Greta Garbo and Norma Shearer retired in their late 30s. Gene Hackman finally retired. But why don't more actors retire? If you made 40 million dollars a film, wouldn't you retire young and enjoy the rest of your life? Or at least do something you enjoy? A lot of actors, even big stars complain about how awful the business is, yet they've made more than enough to quit. Why don't they?
Why don't more actors retire young? Or at least before they die?
|by Anonymous||reply 236||05/25/2020|
They all wanted to retire, but the prestigious Love Boat, Fantasy Island , and Murder She Wrote guest spots kept tempting them back to work.
|by Anonymous||reply 1||04/22/2020|
Garbo looks so modern at OP’s link.
|by Anonymous||reply 2||04/22/2020|
Everyone likes to work - particularly if you get labeled as a 'legend' or 'icon' and have your ass kissed.
|by Anonymous||reply 3||04/22/2020|
The attention, the people waiting to be in your circle, to bask in the residual glow of your fame, is addictive. If they had what it takes to get the $40M/film paycheck in the first place, there's little chance they're just going to stop.
|by Anonymous||reply 4||04/22/2020|
Even rich people enjoy structure, socialising and working.
|by Anonymous||reply 5||04/22/2020|
For a great many of the first wave of movie stars until about half a generation ago, actors (and performers in all the arts) kept going because they were born with a need/desire/impulse to entertain. How many of them have said that they simply couldn't do anything else? With some exceptions actors just keep going and going. Very few quit while on top--Garbo and Shearer, as you say, and maybe Delores Hart. Many who retired early were women who married outside the business but didn't have huge careers that would go on indefinitely. With men, they often went into real estate or some other side hustle. Or some, like Ann Blythe and Jeanne Crain, were happy for their few years of stardom and become mothers to large broods who might occasionally be seen at social functions.
About 15 years ago or so the next wave of stars were somewhat evidently interested in celebrity than in stardom. No one wants to put the work in anymore. That's why someone who was close to movie stardom who never *quite* caught on will follow the trajectory of movies--premium cable--network show--guest starring--cameos--stunt casting--reality shows, until their spit out of the bottom of the porn industry.
|by Anonymous||reply 6||04/22/2020|
Some of us made poor investments and worse career choices. Some of us have no choice but to work until we die.
|by Anonymous||reply 7||04/22/2020|
Please don't "Oh dear" me.
|by Anonymous||reply 8||04/22/2020|
MGM was cleaning house when Garbo and Shearer bowed out (it was a mutual decision, they claim). Crawford got the boot too, but she was able to land on her feet at Warners.
|by Anonymous||reply 9||04/22/2020|
Cameron Diaz is one of the first in DECADES to retire at (close to) the peak of her stardom. Her last four films all made $100-200 million at the box office, against much smaller budgets. She had many earning years ahead of her. I admire that she actually stuck to it (so far). If I had more money than I could ever spend, lived on the beach in Malibu, and could earn back a little anonymity, I would do the same thing.
To answer your question though, I don't really 'need' a retirement announcement from actors. They are not punching a clock, working throughout the entire year, and earning a salary. If they decide they don't want to make a project for a while, I don't think they really need to mention it. Goldie Hawn (not exactly 'young') didn't announce when she took about 18 years off after The Banger Sisters. Jane Fonda retired for a while too.
I guess some don't full-on retire because they might be tempted out of retirement for another great role. Daniel Day Lewis has said 'this is my last film' several times. We'll see if it sticks this go around.
|by Anonymous||reply 10||04/22/2020|
I think people people become addicted to fame this day in age. Real celebrity used to require a form of mystery and allure. Now the A-list is aging and trying to compete with Instagram stars for their fan-bases. Oh how I wish I could have been an adult before social media, even in the 80s. The only thing that comforts me is that presently is the best time in history to be gay.
|by Anonymous||reply 11||04/22/2020|
R10 - I think the 'great comeback' is always lurking in the back of their minds. And there are plenty of examples to fuel that. Look at Christopher Plummer.
There are plenty of TV shows that actors or actresses could do, but they may see it beneath them. (Demi Moore?)
Early mega success is hard to sustain - and then people can get slammed for doing things that are 'lesser' roles or mediums. It can be a bit of a curse.
Plus, if you try and do too much to squeeze out your peak of fame, you could be labeled a 'film bomb'. Jude Law fits this.
|by Anonymous||reply 12||04/22/2020|
People have always been addicted to fame R11. It's just easier now to keep trying for attention without looking too desperate. Back then you NEEDED more resources, like studios or hit shows/movies to stay relevant. Or real life drama. If you lost it getting a platform became hard. Now we have social media and any attention you can create will do. People forgotten you but you had some hits in the past? Join Instagram with a photo showing us how great you still look. Attention! Oh that one girl in your comments liked your 20 yr old show? Like her post about wanting a revival and hope it catches on! Here's a selfie with my old co-star that I haven't talked to in years. Remember how much you loved us?
|by Anonymous||reply 13||04/22/2020|
I'm glad someone mentioned Christopher Plummer (a real talent and a pleasure to watch). I doubt Plummer ever made $40 million dollars a film or close to it. (I'm sure he's well set at this point in his life, but still.)
There are far more working actors--household names, even--who have far less money than you would imagine. I'm always a bit stunned when I hear about 5-figure paychecks for supporting roles in film and TV projects (again, recognizable names and faces). Five, not six figures. Way more common than most people think. And when there are agents, managers, etc. getting a cut.... hmm.
I don't think it's terrible to do a job you love for a middle-class income vs say, millions of dollars, but many more actors are doing the former vs the latter.
|by Anonymous||reply 14||04/22/2020|
Aren't they all almost always fucked over during their many divorces?
If they could stay married to the same person they might be able to afford to retire.
|by Anonymous||reply 15||04/22/2020|
I recall reading that Charlie Hunnam was supposed to receive about $400,000 for the lead in 50 Shades of Grey. Not much considering it was expected to be a high-profile role.
|by Anonymous||reply 16||04/22/2020|
Lots of them need the money. A comfortable old age is as expensive as hell!
But for those that don't, well, acting is easy work and interesting to those that like it, something a person can do when they're old and physically frail. Why not. Someone's got to play the old codgers and cute grandmas.
|by Anonymous||reply 17||04/22/2020|
R16 Charlie Hunnam isn't a movie star or likely to be in the future.
He got lucky with Sons of Anarchy on TV, hope he saved some money.
|by Anonymous||reply 18||04/22/2020|
The structure of Hollywood means an actors’ agent, lawyer, financial adviser, etc gets X% of whatever you make. If the actor stops working, a while group of people lose their income. I would assume there is huge pressure on them to keep going to make a living for all those people and their assistants.
|by Anonymous||reply 19||04/22/2020|
True, R19. And if you're not making them money, often they--agents, managers-will fire you. I've heard about actors being dropped from their representation when they weren't booking the jobs, or even the right kind of jobs. Loyalty doesn't count for a lot, especially further down the food chain.
|by Anonymous||reply 20||04/22/2020|
R20 - good point. But wouldn't you keep them on your roster to just have a list of your 'great actors' that you worked for?
|by Anonymous||reply 21||04/22/2020|
Shirlee Fonda, Henry's widow, was asked why he had taken on jobs as GAF spokesman in their commercials and a TV series. She joked about actors waiting by the phone for their next job. He didn't need the work or the money. He just kept taking the next job even though he was one of the biggest movie stars in the world.
|by Anonymous||reply 22||04/22/2020|
Some work because they NEED to.....some bad investments or a bad divorce might set you back even if you earn millions per film.
Others just want to be in the spotlight forever
|by Anonymous||reply 23||04/22/2020|
I'm glad Madonna retired from "acting." Now, if she would only step away from the auto tuner.
|by Anonymous||reply 24||04/22/2020|
As said above Garbo's retirement wasn't entirely her choice. Her most recent movie was a flop, war had just broken out so a huge market was closed to her, and she was expensive for the studio but not bringing in the money like she once had done. So she jumped. In the 1950s she was still interested in a comeback.
Deanna Durbin, now she quit cold. Never looked back.
Does George Clooney still act? Paltrow is sort of semi retired from acting (a few brief scenes in those Marvel movies is all she's done recently)
|by Anonymous||reply 25||04/22/2020|
Shearer and Garbo were both filthy rich. Most actors are not, and have to keep working to maintain the lifestyle they’ve become used to.
Plus, most performers need attention. They will not go willingly.
|by Anonymous||reply 26||04/22/2020|
Bridget Fonda is another one.
|by Anonymous||reply 27||04/22/2020|
Back in the studio days, publicists and other suits would encourage actors to spend spend spend on their lifestyle, convince them that their career depended on keeping up a glamorous front. Sometimes, when contract negotiations came around the studio would know that an actor didn't have a cent because they'd spent it all, and they'd give the poor debt-ridden bastards a choice between a pay CUT and being out on their ass.
Betcha a lot of today's hot young things live the same way, and so do reality TV stars and social media "influencers". And the Kardashians, they're all front.
|by Anonymous||reply 28||04/22/2020|
Also in the case of Garbo, she was already famous for being reclusive, and she didn't have much love for Hollywood, so when she saw the writing on the wall in the early 40s, as r25 indicated, I suspect she welcomed retirement.
|by Anonymous||reply 29||04/22/2020|
OP Watch Sunset Boulevard
|by Anonymous||reply 30||04/22/2020|
OP doesn't seem to know the difference between "retired because I had all the money I needed" and "retired because I couldn't get work, having aged out."
Men don't age out of roles and offers the way women still do.
And some members of both sexes never retire because they LOVE the attention, status and fame. And still get attention.
|by Anonymous||reply 31||04/22/2020|
Garbo never married or had kids, so she had her money all to herself. She also never lived an expensive Hollywood lifestyle. Marriage, kids and lifestyle cost a fortune, as the above poster said.
|by Anonymous||reply 32||04/22/2020|
Answer to OP's query largely would depend upon why someone became an actor in first place. Notice use of just that word instead of shall we say "film star".
Truly classically trained actors want to constantly practice their craft and will do so up until they die if allowed. This explains why episode television and other programs of 1960's through 1980's was filled with famous actors from stage and large screen. Maurice Evans, Mary Astor like many others yes needed to make money, but they also wanted to continue working and thus welcomed a chance to do so in the rapidly growing new medium, television.
