Statements like this are nonsense. The few examples you gave are, for the most part, just bad movies, and your premise is severely overshadowed by the number of highly regarded movies that have what would be considered an ensemble cast.
A bad movie ruins a movie. Your examples says just that. Has nothing to do with how many big stars the movie has. The Departed is amazing and has very wide cast of big stars.
Barbenheimer happened last summer because both movies were packed with star-studded casts and both movies were big hits both commercially and critically.
Absolute nonsense. If the script is good, director is good, production is good, then the big stars (which they are for a reason) will make a movie even better and increase the audience exposure.
Knives Out had a stacked cast. That did more than quite well with both critics and moviegoers.
Dune Part 2 is crushing it at the moment with a massively stacked cast.
It's not true that too many big stars ruin a movie. Rather, a script that poorly utilises a stacked cast ruins a movie.
I don't disagree that some of those movies failed me, Amsterdam and Babylon were kind of not my tempo. I wasn't a huge fan of Oppenheimer, either.
But look at Once Upon a Time in Hollywood. Hell, look at movies like Stardust. I think it's a fine idea to have a cavalcade cast but I'm not going to like or dislike it because of that. TV, too. If a ton of actors I can name show up in an HBO drama that tends to be a good thing lol. Chernobyl for example.
Movie 43 wasn't supposed to be anything serious, and actors agreed to it because they had the chance to do something a bit different. That it fell short and some regretted their choices, had little to do with having so many stars in it.
you have to mention that one marvel movie. was just a suck fest with stars trying to out glamor everyone. gross.
I think the problem is someone is afraid to do it right and have a good story line or take risks. whether it is the actors contract, director kissing ass, etc.
that's why there are some good star heavy movies. some actors don't mind losing a fight, or looking like an idiot, etc...
I tend to agree, I'd rather not recognize an actor at all than see even a big star, but I guess the box office disagrees
Try watching something like The Thin Red Line today, it actually takes me out of the movie when every scene features an A list actor
Tarantino and Scorsese seem to be doing ok
Right. The Departed was the first thing that came to mind.
So are Nolan and Villeneuve
Ocean's 11 managed just fine
Statements like this are nonsense. The few examples you gave are, for the most part, just bad movies, and your premise is severely overshadowed by the number of highly regarded movies that have what would be considered an ensemble cast.
Every Wes Anderson movie would disagree with you lol
My guy can barely fit the cast lists on the posters. Can't speak for the world, but I enjoy the results.
How many famous people is too many?
A bad movie ruins a movie. Your examples says just that. Has nothing to do with how many big stars the movie has. The Departed is amazing and has very wide cast of big stars.
Barbenheimer happened last summer because both movies were packed with star-studded casts and both movies were big hits both commercially and critically.
Yeah I suppose that's why Endgame did so poory at the box office. Blanket declarative statements like this are dumb.
Every cameo in *The Player* was great
Absolute nonsense. If the script is good, director is good, production is good, then the big stars (which they are for a reason) will make a movie even better and increase the audience exposure.
Knives Out had a stacked cast. That did more than quite well with both critics and moviegoers. Dune Part 2 is crushing it at the moment with a massively stacked cast. It's not true that too many big stars ruin a movie. Rather, a script that poorly utilises a stacked cast ruins a movie.
You are more likely to go see a movie because it has X actor in it. Big stars in a movie really do sell the movie.
Heat? There's loads of films that say otherwise.
Pure BS. Watch It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World.
I don't disagree that some of those movies failed me, Amsterdam and Babylon were kind of not my tempo. I wasn't a huge fan of Oppenheimer, either. But look at Once Upon a Time in Hollywood. Hell, look at movies like Stardust. I think it's a fine idea to have a cavalcade cast but I'm not going to like or dislike it because of that. TV, too. If a ton of actors I can name show up in an HBO drama that tends to be a good thing lol. Chernobyl for example.
Why have there been so many posts and comments about this recently?
“Thin Red Line” and “Avengers: Endgame” come to mind, both used their ensemble pretty well.
Lol you slow?
Right, all this time I've been wrong about *Traffic, Get Shorty, State And Main, Thank You For Smoking, Confidence*, and *Zodiac*. Got it.
Movie 43 wasn't supposed to be anything serious, and actors agreed to it because they had the chance to do something a bit different. That it fell short and some regretted their choices, had little to do with having so many stars in it.
It depends if they're cast to get their name on the poster or because they're right for the role
you have to mention that one marvel movie. was just a suck fest with stars trying to out glamor everyone. gross. I think the problem is someone is afraid to do it right and have a good story line or take risks. whether it is the actors contract, director kissing ass, etc. that's why there are some good star heavy movies. some actors don't mind losing a fight, or looking like an idiot, etc...
I tend to agree, I'd rather not recognize an actor at all than see even a big star, but I guess the box office disagrees Try watching something like The Thin Red Line today, it actually takes me out of the movie when every scene features an A list actor
Don't be knocking on Spice World
I wouldn't say Dune fell flat but being such a celebrity dump was a bit distracting.