The character actors are great but I want to see MOVIE STARS. Even in the theater it was always stars who carried the business. They are the ones who bring in the people with the money in their hot little hands. They want charisma. And you know what? Having a brain and a personality with some individuality are part of what charisma IS. The old stars were compelling. That quality can be enhanced but it can’t be manufactured.

One exception: Josh Lucas. He could be a real Movie Star, if his career were properly handled.

By the way, Spencer Tracy’s wife was not deaf—their son John was. The man was an alcoholic, which usually is accompanied by less than stellar behavior. Wonderful actor though.

Today’s men in general are as masculine as house cats. I say this to men and they can’t imagine why I say that. Look at all the adverts and sitcoms–Dad is a doofus, Mom is a genius and smug about it, too. Is it all the estrogen in our foods today?
The whole culture since the 60’s has been about hearing women roar. And roar. AND ROAR. I was in high school in the 60’s and even then thought the culture had gone to the spoiled brats with sheep mentality. “Question Authority!” Who is questioning the people who say, “Question Authority”?

Thanks. I agree with you completely about Paddy Chayevksy, one of my all-time favorite writers. That man could do things with words I can only aspire to achieve. I mentioned him on another thread recently, but had a serious brain freeze at the moment I selected those examples.

I like your perspective on this. I would add to Lehman and Hecht, one one my favorites, Paddy Chayefsky. A man who was not only a brilliant writer but was awarded the Purple Heart for service to our country in World War II.

I believe much of what made movies of yesteryear so special, is they were made by individuals who loved making movies. Producers, directors, writers, actors, coming together to create these memorable moments in time.

That’s why so many of them hold up so well today. Many of these actors along with their great talent, had a sense of style, they had class.

And the films?…the films have soul. Like an old Cole Porter tune, they are ‘timeless’…there for all eternity.

Lucky us.

It’s really more a matter of aesthetics than thechnology, in my opinion, which makes the Golden Age seem larger than life. Starting in the late sixties, with fare like “Bonnie and Clyde” and “The Graduate,” the hip crowd began emulating European realism, making our movies downbeat and gritty, too. Naturalism took over everything.

To be considered serious among a certain crowd, it was no longer fashionable to reach for the stars like DeMille or Lean. Every director had to be a Godard; every actor a Brando. Bigger than life movies were labeled “popcorn” movies, unless proven otherwise. Surely, “Jaws,” “Star Wars,” and “Close Encounters” were great movies. But none of them won Best Picture, no sir. Plus, we all pretty much know at heart they’re for kids, right?

And that’s how things remain. Computer graphics are a wonderful technological achievement, and however “fake” people complain of them looking, the shoddiest CG romp can take us places only dreamed of decades ago. I believe CG has at least as much otherworldliness as technicolor. That being said, there is a presumption of popcorniness for effects films. We can accept “Titanic” and “Lord of the Rings” as artistic achievements, but only after intense scrutiny. That is because of the gloomy 70s.

You’re using the term “today” a little loosely. They’ve been in the business for four decades now.

If you leave “class” off the list, I also like 70s badasses like Nicholson, DeNiro, and Pacino.