Great actress that Bette Davis was, sadly she needed money so retirement wasn't in the cards. She and countless others like her arch enemy Joan Crawford took television and other roles where they could get them because, well beggars can't be that particular. You also have to consider actors/actresses who came up with the studio system were often left high and dry when it ended. A good number simply were used to getting regular paychecks, and once that stopped found themselves often in limited financial circumstances for various reasons. Again so they had no choice but to do television, commercials, and or whatever else that came along.
Then you had the said suicide of Marilyn Monroe who joined a not so short list of actors/actresses that took another way out when writing was on the wall.
Though only aged 36 MM having just been fired from her final film knew what time it was. Though still radiantly beautiful she was hurling towards 40, an age that is (or was then anyway) fatal for Hollywood actresses. Other women could go for parts as mothers, middle-aged wives, or something other than sexpots, but those options likely weren't on the table for MM. More to the point by the 1960's and certainly 1970's the dumb blonde bombshell thing was done.
If MM had married well, or maybe invested her earnings so she could retire from the world like Garbo and live comfortably that would have been another matter. Thing is MM had an actor's soul; she wanted to work, needed and found the love so often missing in her life via adoration of the public. It's like that song "Applause" says; that sort of love is what keeps actors going.
|by Anonymous||reply 33||04/22/2020|
[quote]OP doesn't seem to know the difference between "retired because I had all the money I needed" and "retired because I couldn't get work, having aged out."
OP here, not sure what/who you're referring to. Garbo and Shearer, or Gene Hackman? Or...?
Garbo and Shearer were young, as someone pointed out Garbo's European market was drying up because of WWII but she still was supposed to do Madame Curie with Spencer Tracy (which Greer Garson ended up doing with Walter Pidgeon) and Shearer was offered Mrs. Miniver (Garson again). Anyhow I don't think you mean them.
|by Anonymous||reply 34||04/22/2020|
[quote] Other women could go for parts as mothers, middle-aged wives, or something other than sexpots, but those options likely weren't on the table for MM. More to the point by the 1960's and certainly 1970's the dumb blonde bombshell thing was done.
Marilyn didn't always play dumb blondes. Niagara. The Misfits. Her last (uncompleted) film was a remake of an Irene Dunne-Cary Grant movie. I actually think if she had lived and was in good health she could have continued to work in the 1960s or 70s. She was younger than Doris Day (who made movies into the late 1960s and then did a TV series into the 1970s). Maybe she couldn't have played the average mom, but she could have played MILFs. Or any number of other roles.
|by Anonymous||reply 35||04/22/2020|
Just to flip it around and play devil's advocate what major film role from say 1965 to 1979 could you see MM playing ?
Your previous good comments not withstanding leave us not forget reason why she was fired from Misfits; MM was a basket case and people (ok, mainly the Suits) were getting fed up.
My own previous post not withstanding MM turned in some great work that wasn't strictly blonde bombshell (the Prince and the Showgirl comes to mind), but things did still revolve around her beauty and figure to some point.
Ironically Raquel Welch as "Lust" in the 1967 film Bedazzled is a role at first glance one would think was tailor made for a younger MM. But then again not so much as not only did RW play her character differently, she had the stacked body that defined post 1950's bombshell era. There was still a nice rack, but far less jiggling flesh.
|by Anonymous||reply 36||04/22/2020|
Just to flip it around and play devil's advocate what major film role from say 1965 to 1979 could you see MM playing ?
Come on, if Ava Gardner could play in some shitty disaster flick like Earthquake I'm sure Marilyn could have. Or Jennifer Jones in The Towering Inferno (less shitty). I mean how can you say "what major film role" could someone play who isn't around to play said role? Maybe someone would have written her a role. Fucking Mae West even made a comeback in Myra Breckinridge. I actually could see MM playing Mrs. Robinson (after all it was offered to Doris Day and a couple others who were nothing like Anne Bancroft). I would just file this under Who Knows?
Anyhow I'm not saying it had to be only 'major' roles. You said that. Gloria Swanson and Olivia De Havilland or other over-the-hill stars were in a lot of 60s-70s trash, or on TV. Marilyn wasn't even that old, she would only have been 40 in 1966.
|by Anonymous||reply 37||04/22/2020|
Norma Shearer was one of the initial choices to play Charlotte Vale in "Now, Voyager", but Bette Davis launched a scorched earth campaign to secure that role. Turning down Mrs. Miniver wasn't a great career move either which helped Ms. Shearer out the door so to speak in 1942.
|by Anonymous||reply 38||04/22/2020|
[quote]Just to flip it around and play devil's advocate what major film role from say 1965 to 1979 could you see MM playing ?
Mrs. Robinson in The Graduate.
|by Anonymous||reply 39||04/22/2020|
Some actors are genuinely in it for the art and that's why they stay in the game until they die. What else are they going to do? Most actors don't make the kinds of insane salaries you think they do anyway. It's not like most of them could make 5 movies and be set for life.
Honestly, who really wants to retire from something they love? It's one thing if they can't physically do it anymore. For example, Liza Minnelli needs to stop giving concerts, because she doesn't have a voice left and can barely stand anymore let alone jump about the stage like she used to. She should find some good TV/movie roles. The trick is adjusting to our new set of skills every few decades or so. Some of us can't hit the same high notes we used to, some of us can't walk as well anymore, and most of us should stop trying to be ingenue pinups at 40.
|by Anonymous||reply 40||04/22/2020|
I could picture MM playing Mrs. Robinson!
|by Anonymous||reply 41||04/22/2020|
I wish some actors would retire after they die.
|by Anonymous||reply 42||04/22/2020|
[quote] Olivia De Havilland or other over-the-hill stars
I certainly wasn’t over the hill then! I was so young.
|by Anonymous||reply 43||04/22/2020|
Rosie ODonnell IS Rambo XV
|by Anonymous||reply 44||04/22/2020|
Robert De Niro keeps on accepting character parts in movies like fast food burgers coming down the assembly line. I guess he needs the money for his high maintenance wife and their subsequent divorce.
|by Anonymous||reply 45||04/22/2020|
Divorce and alimony are a big reason why some actors keep working in less-than-stellar projects. That shit is mega-expensive.
|by Anonymous||reply 46||04/22/2020|
Doris Day was retired from movies for almost 50 years before she died. She was financially solvent and channeled all her energies into her beloved animal work. A class act.
|by Anonymous||reply 47||04/22/2020|
It was said that Joan Crawford kept on making bad movies in the 1960's because she needed to just like an addict needs that next fix. She sometimes showed great director George Cukor the scripts as though were going to be classics.
|by Anonymous||reply 48||04/22/2020|
[quote] Men don't age out of roles and offers the way women still do.
That's largely true, but that's not 100% true.
There are a lot of former hunks and leading men who've lost their looks as they've aged who would love to work more and/or get better roles: Val Kilmer, Cary Elwes, Kurt Russell, Rupert Everett, Jean-Claude van Damme, William Hurt, Fred Ward...
|by Anonymous||reply 49||04/22/2020|
Garbo looks amazing in that photo. I have no problem with any actor not retiring. If that's what they need for their ego or money, so be it. If I don't like what they're doing. Then I won't watch it. Having your face reconstructed to the point of freaky is another story.
|by Anonymous||reply 50||04/22/2020|
[quote]Then you had the said suicide of Marilyn Monroe who joined a not so short list of actors/actresses that took another way out when writing was on the wall.
I question the suicide aspect of her death. She was buying furniture for her new home. She was trying to wean herself off her pill addiction and planned to fire her nosy housekeeper. She was in talks with producers (both domestic and foreign) about future film roles, including a biopic on Jean Harlow. That's not the behavior of someone retreating from life. [italic]You don't make plans for the future if you intend to kill yourself.[/italic]
[quote]Though only aged 36 MM having just been fired from her final film knew what time it was.
What many fail to mention is that she was rehired to finish Something's Got To Give, with a better salary and improved contract. That contradicts her "fall from grace" narrative. She was that popular with the public that she still had bargaining power with the studios. She was typecast because her movie persona was lucrative for her employers. Plus, she had a lifelong interest in self-improvement (her time at the Actors Studio) and wanted to stretch as an actor (Don't Bother To Knock, Niagara, Clash By Night), not do the same thing over and over.
So no, she wasn't finished and washed up at 36, considering that the industry still had her in mind for their projects, difficult as she could be to work with.
Wilder later praised her: "She was an absolute genius as a comedic actress, with an extraordinary sense for comedic dialogue. It was a God-given gift. Believe me, in the last fifteen years there were ten projects that came to me, and I'd start working on them and I'd think, 'It's not going to work, it needs Marilyn Monroe.' Nobody else is in that orbit; everyone else is earthbound by comparison."
|by Anonymous||reply 51||04/22/2020|
Wilder = Billy Wilder.
|by Anonymous||reply 52||04/22/2020|
"I question the suicide aspect of her death. She was buying furniture for her new home. She was trying to wean herself off her pill addiction and planned to fire her nosy housekeeper. She was in talks with producers (both domestic and foreign) about future film roles, including a biopic on Jean Harlow. That's not the behavior of someone retreating from life. You don't make plans for the future if you intend to kill yourself."
There is no one way for a suicidal person to act.
|by Anonymous||reply 53||04/22/2020|
R53. That's why I referenced "intentional suicide". One can argue that she overdosed accidentally. She had multiple prescriptions beyond the limit from various doctors (they didn't know). She developed a tolerance for her pills and had to increase the dosage to get the same effects.
To make plans for the future and make promises to reconnect with people (like Milton Greene) suggests she wasn't suicidal. And those close to her have said to biographers they were shocked at the news because she was in good spirits. Her history of past suicide attempts were "cries for help", where she overdosed with people nearby who could revive her. She reportedly had a pattern of depression/isolation periods, then picked herself up and got on with life.
She started out with nothing, faced worse obstacles in her past. You think she would've achieved all that success if she had been fragile? If that were so, a suicidal Marilyn would have killed herself long before 1962.
|by Anonymous||reply 54||04/22/2020|
She took barbituates to get to sleep, but woke up and needed more. She took a chloral hydrate enema, and the combination killed her. It was a terrible, tragic accident. She didn't commit suicide and she wasn't murdered.
|by Anonymous||reply 55||04/22/2020|
[quote]R54 To make plans for the future and make promises to reconnect with people (like Milton Greene) suggests she wasn't suicidal.
