Audiences have connected to cinema for many reasons across time. Films can influence our adolescent years, offer comfort after a strenuous day of work, or maybe remind us of simpler times, bringing heartfelt memories of those we no longer have around us. At the center of these kinds of movies is the reason why people watch them in the first place: iconic characters brought to life by formidable actors or “stars.” From the years of Arnold Schwarzenegger’s Terminator to Anthony Hopkins’ Hannibal Lecter to the modern times of Robert Downey Jr’s Iron Man and Christian Bale’s Batman, arguably, such individuals are the very definition of the term “A-List.” Setting these high standards for fashion and fame, amassing unattainable levels of love and adoration from all over, and smashing box office records all at the same time.
Since the late 1900s and the rise of blockbusters, A-listers have appeared as almost “untouchable,” with many in the industry seemingly battling against one another through unfathomable box office-breaking hits and awards show sweeps to be defined as King or Queen of Hollywood. Leonardo DiCaprio, Angelina Jolie, Tom Cruise, and Will Smith are just some of these household names. From beloved characters to death-defying stunts, A-listers aren’t just measured by their financial success, but also by unmeasurable means; an actor’s performance range for example, or the wow factor they bring to the big screen, immersing us within their films.
While there is a corner of history with a significant range of cinema icons, can it be argued that the era of A-listers and movie stars has ended? Are the stars of cinema now the stories being told on screen, as opposed to the talented actors bringing them to life? Is the term A-List itself becoming redundant in today’s world where celebrities can be made overnight?
The Social Media Network
Outside of fandoms showing love to their A-lister of choice, who in the current film industry could be considered as having the same magnetic lure to the silver screen as those from the past? There’s almost a sense of uncontrollability and unknownness around A-listers today, as a result of the freedom that comes with social media and the opportunity for such individuals to express themselves more.
And this should come as no surprise with there being 4.95 billion social media users worldwide, according to Data Reportal. This has allowed people to be more engaged with performers than ever; we can like their photos as if friends, delve into their personal lives through social media stalking, and even watch the prestigious director Martin Scorsese dance on TikTok. Or you can watch Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson workout as he answers fan questions on Instagram. This could be described as the precursor for the decline of A-List influence. These once ethereal and mystical individuals have almost become grounded and relatable due to our accessibility of information, as well as the illusion of involvement we have in their lives. You can even now watch whole pirated movies on TikTok through separate parts!
Throughout the 1970s-2000s, arguably just before the popularization of Netflix and the following various streaming platforms, media was limited and physical. If you wanted to see stars and investigate their personal lives, you had to pay per outlet and even then the accessibility we had was a minuet glimpse in comparison to today. Such media limitations contributed to the sensationalized presence that film stars previously had. Brad Pitt (Fight Club, Se7en) and Tom Hanks (Forrest Gump, Cast Away) are two of the most notable examples, preserving their A-List images due to such restricted online presence yet continuing to provide empowering performances.
In a recent WIRED interview promoting his latest project Dream Scenario, Nicolas Cage revealed that he limits his social media presence in an attempt to preserve his image, inspired by the perceptions of the “Golden Age” actors. Cage elaborates upon this by saying that due to social media, “we’ve lost all mystery, and frankly I think it’s boring”. Without a connection through the internet, a shroud of mystery engulfs these stars and drives general audiences to cinemas to see them in the limited opportunities they get, boosting theater attendance and figures for such films.
The Age of Influencers
Social media has had its own Big Bang in the last decade, resulting in an entirely different digital world, and thus consequently the quantity of “celebrities” has boomed. That term was previously accustomed to movie stars or sporting heroes, but it has since been nullified by likes of Charlie D’Amelio on TikTok or MrBeast on YouTube, watering down the public perception of fame and influence of the term. This isn’t a dig at such incredibly successful individuals, but social media has allowed the ability for almost anyone to become famous – a title that was previously reserved for those possessing an elite capability to perform in the arts or athletics. This coincides why A-listers being on the verge of extinction, as audiences’ interests have now adjusted to various other forms of entertainment, leaving less attention for the film stars of yesterday.
