media.
Reply
Miriam Hein
3/17/2020 11:18:52 pm
Angelica Jade Bastien states, "Watching one superhero film after another, it becomes undeniable that the actors aren’t the stars — the characters and property are." I agree with her claim that the reason that these actors get famous is because of the characters and movie itself. It is not right that actors who have not done any other movies and are mainly know for marvel get all the fame and glory even without the hard work and experience. Most of these actors' superhero characters become their image. And all of these tie in with the effects of the industry becoming like this. One of the effects are that women actresses don't even get noticed or seen unless they are playing a lead role or superhero. This commercialized issue with the industry makes it hard for earned individualization. These actors can just become famous or ''stars" for fitting the role they play not necessarily being talented or a hard worker. I think it affects a lot of different parts in the industry.
Reply
Kishan Patel
3/18/2020 12:03:14 am
Angelica Jade Bastien, the author of "Have Superheroes Killed the Movie Star" argues that the role of superheroes within a movie has limited the actors/actresses' opportunity to branch out to other genres of film and create their own image in the movie industry. I strongly disagree with that claim due to many reasons. Throughout the article, Bastien describes how many superhero movies prevent actors from landing roles/being successful in other genres/styles of film. Within the article, Bastien states "Chris Pratt — now trading in the rugged American machismo that drew us to Harrison Ford — has found success leading Jurassic World and Guardians of the Galaxy. But it’s hard to argue that he is successful on his own and not just replicating a bland approximation of actors before him." Although Pratt's most known movies are those related to heroic events, that does not eliminate the fact that he has acted in other movies with completely different roles, which have turned out to be very successful (moneyball). Overall, I believe that taking part in superhero movies does not deteriorate your acting abilities, but in fact strengthen them and give you a more credible reputation.
Reply
Vernard Martin
3/18/2020 06:53:01 pm
In this article Bastien talks about how actors taking on the role of superheroes affects there acting career negatively. I agree but partially. I feel actors can take roles that once they get deep into the character or have the role for a long time they become known for the role. For example Paul Blart will always be known as mall cop. But at the same time Bastien’s claim was good. Actors like Robert Downey Jr who is known as iron man can take on superhero roles that cause them to be looked at as only that person. To the point when you see them in other movies and shows it can be hard to see them really be into the character there playing because all you can think of is them being that superhero. This is said by Bastien where she states says “it becomes undeniable that the actors aren’t the stars”.
Reply
3/24/2020 01:17:20 pm
In this article Angelica Bastien claims that people go to see the character rather than the actor themself. While this may be true to an extent, it is a broad assumption that is misleading. Furthermore, while many watch the marvel cinematic universe productions because they are fans of specific characters , a lot don't and simply continue to watch because they fell in love with the screen play of legendary actors like Robert downey jr. and Steve Rodgers."The moviegoing public has a hard time seeing these actors beyond the comic book and legacy franchise characters they play" (Bastien). Her claim is false as Robert Downey Jr. has starred first as Sherlock Holmes, the trilogy that brought him great success. Many people such as Bastien thought that he couldn't be seen respectably as any other character. This premise was obviously debunked with his role of iron man revolutionizing the MCU.
Reply
Stryder Pietraszuk
3/24/2020 02:08:13 pm
In the article Angelica Bastien argues that people go to see movies for the characters not the actors. This I believe is a valid argument as when some goes to see a movie they aren’t thinking wow Chris Evans is my favorite character they think Captain America is my favorite character. while this is a board statement there is proof to back this up the characters of Thor and Loki in the marvel cinematic universe are played by actors that before that no one new about but the first Thor movie still did well in the box office. This goes to show that the big superhero names draw people into the cinemas but the actors keep them coming back. Another example of this is Tom Holland who before he became spider man was vastly unknown to western audiences but spider man was so when Spider-Man home coming was released everyone was excited to see Spider-Man not Tom Holland. So these example show my point that a popular character is what draws in crowds to a movie not the actors.
Reply
Leave a Reply. |
Analyze all the thingsThis is a space for us to play like Aristotle and analyze the world. ArchivesCategories |