She was an addict and an alcoholic, and mentally unstable. Any one of those things can promote mood swings.
Just because she was buying furniture doesn’t mean she wasn’t also miserable. Or an inch away from it.
|by Anonymous||reply 56||04/22/2020|
Because narcissistic personality disorder cannot be cured.
|by Anonymous||reply 57||04/22/2020|
R56: She was a pill popper, not an alcoholic. Show me proof she had an alcoholic addiction. Occasionally, she washed down pills with champagne to increase the effects of her medication, which, by the way, was prescribed to treat her chronic insomnia and painful endometriosis. You seem to suggest she was a junkie using recreational drugs for shits and giggles.
R57: How easy to say she had NPD/BPD or was bipolar/schizophrenic without ever meeting the patient yourself. So you two think you know more about her mental state than the people who actually knew her and socialized with her regularly, armchair psychiatrists? None of the actual psychiatrists who treated her diagnosed her with a mental disorder.
I'm not pulling shit out of my ass. I'm repeating what has been said about her by the many biographers who did the research. She has more biographies than any other famous person. Cross reference them and consistent details emerge from the discrepancies. Go ahead and repeat the tabloid perpetual victim narrative all you want. Not buying it.
|by Anonymous||reply 58||04/22/2020|
Cary Grant retired 20 years before he died even though he was still big box office/popular. He became weary of playing the male lead to a much younger female star. Enough was enough...….
|by Anonymous||reply 59||04/22/2020|
Interesting piece about Garbo's last film.
It's interesting to note that as Garbo faded in Hollywood another Swedish actors's star was rising. Ingrid Bergman of course became one of the biggest stars in the world in the 1940s. Of course she had a completely different screen persona than Garbo. The mysterious, aloof screen goddess stuff was dated and rather silly in a world turned upside down. And Bergman was a better actress than Garbo.
|by Anonymous||reply 60||04/23/2020|
^ stinky linky
|by Anonymous||reply 61||04/23/2020|
^^I know, DL won't link to that site. A few quotes:
"The infamous 1938 article “Box Office Poison” cited her as one of several stars who were nothing more than “burdensome to the studios,” saying that “Garbo, for instance, is a tremendous draw in Europe, which does not help theatere [sic] owners in the United States.” With the war cutting off many European markets, studios couldn’t rely on films like Garbo’s dramas, which didn’t appeal to flyover states as much."
It grossed $1.8 million, and MGM ended up reporting a loss of $62,000. Only two Garbo films had ever lost money before: The Temptress lost $43,000 in 1926, and then Conquest lost an astonishing $1,397,000 in 1937 (this was also the most recent film written by Viertel). Two-Faced Woman was the third. With this last-ditch attempt to give Garbo nationwide appeal deemed a failure, it seemed clear that it was time for Garbo to take the break she always wanted.
“Under the terms of her contract, MGM was obliged to pay her whether they made another picture or not—win, lose or draw,” said Clarence Brown, who directed several Garbo films. “The company couldn’t afford to make another Garbo film without the vital European market, and she understood the situation. She went to Mr. Mayer and released him from the contract for $250,000. She never took a nickel of the rest of the money she was entitled to under the contract. Is there a motion-picture star in the world who would do that? I wouldn’t. But that’s Garbo.”
|by Anonymous||reply 62||04/23/2020|
Norma Shearer and Greta Garbo retired when they were in their thirties, because they were in their thirties...parts for which they became famous were drying up for them. By Hollywood standards at the time and continue into our own, these women were old!
It's sexist, but it was and sadly continues to be the business.
|by Anonymous||reply 63||04/23/2020|
R59 Cary Grant! Thank you. Forgot about Cary. Great example. Irene Dunne also retired in the early 1950s. (Though she did TV shows once in a while.)
Actually John Lund (if anyone remembers him) retired from acting fairly young while he was still working - tho no longer in star parts. Some really young actors gave it up like Jamie Walters (Ray on the original 90210) who became an EMT after his briefly very successful music career died. Yeah you might say he had no choice but many actors stick with it. He probably could have found another series eventually.
[quote] Norma Shearer and Greta Garbo retired when they were in their thirties, because they were in their thirties...parts for which they became famous were drying up for them. By Hollywood standards at the time and continue into our own, these women were old! It's sexist, but it was and sadly continues to be the business.
I don't know...yes and no. Garbo retired, but Dietrich certainly didn't (and she was older than Garbo). Shearer did, but Katharine Hepburn didn't, Colbert didn't. Garbo was offered roles for years. Maybe even Norma was too, though idk.
|by Anonymous||reply 64||04/23/2020|
Hey Over Here!
|by Anonymous||reply 65||04/23/2020|
Julia Roberts wants to be a living Hollywood legend, old-school style. She'll never stop.
But while she's had an insanely long, lucrative career and won her Oscar (19 years ago!), she doesn't have the love and goodwill of her peers, the critics, or most of the public the same way those old legends did. People don't care about her, not really.
Who watched HOMECOMING?
|by Anonymous||reply 66||04/23/2020|
r66 you have a good point. One thing about those old Hollywood legends was that people cared about them for life. Bette Davis, Katharine Hepburn, etc. had a loyal following to the end. The people who were their fans in the 30s and 40s continued to follow them, and they picked up new generations of fans too. They always provoked interest and remained in-demand with the public. I don't see that happening with stars today who've been around for a long time. Does anyone give a shit about Goldie Hawn or Meg Ryan, for example? Does anyone care that they don't really work anymore? Once their career peak is over, the public moves on.
|by Anonymous||reply 67||04/23/2020|
Another example - Greta Garbo did nothing for the last 50 years of her life, but she was still followed and was still newsworthy. The public was still interested in her, even though she stopped making movies in her mid-30s. She was hugely famous to the day she died.
Can you imagine any celeb today keeping that level of interest with the general public?
|by Anonymous||reply 68||04/23/2020|
r6 It's often the money. A talent manager once told me "doesn't matter how much they earn, they all spend it." It's easy to go broke buying islands and double digit residences like Johnny Depp and Nicholas Cage....But it's also easy to go broke just having a staff of people and having two residences and living very well....Many actors pay for full time child care, full time housekeeping, one or two assistants, an office, business manager, agent, talent manager, lawyer....Some of those expenses are post tax. Do the math. PLUS most have a few family members they pay overhead and life expenses for.
You think Whoopi wanted to do ads for adult diapers?
|by Anonymous||reply 69||04/23/2020|
Remember Gene Hackman had two retirements. He initially retired after making Superman.
|by Anonymous||reply 70||04/23/2020|
Actors who should retire but probably won't any time soon: I nominate Robert De Niro.
His fiscal problems are legendary, almost Depp and Cage-worthy: for every million he makes, he spends/badly invests/squanders 2 million. His only concern nowadays is who will pay him the most while keeping his "legend" status afloat--the legend is what keeps him bankable and elevates his projects, not his box office appeal. He's (allegedly) unpleasant to work with, increasingly so in recent years. He needs to hang it up,
|by Anonymous||reply 71||04/23/2020|
Mrs Robinson was the first role that came to mind for me as well.
But Marilyn could have played the lead in "Diary of a Mad Housewife". She could have been in "Reflections of a Golden Eye," and why not play Bonnie Parker, too? I could see her as Hot Lips in "MASH" or playing one of the older woman parts in "The Last Picture Show."
|by Anonymous||reply 72||04/23/2020|
They need attention (and they don’t have the ability to do anything else).
Which is why they’re in the entertainment business in the first place.
|by Anonymous||reply 73||04/23/2020|
r66/r67, a key difference is that Garbo, Hepburn, Davis, Dietrich, etc., were at their peak during the Golden Age of Hollywood, which was almost a mythical period in entertainment history. The mythology that surrounded film in the 60s/70s centered around the filmmakers (Scorsese, Coppola, Spielberg, etc.) rather than the stars. Since the 80s and the emergence of the blockbuster franchise, all mythology associated with cinema is gone.
That said, I do think a few stars post-60s have engendered a certain mythology: primarily women like Faye Dunaway, Sharon Stone, Michelle Pfeiffer, those stars that most capture the glamour of the Golden Age -- that doesn't translate into them getting great roles in their older ages, but the interest remains high in the public.
|by Anonymous||reply 74||04/23/2020|
R72 Marilyn Monroe would have been old enough at 41 to play Bonnie Parker's Mother by the time Bonnie & Clyde came out in 1967.
|by Anonymous||reply 75||04/23/2020|
Deanna Durbin out-Garboed all of them, retiring at 27 or 28 to France, and only giving one 1 interview in the 1980s. She apparently liked making movies and enjoyed most of the people she worked with, but really was more of a private person and sang for friends and family at her home outside Paris. She was offered many roles to come back to films, but never did. So her explanation of being the highest paid star with the worst material (at Universal at the end of her contract) could have been fixed had she chosen to move to MGM. But even Greta Garbo had numerous sightings in NYC. Most of the press and people left Deanna alone in France, which was the way she wanted it. She had already lived the life of a movie star and decided that she'd rather be a wife and mother. If she had wanted to, she could have worked quite a bit longer.
|by Anonymous||reply 76||04/23/2020|
[quote] The public was still interested in her, even though she stopped making movies in her mid-30s. She was hugely famous to the day she died.
This never happened.
The public was MILDLY interested in her by the 60s, 70s, and 80s, and only as a curiosity. They were not "hugely" interested in her.
I am sure I was the only kid in my high school who knew who she was.
|by Anonymous||reply 77||04/23/2020|
Peggy Dow was an up-and-coming starlet in the late 40s and early 50s. She was in Harvey with Jimmy Stewart. She walked away from showbiz when she got married.
|by Anonymous||reply 78||04/23/2020|
A lot of stars from the studio era didn't "retire" as much as the roles dried up. Also, the death of the studio system meant a contraction in the number of B pictures---most of the people from the movies who had success on tv were B picture people (e.g., Ann Sothern, Lucille Ball, Donna Reed, Ronald reagan, Robert Young). And the A-listers who made the jump were either second stringers (Robert Montgomery, Dick Powell) or sadly, too old to cast (Barbra Stanwyck). A lot of musical comedy people did dinner theater and summer stock. Character players never had big paychecks to fall back on and wound up doing a lot of episodic tv or playing second bananas like William Demerest or Edgar Buchanan.