Platforms like Letterboxd have unlocked a versatility to film discussion, allowing for opinions to be shared online in a whole new format – impacting the way cinema of both past and present is perceived by the general public. When movies relied more on in-person word of mouth and critic reviews for box office success, their stars were less vulnerable to critique, whereas when anyone can provide insight on an actor’s performance it can be harder to maintain an image at the top of Hollywood. Social media’s most damaging flaw is through likes – the larger the number, the more common that such an opinion is perceived as truth. Such factors were never present before, and could justify why A-listers now appear less relevant in comparison to the pre-social media era. People have an improved ability to provide their opinions nowadays, resulting in stronger judgments of who belongs on the A-List.
Heroes of the Box Office
Many moviegoers may consider our modern A-listers to be the likes of Chris Evans, Florence Pugh, and Margot Robbie since they have continuously dominated our screens. Nonetheless, there have been recent arguments supporting the idea that movie stars no longer exist, but rather that fame has transferred to the characters they play on screen instead. Quentin Tarantino was quoted in an interview with Variety, suggesting that people go see superhero movies because “Captain America is the star or Thor is the star,” not the actors themselves. In support of Tarantino’s argument; Leonardo DiCaprio’s worldwide box office sum for films where he starred as the lead (23) has amassed $6.9 billion.
Chris Evans, however, has achieved $10.2 billion in just 14 movies as a lead ensemble member (via The Numbers). Admittedly, it doesn’t take a film critic to understand how influential being the star of a major franchise, such as the Marvel Cinematic Universe, can be to the box office, and yet it still communicates support for Tarantino’s claims. Evans’ Captain America trilogy accumulated $2.2 billion alone, approximately a third of DiCaprio’s 23 movies as a lead, with a 20-movie difference. Outside of his lead ensemble roles, Evans has made a mere sum of $1 billion at the worldwide box office as a leading actor. Although it is hard to imagine anyone else holding Cap’s shield, no one would claim Evans as an actor more worthy of a larger overall box office. Maybe the importance of A-listers has instead declined due to the type of stories being currently told?
It’s no secret that comic book movies generate huge box office numbers, sometimes regardless of their quality. The MCU alone has accumulated around $29 billion, making it the biggest film franchise ever. It is fair to suggest that as a result, the A-List of the 21st Century are those that, for the most part, feature in superhero flicks. Margot Robbie was (and still could be) Harley Quinn and Hugh Jackman is sharpening his claws to return once more as the beloved Wolverine in Deadpool 3. Hell, even Brad Pitt cameoed as The Vanisher in Deadpool 2. Involvement in such genres doesn’t make an actor less talented, but it suggests that modern A-List stars are created, or their reputation is at least maintained through participation in current film trends. It’s also possible that it’s the comic book characters that create the star, rather than the star popularizing the character.
Finding Success Through Trends
Barbenheimer was a recent trend that has certainly left its mark in film history. The event consisted of watching Greta Gerwig’s Barbie and Christopher Nolan’s Oppenheimer back-to-back, spending around 5 hours in a theater watching two wildly different stories. People swarmed to theaters in hordes to participate in the Barbenheimer craze, which was birthed purely through social media buzz and eventually accumulated a combined $2.4 billion box office. A remarkable figure showcasing how trends are pivotal to bringing audiences to witness the A-List on the silver screen, as opposed to the A-List luring them through their names.
Speaking of such trends, movies produced by the rising studio A24 are attracting outstanding levels of interest. Audiences have been captivated by the studio in recent times, with Best Picture Oscar-winner Everything Everywhere All At Once setting the groundwork for future success. The film was produced for a low to moderate budget of approximately $25 million yet surpassed over $140 million at the worldwide box office. A24’s success in producing present-day cult movies has been linked to their recent approach of casting actors previously on the A-List, such as Brendan Frasier of The Mummy fame who was awarded the Academy Award for Best Actor in 2023 for his performance in The Whale.
A24 movies are often met with critical praise, though have yet to break the box office like released from studio giants such as Disney. Despite this, their success appears to be continuing, having attracted current popular stars Zac Efron (High School Musical, The Greatest Showman) and Jeremy Allen White (The Bear, Shameless) to their next release, The Iron Claw. Suggestions could be made that A24-produced films provide actors an opportunity to both improve their image by participating in a current trend and expand their acting portfolio through more intimate story-telling that excites them personally.