The fading stars (and second stringers) seem to go into voice work now. I guess it's replacement for summer stock, dinner theater, or shows like Murder She Wrote. What does seem different now is that there isn't a machinery to really introduce new stars outside of television and, over time, 'stars" are willing to accept character roles, which was a rarity in the past---Joan Crawford was willing to have a small part in "The Best of Everything" in the late 50s, but that was unusual, whereas it wouldn't be now.
|by Anonymous||reply 79||04/23/2020|
r77 Garbo's movies were still of great interest, decades after she retired.
|by Anonymous||reply 80||04/23/2020|
I heard Brendan Gleeson in an interview about taking the role of Dump in the James Comey bio pic (A Day Late & A Dollar Short, or whatever it's called); anyway, he made it sounded like he sauntered in for a couple of days of shooting, didn't have to do press, etc. So it didn't exactly sound like some rigorous exercise - if someone is willing to pay you for minimal work, why not? That said, I doubt older women have the same kind of luck in holding on to a career
|by Anonymous||reply 81||04/23/2020|
R2 I agree.
She also looks a little like Sela Ward
|by Anonymous||reply 82||04/23/2020|
It's about money problems and losing the acting union's healthcare benefits if you didn't have a job that year. For those with health problems that's a really big issue.
|by Anonymous||reply 83||04/23/2020|
According to George Cukor who directed Garbo in a movie a year or 2 before she retired, he was in her dressing room during a movie shoot and she was looking in the mirror. A few lines had started to form around her mouth and she told him that she was going to have to retire as her looks were going to start to go. Garbo was still a beauty but she aged rapidly after the age of 36. I dont think she was in love with film making and certainly not being a movie star. She was thrifty as hell and saved most of her money.
As to the comment about MM commiting suicide.There are many people that disagree with that theory. I tend to believe it was an accidental overdose brought about by an unstable unprofessions shrink, dr greenson, the last night of her life. Throw in a batshit crazy maid acting as a nurse in Eunice Murray and you had a disastor on your hands. MM was not at a lowebb. Fox had reinstated Monroe and brought her back to somethings got to give at a lot more money. It was a 2 picture deal and she also agreed to film a movie called what a way to go. That was eventually done by shirley Mclain. Many roles she did after MM died would have been MM vehicles if she were alive. I would agree tho....... that MM wouldnt have liked the way she looked on film past 40 and if she saved enuf money she would have called it quits.
|by Anonymous||reply 84||04/23/2020|
"Oh Judy, dear...Are you still in that shit business?!"
|by Anonymous||reply 85||04/23/2020|
[quote] That was eventually done by shirley Mclain. Many roles she did after MM died would have been MM vehicles if she were alive.
I would love to have seen Marilyn in Sweet Charity. But not Terms of Endearment.
|by Anonymous||reply 86||04/23/2020|
Nobody would've believed that Marilyn Monroe could've been Debra Winger's biological mother.
|by Anonymous||reply 87||04/23/2020|
Marilyn Monroe IS Madame Sousatzka!
|by Anonymous||reply 88||04/23/2020|
Marilyn Monroe as MAME!
|by Anonymous||reply 89||04/23/2020|
[INTERIOR: DOWNTON ABBEY LIBRARY, EVENING. The CRAWLEY FAMILY are dressed in white tie and evening gowns, and assembled on chairs arranged to face a microphone stand. The servants are fussing with drawing the drapes and setting up a large spotlight. LADY EDITH is seated at the piano. ]
LORD GRANTHAM: (to Lady Mary) "I can't understand what all this fuss your grandmother has arranged is all about!"
LADY MARY: "Granny said she wanted to surprise you tonight on occasion of your special day!"
LADY GRANTHAM: (leaning in) "After all, Rawwww-bert, you're her only son-in-law, and she adores you!"
DOWAGER COUNTESS: (haughtily) "You Americans! You always seem to offer just one surprise after another!"
(CARSON suddenly turns off the lights, plunging the library into darkness. Suddenly THOMAS turns on a single spotlight, revealing the 85-year-old MARTHA LEVINSON dressed for the occasion in a skin-tight and spangled flesh-colored dress. She looks confused at first, searching beyond the spotlight to find LORD GRANTHAM, with one hand over her eyes to shield them from the glare. Then she finds him in the group, and starts singing seductively to him, as LADY EDITH accompanies her on the piano.)
MARTHA: (erotically) "Happy birthday.... to you... Happy birthday... to you.... Happy birthday... Lord Grantham..."
|by Anonymous||reply 90||04/23/2020|
[quote]Honestly, who really wants to retire from something they love?
This sentiment will never be understood by the shopgirls in this thread.
|by Anonymous||reply 91||04/23/2020|
"Some actors are genuinely in it for the art and that's why they stay in the game until they die. "
That's the thing. A really good actor like Maggie Smith or Helen Mirren isn't just in it for the money, they are bright people who want the creative outlet. That's what they do, it's their life work and they're very good at it, and hopefully want to keep getting better... and if it's easy work that pays well, so much the better!
Because acting is physically easy work, the hours may be long but there are plenty of breaks, and stand-ins and stunt people around to do anything hard. Hell, an 80-year-old lady who's losing her sight like Judi Dench can make big money as an actor, it really is one of the few fields open to the old and frail.
|by Anonymous||reply 92||04/23/2020|
"that MM wouldnt have liked the way she looked on film past 40 and if she saved enuf money she would have called it quits. "
By all accounts she hadn't saved her money, I don't know where the money went, (divorces?) but she wasn't living high and didn't leave a large estate, unlike Garbo or Shearer there was no "fuck you money". So if she'd lived, she'd probably spent the next few years playing Dean Martin's sexy wife in the horrible farces of the early sixties, and she'd have entered her forties just as the sixties hit the fan. She would have had a hard time finding work, it'd have been character roles where she had to show up on time and knowing her lines, or nothing.
I like to think she would have taken what money she had, and gone off to make pottery in Bolinas or someplace obscure, and pissed off the neighbors by taking in every stray cat or hippie kid that wandered by. And made a limited comeback in the seventies and eighties, when glamour started to come back into style.
|by Anonymous||reply 93||04/23/2020|
I plan on retiring before I’m 50, but that’s 17 years from now.
|by Anonymous||reply 94||04/23/2020|
Garbo didn't want to retire. But she couldn't find/develop age-appropriate projects in the gaudy, WW2-era of Betty Grable musicals. So she gave up.
|by Anonymous||reply 95||04/23/2020|
1970: a 44-year-old Marilyn guest stars on LOVE AMERICAN STYLE, "Love and the Den Mother" after being fired from a Robert Altman movie.
1973: after an unhappy run in regional theatre productions of CACTUS FLOWER, ANY WEDNESDAY, and 40 CARATS, MM does a pilot for a daytime talk/variety program, which goes well until a disastrous cooking segment. The pilot scores low with focus groups ("she's too weird and sexy"). The network commits to a similar spot with Dinah Shore instead.
1978: MM appears on MATCH GAME, the Labor Day Telethon, and DONNIE AND MARIE. Her spot on THE LOVE BOAT ("My Mother-In-Law Was A Playboy Bunny?") earns critical raves, an Emmy nomination, and that year's People Choice Award for Best Featured Guest On A Series. She is 52 years young.
Three years later, the same producers create her signature role on FALCON CREST (1981-1990), the villianous Constanza, for which she is best remembered today.
|by Anonymous||reply 96||04/23/2020|
Nah, MM would have been like other sex kittens who went on to bigger and better things, like Ann-Margret and Raquel Welch. She wasn't Carol Wayne.
|by Anonymous||reply 97||04/23/2020|
r67, For one thing they look horrible. Those elder women you named continued to look beautiful and age gracefully. Goldie Hawn and meg Ryan look like freak shows. This is how I know plastic surgery is a mental disease. How the fuck can you not see you are ruining your face.
|by Anonymous||reply 98||04/23/2020|
British model or whatever of acting IMHO is different than USA, which perhaps explains why many actors on that side of ocean work literally until they drop if wanted.
Classically trained British actors move freely between theater, film and television; Maggie Smith and Helen Mirren are excellent examples. That variety means there are (hopefully) lots of choices for good work with a range of people. You don't see much of this in USA where actors tend to stick to their lot, and at least for television the holy grail is to land a sitcom that moves into syndication. Jim Parsons was one of the few recent exceptions choosing to walk away from The Big Bang Theory (leaving piles of money on the table), because he wanted to do other work.
|by Anonymous||reply 99||04/23/2020|
r98 Bette Davis most certainly did not age gracefully. The booze and cigs did a number on her looks.
|by Anonymous||reply 100||04/23/2020|
Garbo was very unusual for an actress, in that she didn't crave public attention, she didn't marry dirtbags, and she didn't live beyond her means. That left her free to go her own merry way and make a new life for herself when things in Hollywood slowed down, and by all accounts she was happy enough and didn't miss Hollywood.
I'm not surprised she considered offers. I mean, it didn't seem that she missed stardom or Hollywood, but I don't think she disliked acting.
|by Anonymous||reply 101||04/23/2020|
Lots of those classic Hollywood actresses married men who blew through their money. Judy Garland, Bette Davis, Debbie Reynolds, Doris Day, there are numerous others. That's why many of them had to keep working.
Greta Garbo, Barbara Stanwyck and Katharine Hepburn were lucky that they were all dykes. No husbands to piss all their $$$ away.
**Yes, I know Stanwyck was married to Robert Taylor but he had his own money and it was probably a lavender marriage anyway.
|by Anonymous||reply 102||04/23/2020|
R79 Spot on!
Remember Valley of The Dolls where Neely O'Hara is seen as "brave" by news media and her peers in Broadway theater circles for doing television. Sadly Ms. O'Hara finds television isn't same as Broadway and upon rehearsals screws everything up (not knowing her lines, missing her marks....), and resorts to a few pills to get back on track. The rest as they say is history, and the great Broadway star's first attempt at the new medium fails badly.
As noted in above post by 1960's and certainly 1970's various forms of television (episode, drama, movies, etc..) had largely replaced the old "B" and below Hollywood films from studio system of old. Pick any television show from those decades; Mannix, Cannon, Bewitched, the Brady Bunch, the Ghost and Mrs. Muir, the Twilight Zone, Alfred Hitchcock Presents, etc... and go to their IMBd page, there you'll find casts that often included large numbers of former film or even classically trained theater actors.
Some did television because it was the only game left, and money is money. Others took work where they could find it for a variety of personal and professional reasons. But one fact is clear; Hollywood films largely changed starting in 1960's and into 1970's in part to compete with television. Thus many of the roles that once were plentiful in films were largely gone by end of 1960's or so.
|by Anonymous||reply 103||04/23/2020|
"Nah, MM would have been like other sex kittens who went on to bigger and better things, like Ann-Margret and Raquel Welch."
Raquel Welch actually had a very brief heyday, she was hot for a few years, but faded quickly because she was a terrible actress and a monumental cunt behind the scenes. She kept her looks when she was no longer young but that didn't help her go on to bigger and better things, she's only worked occasionally since the seventies. Ann-Margaret, on the other hand, has had a very long and varied career, because she's an excellent and versatile performer, behaves like a professional, and yeah, kept her looks.
Marilyn never behaved like a professional, and I don't give good odds of her having kept her looks into middle age if she'd lived.
|by Anonymous||reply 104||04/23/2020|
[quote]But one fact is clear; Hollywood films largely changed starting in 1960's and into 1970's in part to compete with television. Thus many of the roles that once were plentiful in films were largely gone by end of 1960's or so.
It was also the end of Westerns, which had been huge for decades and employed a ton of people. Then Westerns were suddenly over. Amazing how fast that happened for a genre that cranked out so much product year after year for decades.
|by Anonymous||reply 105||04/23/2020|
Well they blew through all that money because they could. Under studio system of old they got nice fat contracts so money was coming in regardless. If they shot their wad one year, there was always another that would bring in more money. That is until there wasn't either because studio system ended or their contracts were not renewed, and no one picked them up.
One thing about many actors from "old" Hollywood is that many came from poor to nearly (if not actually) destitute backgrounds. As such persons are wont to do when suddenly flush with money it was spent like water. This and many had awful if not criminal financial advice; from managers/handlers who outright stole from them to bad investments. Judy Garland is a case in point; at least one or more of her mangers/financial advisers screwed her over royally. Not just stealing, but leaving JG with huge IRS issues as well. It was Liza Minnelli IIRC who end the end worked her behind off to finally pay off her mother's tax debts.
|by Anonymous||reply 106||04/23/2020|
Catch Ann Margret in "Carnal Knowledge", "Tommy", "The Two Mrs. Grenvilles", and some other bits of her pretty decent CV as proof a sex kitten/bombshell can also act good as the best of them.
AM is about twenty years younger than MM, which IMHO means she came along at the right time and was able to capitalize on two things; male audiences still wanted to see a beautiful woman with a nice figure, but critics wanted someone who had acting chops.
|by Anonymous||reply 107||04/23/2020|
I think artists, as a rule, continue to grow and deepen as their lives go on--think of the final works writers like Shakespeare, composers like Strauss, and others. The same can be true for actors--I think of Cicely Tyson in The Trip to Bountiful, Lois Smith in The Inheritance, Elaine May and Eileen Heckart (giving very different performances) in The Waverly Gallery and, IMHO, Elaine Stritch in A Delicate Balance. Ian McKillen and Patric Stewart in their Beckett/Stoppard pairing. Experience makes many artists more rich (not monetarily necessary), especially if they find ways to transition into different roles. This, of course, isn't always true--poets, like mathematicians, often do their best work before thirty. And some actors try to hold onto their youthful image to their detriment.
|by Anonymous||reply 108||04/23/2020|
And if more of them did retire early we would have more WHET threads!
|by Anonymous||reply 109||04/23/2020|
r106 good summary. And also, many female stars in those days had husbands who robbed them blind. The women in that era were not into finance and just let their husbands run the show, it was what was done back then. So many of them got screwed like Judy, Doris and Debbie. Later generations of women were much more hands-on with their finances and left their money in the hands of actual professionals, instead of whatever husband they had at the moment.
Then you had the leeching families, as has been mentioned. Bette Davis was a good example of this. She supported EVERYBODY for decades, and she supported them very well too. Davis herself didn't have much money left over after her mother, sister and daughter (and also her daughter's husband and kids) fed at the money trough.
|by Anonymous||reply 110||04/23/2020|
Lyle Waggoner (may he RIP) retired after Carol Burnett and ran a very successful RV business for his remaining years.
|by Anonymous||reply 111||04/23/2020|
Garbo was horrified at how terrible "Two-Faced Woman" was and she decided to take time off and wait out the war, when the lucrative European market would be available again. She did plan to come back in an Italian film, even making screen tests for it (she was still ravishingly beautiful; you can find the tests on YouTube) but the financing fell through and that was the end of it. Hollywood tried to get her back for My Cousin Rachel but by then she wasn't interested and Olivia de Havilland did the part.
|by Anonymous||reply 112||04/23/2020|
What about Tallulah Bankhead? Didn't she retire in her early 50s?
|by Anonymous||reply 113||04/23/2020|
I think having a plush apartment, money in the bank and haunting the streets of Manhattan every day would be nice. Though she did have stalkers.
|by Anonymous||reply 114||04/23/2020|
Tallulah Bankhead worked almost right up until her death in 1968
|by Anonymous||reply 115||04/23/2020|
Garbo was offered Sunset Boulevard, but turned it down saying she "had no interest"....
It isn't so much that Garbo retired from Hollywood, but more she really wasn't that into making films in the first place, and wasn't too keen on the public life of a movie star either. Greta Garbo was a very complicated person, but one thing clearly stood out, she was an intensely private one, something that stood out from other actresses of the time.
That being said Garbo wasn't reclusive in her post Hollywood years as many would believe. There was travel with friends, a visit to the White House and other activities.
|by Anonymous||reply 116||04/23/2020|
Garbo was said to enjoy acting and liked the process of making a film, it was just all the other Hollywood/celebrity bullshit she couldn't stand.
|by Anonymous||reply 117||04/23/2020|
Most people go into acting knowing that they are not likely to make a lot of money or become famous. But they like the work.
If they do make a lot of money or become famous, they still like the work.
I am always amazed at the actors who come off of a successful TV show and then their next project is in a 150 seat theater. Some people just like their work.
|by Anonymous||reply 118||04/23/2020|
I wish some of these A- movie stars would. But, they got to keep turning out the crappy movies. But with what's going on right now I think a lot of things are going to change in the entertainment business.
|by Anonymous||reply 119||04/23/2020|
I think we're going to see the end of movie theaters before long. Now that we can stream at home and we have giant HDtvs movie theaters are not what they used to be.
|by Anonymous||reply 120||04/23/2020|
Jim Parsons walked away from $50 million when leaving TBBT to pursue other projects such as stage acting.
If that's not dedication to one's craft, don't know what else qualifies.
|by Anonymous||reply 121||04/23/2020|
There isn't anything released recently by these highly paid so called "A List" film actors I'd pay money to see.
|by Anonymous||reply 122||04/23/2020|
Tammy Cruise will continue acting long as there is breath in his body.
|by Anonymous||reply 123||04/23/2020|
Can't wait to see Tommy's "Action Grandpa" roles when he's 70
|by Anonymous||reply 124||04/24/2020|
Jim Parsons did several Broadway shows during breaks from filming "Big Bang Theory". If he was the one who walked away from the show, he probably thought they did enough with his character. Plus, he still does voice-overs for "Young Sheldon" (a delightful show -- love the family on that show, especially his sister Missy and Annie Potts as Meemaw), and he is getting residuals from "Big Bang" which always seems to be on several channels. So he's set for several lifetimes. Good that he wants to do theater. I saw him in a supporting role in "The Normal Heart" on Broadway, and he was very good indeed.
|by Anonymous||reply 125||04/24/2020|
Yes, Jim Parsons has a fuck-ton of money. Very, very wealthy. Amazing how acing one audition and being cast in one role can turn a person's life around forever.
|by Anonymous||reply 126||04/24/2020|
I always think of John Mahoney from Frasier. This is a man who didn't start acting until he was nearly 40. He had a great role in Moonstruck, which led to some appearances on Cheers and other sitcoms and, finally, his most famous role on Frasier. After that show ended, he mostly did theatre work. You could tell he was someone who did it just because he enjoyed it. He apparently still lived in Chicago when he wasn't working instead of staying in L.A. or New York. Someone like that is a true actor to me.
|by Anonymous||reply 127||04/24/2020|
John Mahoney did a lot of theater in Chicago, especially at Steppenwolf Company. He won a Tony for his terrific and very funny performance in "House of Blue Leaves" on Broadway before he got "Frasier" as well.
|by Anonymous||reply 128||04/24/2020|
R86 Jennifer Jones originally had the rights to Terms Of Endearment and she took it to James L. Brooks. Brooks convinced her she was too old for it (she was about 60). I can't picture her in it but at least she had the intelligence/taste to be interested in it and choose the right director for it.
|by Anonymous||reply 129||04/24/2020|
60 wasn't too old for the part at all.
|by Anonymous||reply 130||04/24/2020|
I can't say why people (including me) continued/continue to be more interested in actors and actresses of the classic film era, than in some of the ones of our own era who are older now. It's hard to generalize but when did Goldie Hawn or Meg Ryan ever do anything on the level of Camille, The Philadelphia Story, The Old Maid, Dark Victory, Summertime, Double Indemnity, etc? When I was a kid I went to see a movie with Jane Fonda and she was on the toilet wiping her ass. Once you see that it's all over. lol. I mean seriously though, the old stars, whatever they were like in real life, had taste and class on the screen, and they made movies that either made you feel wonderful or emotionally devastated you, or both. You never forget those experiences or those luminous presences.
|by Anonymous||reply 131||04/24/2020|
Same r131. For example, Bette Davis in Now, Voyager gave an emotionally wrenching performance that's still wonderful to watch today.
|by Anonymous||reply 132||04/24/2020|
Jane Fonda and Goldie Hawn are good actresses. If you're going to attack "modern" actors why single them out? It's not like there weren't tons of no-talent whores in the old days who got work because they slept with some mogul
|by Anonymous||reply 133||04/24/2020|
R130 60 in 1983 was like 70 or 75.
|by Anonymous||reply 134||04/24/2020|
Plus the medium of film was fairly still new in the Bette Davis heyday. At least after talkies started. I think after everyone had TVs, it served to dilute movies. Not to say their hasn’t been some phenomenal films since the advent of tv. There’s just hardly any new ideas anymore where film is concerned. It’s not surprising Parasite went on to win best pic over a war film, considering it had something original. But if you look at the acting winners, familiar characters real life and imagined and themes won.
|by Anonymous||reply 135||04/24/2020|
I don't think seeing an actor wipe their ass on screen means they're a bad actor. I'd actually say that means they have guts and don't care about what people will think of them. I admire actors who go there even if they look foolish.
|by Anonymous||reply 136||04/24/2020|
That was probably "Fun with Dick and Jane" with the ass wiping Maybe Jane Fonda should have starred in "Gargantua and Pantagruel" which talks about the invention of the asswipe
|by Anonymous||reply 137||04/24/2020|
Consider over the decades there were subtle but never the less dramatic changes in Hollywood film "acting" that not all actors/actresses could manage.