Low-Budget Big Hitters
The commercial success of a movie is arguably what creates stars in the eyes of the general public. In today’s film industry where production budgets are commonly in the hundreds of millions, A-listers can often be created by involvement in projects with the minimal budget required for success. Insidious (2010) is often discussed in this context, and rightfully so. Modern horror projects are known for their lower finances and likelihood to profit, but the James Wan-directed horror film claims the throne, impressively earning nearly $100 million in profit on a minimal $1.5 million budget. Insidious was a smashing financial success and was well-received by critics, leading to the creation of horror movie powerhouse Blumhouse and the future of the Insidious franchise. Additionally, the success of Insidious led to one of its stars Patrick Wilson and director James Wan reuniting in the 2018 DC blockbuster Aquaman.
Films operating on low budgets churning out stars isn’t exactly a new phenomenon. One of the biggest action stars of the mid-70s to 90s was Sylvester Stallone, who became the icon he is through the $225 million-making cinematic classic Rocky, also financed on a mere $1 million. Rocky skyrocketed Stallone’s career, making him one of the most recognizable names in Hollywood. It spawned a further 8 movies in the franchise as well, including the Creed series starring Michael B. Jordan. Around this time, Stallone was considered an unknown name and he almost didn’t even play Rocky Balboa, allegedly being offered a lump sum to instead allow someone else to be cast. After fighting for the role, however, the correct decision was made, as Rocky achieved three Oscar wins, including Best Picture in 1977.
In relation to modern cinema, 2016’s Moonlight is another critically acclaimed film produced on a small budget. Box office success was not expected for an indie, gay coming-of-age drama, yet Moonlight grossed $65 million worldwide against its estimated $4 million budget (via Box Office Mojo). It additionally claimed three Oscar wins, two further nominations, and a memorable night in Oscar history when La La Land was incorrectly announced as the Best Picture winner. Moonlight perfectly encapsulate the argument of this piece and while it doesn’t have a completely unknown cast, its success was primarily driven by the unique story-telling and acting performances, which led to it becoming the first LGBTQ+ movie to win Best Picture at the Academy Awards. A-listers weren’t needed for either critical or financial achievement, further insinuating that the power of the A-list has declined.
The Fault in Our A-List Stars
Just as an A-list cast is not required for cinematic success, an A-list cast doesn’t guarantee it either. Some of the biggest flops of the new generation of cinema have starred iconic casts, 2022’s Amsterdam being a noteworthy example. Despite starring Margot Robbie, Christian Bale, and John David Washington of Tenet fame, the movie was received poorly amongst critics and audiences, resulting in an estimated total loss of $97 million according to Deadline. Even Taylor Swift’s massive “Swifty” fandom could not influence a higher financial total with the musical artist having a small role in the film. Justifications are often made for box office bombs surrounding the quality of their marketing, but that wasn’t the case for Amsterdam as the film itself relied solely on an A-list cast – as opposed to interesting story-telling – to attract hungry eyes to the big screens, confirming their inability to do so in today’s society.
Coming off the back of his iconic role as Iron Man, Robert Downey Jr’s first role after Tony Stark’s passing was as the lead of 2020’s Dolittle. Another example of a box office bomb, the Universal Pictures production carried a weighty budget of $170 million making its $250 million return appear as a significant disappointment (via Forbes). Although it turned a small profit (without including advertising costs), the tactics of throwing as many A-listers as possible into the cast in hopes of significant financial return can be deemed as amateurish, as audiences craved a rich and entertaining story rather than the likes of Spider-Man actor Tom Holland voicing roughly CGI’d animals.
If the likes of Amsterdam and Dolittle were not already enough evidence, it’s perhaps a fair assessment that A-listers have retired their cinema-pulling power that they once had for a multitude of reasons. Whether unwillingly through the rise of social media and loss of exclusivity, the increase of fleeting fame, or as a result of genuine interest from audiences prioritizing story-telling over the faces of the story, A-listers as cinema remembers them are on the verge of disappearance, with fame instead becoming a role-by-role privilege for those truly at the top of their art form. Arguably, the only way back for such fame is for the privatization of actor’s lives or the decline of social media, which would be regarded as a phenomenon in the unlikely circumstances that this could ever occur in the modern era.