First huge hurdle was move from silent to sound films. All the elocution lessons in world couldn't help some silent film stars transition into "talkies", so they retired or whatever.
Then came movement away from the mannered style of acting with its grand sweeping gestures that came from so many early film actors coming from "the theater". Norma Shearer's performance in "The Women" is full of such acting, which even for 1930's came across as rather dated to some.
Acting styles continued to change through 1940's into 1970's and so forth. You began seeing more American Academy of Dramatic Arts grads, and or method actors who were bringing a different sort of approach to films and their character's roles. Marlon Brando, Dustin Hoffman and Al Pacino seemingly overnight changed what was a film actor.
Larry Olivier worked long as he did IMHO because he found roles that suited his hammy style of acting such as his parts in Sleuth, Marathon Man, The Prince and the Showgirl.....
As Neely O'Hara found out, film is different than stage acting, and television different from the other two. Some actors were then and are still able to move freely between all three, others just couldn't.
Estelle Winwood had a career that spanned about eighty years (1903–1983), and worked until she was 100, dying at aged 101. She moved from stage to film then onto television, the latter even when her character was largely confined to a wheelchair.
|by Anonymous||reply 138||04/24/2020|
Terms of Endearment was awful---Jeff Daniels was miscast and the manipulative ending was something that Helen Keller would have seen coming. Jones would have made it more mawkish. Macliane basically played a brittle version of the "wacky dames" usually played and Nicholson just phoned-in his performance which was even more stereotyped.
|by Anonymous||reply 139||04/24/2020|
R138, the mannered style of film acting did not come from the "theater." It came from actors like Norma Shearer and Joan Crawford who never played in the theater.
Theater actors like Jeanne Eagles, James Cagney, Barbara Stanwyk, Lee Tracy, tended to play much sharper, faster, and more real.
|by Anonymous||reply 140||04/24/2020|
Really? Thanks for that bit of information.
Maybe one is confusing "theater" with silent film acting which was a totally other beast it seems than what came later.
|by Anonymous||reply 141||04/24/2020|
I totally agree about TERMS OF ENDEARMENT. I'll never understand the love for this mawkish, manipulative turd of a movie. I don't think Winger's acclaimed performance has stood the test of time, either--she's just okay, not much more.
That said, Jennifer Jones would have been dreadful in it. Shirley Maclaine (despite overacting) brings the humor and vitality the film desperately needs.
|by Anonymous||reply 142||04/24/2020|
Joan Crawford showing off her gams as the MILF role of Monica Rivers in film "Beserk" (1968). In fact it is more like grandmother I'd like to fuck since Joan Crawford was over sixty when she made Berserk.
That Ty Hardin was the guy who lusted after JC's character is laughable, but Hollywood is built upon fantasy.....
|by Anonymous||reply 143||04/24/2020|
Don't criticize Patti's singing or whatever, just listen to words and emotions behind the song. You then begin to realize why Norma Desmond wanted to be back in front of the cameras, and why some actors will remain so until they drop if they can.
For us watching is likely seems so effortless; but to actors it is a journey that begins with a simple question, who is my character. Then trying to get into that character's head so to speak.
|by Anonymous||reply 144||04/24/2020|
I was not criticizing Jane Fonda's acting. I was just a kid and it was Fun With Dick And Jane, yeah. I was making a point about...it's hard to explain. If you see actors doing vulgar or everyday things on the screen somehow they're no longer the movie gods and goddesses - they're just closer to reality. I mean you don't walk into a party and say "Hey guess what? I just wiped my ass." Because it's considered vulgar. Same for swearing a lot, showing your privates, farting, talking about fucking, whatever. Yet all those things are entertainment on the screen now. Or in music. I don't mind, and I love a lot of those movies, TV shows, and that music. I'm just saying I think...why is William Powell so cool, for ex.? It just might have to do with his never being everyday or vulgar on the screen. I really think that has a lot to do with why these people are still iconic. But they still gave us emotional truth.
|by Anonymous||reply 145||04/25/2020|
R141, I think you are hitting on something.
Silent film acting at its best was so subtle and evocative. But when sound came in these actors who had done such rich work in 20s silents were transformed into plummy hams.
Maybe they thought acting with a voice was something completely different???
|by Anonymous||reply 146||04/25/2020|
Falconetti is a great example. Has there ever been a better acted film than The Passion of Joan of Arc?
Part of the power is that Falconetti is undiluted. We all only know her from that one film.
|by Anonymous||reply 147||04/25/2020|
Nearly all of the silent film stars couldn't transition to sound. Garbo, Shearer and Crawford were the only ones whose careers survived, iirc. There may have been one or two others.
|by Anonymous||reply 148||04/25/2020|
Ronald Colman, Laurel and Hardy, and John Barrymore successfully transitioned from silent to sound, R148, although in Barrymore's case his career faded during the 1930s due to monumental levels of alcoholism.
Plenty of silent stars kept working into the sound era, such as Ramon Navarro or Clara Bow, but since their careers slowed in the early 1930s or were stopped due to scandal (in Bow's case), the sound films they made were primitive and are barely watchable today. So while they made the transition at the time, they aren't remembered as sound stars today.
Oh, and then there's Lillian Gish, who kept acting as long as she lived. But she had to take the 1930s off from filmmaking and do theater, to get her over that awkward transition from ingenue to character actress.
|by Anonymous||reply 149||04/25/2020|
Kristy McNichol retired in her 30s, and she then spent a lot of time focused on charity work. It must be exhausting not having a steady job and having to rely on auditions, knowing that the best actor/actress doesn't necessarily get the job.
|by Anonymous||reply 150||04/25/2020|
“Without me there wouldn’t be any Paramount Studios,”
|by Anonymous||reply 151||04/25/2020|
I Am Big, It's the Pictures That Got Small!
Gloria Swanson nails that old school silent film acting technique! Every gesture and movement is over sized and grand. An eyebrow raised here, side eye look there.. She swoops around the sets chewing up scenery as if it were lunch; but that was how things were done with silent pictures. Without sound you needed something to keep audiences watching a moving picture.
Without sound actors relied upon technique (or whatever else) to convey their character's message across. Arrival of sound meant dialogue could take up that job. Thus movements didn't have to be so grand....
|by Anonymous||reply 152||04/25/2020|
Compare Norma Shearer to Joan Crawford in this clip from "The Women".
|by Anonymous||reply 153||04/25/2020|
Ricardo Cortez (the first Sam Spade and billed over Garbo in her U.S. silent film "Torrent") who appeared in over 100 films and Ronald Colman are among some of the male stars who made the transition to sound successfully.
|by Anonymous||reply 154||04/25/2020|
Arrival of sound was the making of Ronald Colman's acting career.
"Although he was a huge success in silent films, he was unable to capitalise on one of his chief assets until the advent of the talking picture – "his beautifully modulated and cultured voice"
Yes, Mr. Colman had a very good stage and silent film career, but once sound came along things really took off.
|by Anonymous||reply 155||04/25/2020|
Were Garbo, Shearer and Crawford the only A-List stars to make the transition? The other names mentioned here were more featured actors or character actors.
|by Anonymous||reply 156||04/25/2020|
There were a few others, but then again don't know how you are defining "A-List"....
Carol Lombard and Boris Karloff both started out in silent films but were able to make the leap into sound.
|by Anonymous||reply 157||04/25/2020|
There were others such as Myrna Loy and William Powell who also made the transition.
Basically anyone born in late 1800's who was acting in early days of film (silent), maybe or maybe did not make the transition over to sound. That being said as below linked article makes clear there were other reasons besides vocal quality that resulted in certain actors being left behind.
|by Anonymous||reply 158||04/25/2020|
Then you had situations where arrival of sound meant certain silent film actors had careers longer than many would have believed otherwise because of their voices.
Bela Lugosi's thick eastern European accent with slow plodding English diction made him perfect as Count Dracula. Mr. Lugosi learned to speak English via phonics; hence that slow "good..... eve...ning" or "I never drink..... wine..." from his Count Dracula. It added a certain creepy quality to Mr. Lugosi's evil roles.
|by Anonymous||reply 159||04/25/2020|
More on silent film era movie stars who made it over to sound. All and all you do see the same dozen or so names of "big" stars over and over.
|by Anonymous||reply 160||04/25/2020|
Gee, a lot of silent stars transitioned didn't they? They were very ahead of their time.
|by Anonymous||reply 161||04/25/2020|
Also, Buster Keaton had greater success as a sound comedian than he did in silents. (Although his sound films are largely forgotten while his silents are now revered.)
|by Anonymous||reply 162||04/25/2020|
[QUOTE] n the 1950s she was still interested in a comeback.
She even screen tested for something, and was still reading scripts.
|by Anonymous||reply 163||04/25/2020|
William Haines also successfully transitioned to sound; it was Louis B. Mayer demanding he give up boyfriend Jimmie Shields and start bearding that prompted him to leave acting and start an even more lucrative career as an interior designer.
|by Anonymous||reply 164||04/25/2020|
Because films were seen as so ephemeral, a lot of our concept of film history is distorted. Some of the biggest stars and biggest films of their time are now forgotten.
The films and stars that were syndication-friendly in the 60s and 70s are what we see as significant. But the actual taste of the public in the 20s, 30s and 40s was different.
|by Anonymous||reply 165||04/26/2020|
[quote] Were Garbo, Shearer and Crawford the only A-List stars to make the transition? The other names mentioned here were more featured actors or character actors. Nobody's mentioned Gary Cooper. He had no trouble going from silents to sound. Ronald Colman was a huge star, not a featured/character actor. Marion Davies, Clara Bow, Conrad Nagel, and other made successful transitions to sound. But many stage actors came to Hollywood and many of them became the new stars of the sound era: Gable, Cagney, Robinson, Stanwyck, etc.
I think John Gilbert might have made a smoother transition to sound if MGM didn't screw up his career (probably on purpose) and if he wasn't such a hopeless alcoholic. He had some good moments (such as the film, Downstairs), but I watched one movie on TCM where he visibly had the shakes. And no one bothered with a retake. Also they never paired him with any big female stars. If they wanted to save his career they would have paired him with Crawford, Harlow, Shearer, or Garbo (they finally did, once, at her request) - or put him in one of their big hit all-star films. They rushed him into sound films that were junk, in most cases.
|by Anonymous||reply 166||05/09/2020|
[quote] Were Garbo, Shearer and Crawford the only A-List stars to make the transition? The other names mentioned here were more featured actors or character actors.
Nobody's mentioned Gary Cooper. He had no trouble going from silents to sound. Ronald Colman was a huge star, not a featured/character actor. Marion Davies, Clara Bow, Conrad Nagel, and other made successful transitions to sound. But many stage actors came to Hollywood and many of them became the new stars of the sound era: Gable, Cagney, Robinson, Stanwyck, etc.
I think John Gilbert might have made a smoother transition to sound if MGM didn't screw up his career (probably on purpose) and if he wasn't such a hopeless alcoholic. He had some good moments (such as the film, Downstairs), but I watched one movie on TCM where he visibly had the shakes. And no one bothered with a retake. Also they never paired him with any big female stars. If they wanted to save his career they would have paired him with Crawford, Harlow, Shearer, or Garbo (they finally did, once, at her request) - or put him in one of their big hit all-star films. They rushed him into sound films that were junk, in most cases.
|by Anonymous||reply 167||05/09/2020|
EGO. It's the same reason Mariah and Madonna won't retire.
|by Anonymous||reply 168||05/09/2020|
John Gilbert is in "Queen Christina" which many rank as one of Garbo's best. Gilbert's voice is a little tenor-y, but not at all bad as reputed. The story I heard was that when Garbo jilted Gilbert at the altar, Louis B. Mayer called her a bad name and said Gilbert was better off without her, and GIlbert either tried to sock Mayer or cursed him out. From then on, Mayer stymied Gilbert's career, and Gilbert's drinking didn't help matter either, dying quite young a few years later.
|by Anonymous||reply 169||05/09/2020|
Cooper wasn't a star in silents. He's featured in "Wings" the first film to win Best Picture, but not the star. His stardom came a few years later in sound films, probably co-starring with Marlene Dietrich in "Morocco" or around the time.
|by Anonymous||reply 170||05/09/2020|
John Gilbert was gay I thought
|by Anonymous||reply 171||05/09/2020|
Speaking of Marlene Dietrich, she knew when it was all over and locked herself away in her Paris apartment for the rest of her life. She was physically unable to perform on stage anymore and she didn't want anyone to see her as an old lady so she just shut the door and retired.
|by Anonymous||reply 172||05/09/2020|
Joan Crawford did the same thing. Although she worked up until 1973 (her last professional work was a commercial for Pan Am that year) she saw a paparazzi shot of her leaving the Rainbow Room and realized how old she looked when she wasn’t under carefully controlled lighting and cameras. She vowed to never be seen in public again and she didn’t. She retreated to her NYC apartment and rarely entertained, then got sick and died.
|by Anonymous||reply 173||05/10/2020|
Yes, Crawford was horrified at how she looked in the photos and was never seen in public again. She just locked herself away with her vodka in her Manhattan apartment. Looking at the photos, however, shows that her face still looked pretty good for a seventy-ish woman. It was the horrible, awful wig she was wearing and the dress wasn't flattering either. If she's worn a better wig and dress, she would've looked pretty good.
|by Anonymous||reply 174||05/10/2020|
Joan Crawford was so beautiful when she was young. She might even be more beautiful than Garbo in "Grand Hotel". Who told Crawford at some point that having heavy eyebrows and shoulder pads making her look like a linebacker was a good look for her?
|by Anonymous||reply 175||05/10/2020|
Garbo was stunning. Crawford, merely pretty.
|by Anonymous||reply 176||05/10/2020|
Joan was striking as a young woman. Joan with her mother, celebrating her birthday on the set...
|by Anonymous||reply 177||05/10/2020|
Another star who walked out on her contract was Alice Faye, after Zanuck whittled down her role in the turgid noir FALLEN ANGEL . Faye always claimed her role as the rich spinster wooed by gold-digging Dana Andrews was much more interesting and less blandly passive the it became, but she should have realized before agreeing to do the role that luscious Linda Darnell had the juicier part of the slutty hash-house waitress Andrews really wants. After Faye was shown the final cut, she walked off the lot. She and husband Phil Harris had a long radio career after that, so she did not totally retire from show business.
|by Anonymous||reply 178||05/10/2020|
Alice Faye also came back for the 1962 "State Fair" remake and also a Lassie film, plus she did the short-lived revival of "Good News".
|by Anonymous||reply 179||05/10/2020|
If I had a job that was interesting and that boosted my ego, and I could make really good money, and work only when I felt like it, and it was physically undemanding and offered shit-tons of perks... I'd NEVER retire!
Seriously, the only reason a skilled actor with a long career would retire is ill health, burnout, or finding something they'd rather do.
|by Anonymous||reply 180||05/10/2020|
But some acting work actually is physically demanding. A lot of it, actually.
Stage actors may love their work, but live theatre, 8 shows a week, can be physically grueling, depending on the show, and even the less arduous ones require great discipline: eating, sleeping right, staying in shape, keeping the voice in top form, etc. The problems are compounded when you're touring with a show.
Movie/TV work may not be as demanding, but the days are usually really long, and boring as hell between shots.
|by Anonymous||reply 181||05/10/2020|
You forgot having to learn and remember lines and blocking.
|by Anonymous||reply 182||05/10/2020|
Wonder if COVID is affecting “movie stars.” Who goes to movies anyway? Teenage boys?
|by Anonymous||reply 183||05/10/2020|
Most of the public believes that movie stars and musicians are all really rich. It's rarely the case.
Taraji P. Henson was on a talk show not long ago where they were asking her how she spent her first big money, and despite a longish career before Empire she wasn't making much after paying taxes and the agent. When she was on Person of Interest she was officially paid $60K an episode, but would net around 7-8K a episode after taxes and paying her agent, etc. Which meant she was making $175-200K a year. Not peanuts, but to live in LA that's not especially big money, either.
Most working actors are comfortable, and may even have a few million dollars to their name after a decade or so of work, but there are few actors who make the really big money, and or keep making it long enough to just retire.
Same for musicians. There's maybe 20-30 acts right now making serious bank. A lot of others we know and think are famous are getting more moderate payments, especially with Spotify et al paying so little.
I'm sure Reese W might not need to work, but maybe for someone like her the motivation is different. She is also moving into producing....pretty smart move on her part.
|by Anonymous||reply 184||05/10/2020|
We'll take up a collection.
|by Anonymous||reply 185||05/10/2020|
that’s why fossils like The Eagles and Fleetwood Mac have to tour. They don’t WANT to tour so much, but it’s the only way to make money now.
My question though is if Stevie Nicks gave up cocaine in 1986, why is she still hurting for money that she has to crawl onto concert stages at age 72? Why not retire and make money writing songs for other people? Or, write that book? Or do neither and just go to Hawaii which she loves and just chill out with her dog?
|by Anonymous||reply 186||05/11/2020|
Stevie Nicks has no life. No kids, no man, no hobbies, she's never been a social butterfly. Touring is the only thing that gets her out of the house.
|by Anonymous||reply 187||05/11/2020|
"that’s why fossils like The Eagles and Fleetwood Mac have to tour. They don’t WANT to tour so much, but it’s the only way to make money now. "
Some of the old bands are touring for money, others are touring for ego and attention, because it's not like the Rolling Stones need the money!. I suspect some bands are mixed, some members need money and some don't, which must lead to some very interesting discussions behind the scenes.
Well those that needed the money are fucked now, it'll probably be a couple of years before any large concerts happen anywhere, and by then they'll be 2-3 years further into old age.
|by Anonymous||reply 188||05/11/2020|
How much alimony and child support was paid out by the members of the Eagles and Rolling Stones? That's where a lot of the money went.
|by Anonymous||reply 189||05/11/2020|
It's true, frequent divorces are THE world's most ruinous bad financial habit - drugs and gambling are cheap by comparison.
If you want to know who needs the money, count the ex-spouses.
|by Anonymous||reply 190||05/11/2020|
I'm sure getting rid of both Bianca and Jerry cost Mick a bloody fortune.
|by Anonymous||reply 191||05/11/2020|
Indeed. R189 John Cleese got the Monty Python gang together again because Cleese needed money to pay off his most recent ex wife
|by Anonymous||reply 192||05/11/2020|
I saw Cleese live a couple of years ago, he brought his daughter and her scene-stealing little dog to my town, and it was a truly hilarious evening. And he did say that the divorce was "worth every penny".
I think it's the female entertainers who keep worthless husbands around forever, because giving them credit cards and a separate life is so much cheaper than a divorce. Look at Julia Roberts.
|by Anonymous||reply 193||05/11/2020|
True, r193. Female celebs tend to stay married to worthless husbands, as long as things are kept quiet. They divorce when things get really crazy and publicly embarrassing, like Sandra Bullock and that nutcase she married.
|by Anonymous||reply 194||05/11/2020|
I don't understand why these women get married in the first place. Men make horrible partners in the best of situations, if you have the money to make and support a family without one why put yourself in that position?
|by Anonymous||reply 195||05/11/2020|
Thanks, one of our lesbian participants. We have some parting gifts for you on your way out. Bye.
|by Anonymous||reply 196||05/11/2020|
I need two more Oscars to break that bitch Hepburn's record. It's in my will that Mamie can pull the plug as soon as I get four and five.
|by Anonymous||reply 197||05/11/2020|
r183 I did read that A-listers are turning down projects that film out of the country because they fear getting sick there if Covid continues or restarts in the fall.
|by Anonymous||reply 198||05/11/2020|
I've cut back to part time in the Pottery Barn in my mall.
|by Anonymous||reply 199||05/11/2020|
They want to maintain their lifestyle. It's not cheap living in California. Don't forget they have to pay for their gardeners,housekeeping, agents, lawyers, taxes, drugs, etc. It adds up, very quickly. And it's going to be harder to get projects now. Studios have lost a lot of money. Going to be a lot more picky.
|by Anonymous||reply 200||05/11/2020|
I need that crowd, I need that rush!
|by Anonymous||reply 201||05/11/2020|
[quote]Kristy McNichol retired in her 30s, and she then spent a lot of time focused on charity work. It must be exhausting not having a steady job and having to rely on auditions, knowing that the best actor/actress doesn't necessarily get the job.
I recall reading somewhere that McNichol's bipolar disorder was worsening back in the 90s and that was part of the reason she later left acting and TV work.
|by Anonymous||reply 202||05/11/2020|
[quote]But some acting work actually is physically demanding. A lot of it, actually.
Films are pretty exhausting, it's the bizarre work-flow, and some acting can also be physically demanding. You start at the crack of dawn, then might sit around for hours, but then absolute concentration is needed for your scenes, emotionally and/or physically. Then you change your clothes, jump into another scene that takes place months earlier in the script and try to return to a precise focus until everything comes to a dead halt...for a meal break. Then after you eat and have your wardrobe and make-up tweaked for the fiftieth time, you start the whole engine up again to repeat what you've just filmed 30 times already, because it wasn't exactly right. So you plow on, but with lots more waiting for the clouds to pass, the rain to stop, the child actors to arrive from their tutoring, the trained dog to wake up, the period vehicle to kick into gear (it worked all morning!), the drone camera to get fixed, or any number of other details to be fine tuned....but remain ready every moment for your big scene! Lol.
It can be great fun, but even easy days leave you exhausted, I have found.
|by Anonymous||reply 203||05/11/2020|
Alice Faye didn't actually retire after making Fallen Angel. She and Phil Harris had a radio sitcom from 1946 to 1954. She also appeared on Lux radio Theater and Suspense in the 1950s. She and Harris did some other performing, then she did State Fair and Good News on stage, etc. so she never really was retired until she was older, and even then she did those commercials for Pfizer.
|by Anonymous||reply 204||05/11/2020|
[quote]Most of the public believes that movie stars and musicians are all really rich. It's rarely the case.
If factory workers, postmen, and butchers can retire, then movie stars should have enough money to retire.
|by Anonymous||reply 205||05/11/2020|
I think Alice Faye also did summer theater in the 70s. The blue rinse crowd would have recalled her heyday as a movie star.
|by Anonymous||reply 206||05/11/2020|
I think I'd have absolutely loved the days before televisions were in everyone's homes and radio played a big part in our lives. Listening to dramas acted out on the radio must have been such fun.
|by Anonymous||reply 207||05/11/2020|
Audra's sweating this out, as this messes up her plan to get to her 10th Tony before age 55.
|by Anonymous||reply 208||05/12/2020|
It's absolutely ridiculous that she has 9 Tonys. She deserved a few of them, but certainly not 9.
|by Anonymous||reply 209||05/12/2020|
Audra only has 6 Tonys
|by Anonymous||reply 210||05/12/2020|
THE PRODUCERS has 12 Tonys, and it doesn't deserve all those, either.
|by Anonymous||reply 211||05/13/2020|
[quote]I think I'd have absolutely loved the days before televisions were in everyone's homes and radio played a big part in our lives. Listening to dramas acted out on the radio must have been such fun.
I have always liked listening to that stuff. I used to buy them, now most are available online. Lux Radio Theatre, Orson Welles. I also love comedies, esp Jack Benny, that show was sometimes so wild, it was hilarious. Just read the other day what's his name, Jughead from Riverdale is doing a radio drama podcast. *Cole Sprouse.
|by Anonymous||reply 212||05/22/2020|
It’s partly ego I suspect....they are used to a certain standard and do not want to give it up
|by Anonymous||reply 213||05/22/2020|
R213 I think it's ego, too. It's hard to go from mega-attention to no attention. Some people like Kim Novak retired and are happy being away from Hollywood. I think she's a painter. BUt I also think she had such a bad experience on a film when she was older (and already semi-retired) she retired due to that.
|by Anonymous||reply 214||05/22/2020|
[quote]If factory workers, postmen, and butchers can retire, then movie stars should have enough money to retire.
Some movie stars are awful with money management look at Johnny Depp. A few years back, Richard Dreyfuss was saying he couldn't afford to retire and there have been rumors about Robert DeNiro having to take any role he could get due to debts with his wife's spending.
|by Anonymous||reply 215||05/22/2020|
They tend to have alimony payments/divorce settlements, and the current spouse blows through money like water. Then they have adult children who are lazy shits who can't earn a living so they have to support the kids too. And by "support" I mean a NY/LA lifestyle, and that costs a TON of $$$.
|by Anonymous||reply 216||05/22/2020|
R216 Bette Davis was an example of someone who had support a lazy adult child.
Some childfree actors are probably glad they don't or didn't have to spend a lot of money on child related expenses like paying nannies, private schools, kid hobbies, college expenses etc.
|by Anonymous||reply 217||05/22/2020|
Bette Davis's daughter BD was a total leech, as was BD's husband. They didn't like to work and Bette supported them in very comfortable circumstances until BD was nearly middle-aged. Then the bitch wrote a nasty book about her mother, who did nothing but spoil her and her useless husband rotten. Horrible.
Greta Garbo and Katharine Hepburn never had children or husbands to support and both were very wealthy women their whole lives. They were smart.
|by Anonymous||reply 218||05/22/2020|
Some people like their work and it isn't work to them. I once asked a therapist if he was going to retire and he said he hopes to leave his office for the last time when he has to be carried out.
|by Anonymous||reply 219||05/22/2020|
[quote]Greta Garbo and Katharine Hepburn never had children or husbands to support and both were very wealthy women their whole lives. They were smart.
Hepburn has a husband, she was divorced. I don't think she supported him of course. She did apparently support her brother, who lived in the family home with her.
|by Anonymous||reply 220||05/22/2020|
|by Anonymous||reply 221||05/22/2020|
Katherine Hepburn was married from the late 1920s to the mid 1930s, and divorced her husband after living apart for some times. That was her only marriage, and happened long before courts thought of paying having a wife pay alimony to an ex-husband.
I think Jessica Lange was one of the first women who had to pay alimony. She married young, she and her husband lived in Paris and played at being mines, and they went their separate ways. He went blind and she did well in Hollywood, and when they finally got divorced she had to pay up. I don't believe she ever married again, she never even married Sam Shephard even though they had a passel of children.
|by Anonymous||reply 222||05/23/2020|
[quotes]she and her husband lived in Paris and played at being mines
I don't get it. Was this a mis-type? Did they play at being mimes? lol
|by Anonymous||reply 223||05/23/2020|
I believe Bette Davis paid alimony to two of her ex-husbands. She had quite a few leeches throughout her life.
|by Anonymous||reply 224||05/23/2020|
Some of them invite the entire extended family into higher lifestyles than their jobs would provide. So the star making all the money has to keep making money to support everyone, cradle to grave.
|by Anonymous||reply 225||05/23/2020|
I'm glad I didn't have to pay money to that country singer.
|by Anonymous||reply 226||05/23/2020|
[quote]They tend to have alimony payments/divorce settlements, and the current spouse blows through money like water
Also, crazy child support orders have been put on actors. Good example was Dave Foley and his crazy ex wife. He wasn't making huge money and he got hit with a huge support order and IIRC, he didn't return to Canada for a long time because he would have ended up in jail for unpaid child support.
|by Anonymous||reply 227||05/23/2020|
R227 She was just mad she wasn't as pretty as him in a dress.
|by Anonymous||reply 228||05/23/2020|
I wouldn't want to stay. You're in such a youth-oriented business. Cutthroats and backstabbers. No wonder so many actors are messed up.
|by Anonymous||reply 229||05/24/2020|
Greta Garbo left acting because she didn't want to do it anymore. MGM cleaning house was just a good excuse (for the timing). She was coaxed back into doing a screen test in 1948, but she ultimately stayed retired. She later laughed at her career, saying she had no talent for it.
|by Anonymous||reply 230||05/24/2020|
Has anybody mentioned Grace Kelly?
|by Anonymous||reply 231||05/24/2020|
Speaking of no talent, R231...
Anyway, I don't think Garbo felt she was being treated well by MGM by 1941. She was such a draw in the 1930s, helping MGM rich and prestigious, but public tastes were changing. She got an Oscar nom for NINOTCHKA but it wasn't very successful otherwise, and TWO-FACED WOMAN was a bust.
|by Anonymous||reply 232||05/24/2020|
R232 I used to wonder why Garbo and maybe also Cukor agreed to do a dumb film like Two-Faced Woman. Then I read about how they had to change a plot point due to the Code. Originally the husband knowingly slept with his wife's "twin sister" (who was actually his wife, putting him on). This was considered taboo. So they had to insert a scene before they got together, showing he knew it was his wife all along. If you watch the movie with this in mind, you can see how this change took all the mickey out of it. It would have made more sense and been more sophisticated and satisfying the original way.
I would have liked to have seen her in Madame Curie, with Spencer Tracy (as planned).
|by Anonymous||reply 233||05/25/2020|
Hepburn's brother who lived at Fenwick was an eccentric and an incompetent. She had another brother who was a distinguished physician at Hartford Hospital and a sister who was a librariran.
|by Anonymous||reply 234||05/25/2020|
Once the war started, MGM lost the lucrative European market which had always been very important in making Garbo's films financial successes. I believe Garbo made Two-Faced Woman because Ninotchka had been such a huge hit and people wanted to see her in a comedy again.
|by Anonymous||reply 235||05/25/2020|
I read an interview with Burt Lancaster a few years before he died. I paraphrase but he said something like "There's all these people around me, they want me to keep working because their jobs are dependent on my continuing to work". So basically, he was saying that he kept working to support his entourage, or at least give them something to do.
It's probably the same for some older actors who don't need the money, they don't mind doing a bit of easy work now and then, and it means someone else is paying their entourage's salaries.
|by Anonymous||reply 236||05/25/2020|