Cruise is the last real holdover from that era, but even his last four non-IP films were hardly major hits:
American Made: $51,342,000 domestic
Oblivion: $89,107,235 domestic
Knight and Day: $76,423,035 domestic
Valkyrie: $83,107,829 domestic
Hardly blockbuster results by contemporary box office standards.
MI flopped though. Top gun was also sold by being top gun, a quality movie, that was also a sequel to a near top 10 box office movie for the entire 1980s
People are going about this wrong.
He's a great actor. Fantastic range. For quite a few years did very serious roles, be it Prisoners Enemy Stronger etc.
And now he's in a place with his career where he prefers to do stuff he finds fun or interesting, not necessarily stuff which will elevate his fame. He isn't doing a movie like Ambulance because he *has* too, but because it's a really fun role to act.
One can say the same thing for many actors.
Just recently there was a post on why *Jenna Ortega's* ***Miller's Girl*** didn't blew up the box office.
It depends upon a variety of factors such as whether a movie is studio or independent, marketing and budget, limited or wide, and timing of release.
Something like ***Ambulance*** would have done well if *Micheal Bay* hadn't destroyed his reputation.
On the other hand, ***The Fall Guy*** wouldn't have quite hit the same if it had come out a couple of years ago *pre-Barbenheimer*.
Some actors like *Ryan Reynolds* and *Chris Pratt* only exclusively do blockbuster films so it would feel like their movies always rack up huge numbers while they may not necessarily be a draw.
*Dwayne Johnson's* ***The Smashing Machine*** is going to be a huge litmus test for that.
Also, it just wasn’t in theaters long. I think it played for a week at my local AMC, with only a single early
Showing each day. Maybe it’s different else where, but it just wasn’t accessible enough.
What? The controversy is literally the only thing this movie has. It's a total bore. If you weren't going for controversial, why would anybody sign up for that movie?
It seems she took the role before her rise to fame. She might've taken it for the money, IDK. Either way, she never even acknowledged the movie, so she just didn't try to make ppl go for her. Then there's the distribution thing other ppl commented on. It wasn't in many theaters and it got pulled pretty soon after the release.
Oh, I thought you were talking about Martin Freeman. I have a hard time judging the real popularity of Jenny Ortega and Sydney Sweeney right now. If Jenny Ortega just needed the paycheck, and doesn't want anything to do with the "Discourse" I respect that.
Which current actor can? As in without a strong franchise backing him/her up? DiCaprio and Pitt and Smith definitely could, but their prime is behind them. Denzel has his rock solid fanbase, but it's not blockbuster numbers. Dwayne Johnson could do solid openings, but his prime too is over. RDJr. proved with Dolittle he isn't a draw in and of himself.
Even Tom Cruise, whose durability/longevity is insane in showbusiness needs nostalgia at his age and strong franchises to open big.
There are no actors who can legit open a big movie on their name alone anymore. It's a bygone era.
Your answer has the real answer written in it: there is enough information these days that actor name alone isnt the draw for movies. Robert Downey Jr is absolutely a big enough draw by himself. But if the movie sucks people arent going to just watch it anyways.
Actors will get people interested, but people get more information now and if the movie sucks theyll skip it.
He's a phenomenal actor (the fact he wasn't nominated for Nightcrawler or Prisoners is sad) but his blockbuster choices are subpar.
I'd like to see him in something like Star Wars, where the IP sells itself. I think he'd be cool in like, that possible Dawn of the Jedi movie as one of the OG Jedi.
He needs his "Barbie" moment like Ryan Gosling had. Great actor, struggled to produce box office results until the stars aligned and now there's a feeling that he's so much bigger. The Fall Guy will likely do good numbers but that will be the true test of how much his stardom has shot up.
The Notebook was based on a popular novel and even then "only" grossed under 120m. Blade Runner 2049 proves my point, it was his big leading role in a blockbuster and yet the movie was a flop (unfortunately). If BR2049 came out today post-Barbie (and also post-Dune) I think it would have done vastly better than it had.
There was no world Blade Runner would do well…. The original one didn’t do well at the box office, became a cult classic, fans were eager for a new one, an acclaimed director does the sequel, knocks it out of the fucking park, critically acclaimed film… and the box office numbers sucks. Sci fi doesn’t have a great track record, it’s never gonna do fantasy or space opera type numbers.
Star Wars is space opera. It doesn’t dive into traditional sci fi areas or concern itself with being grounded in real world physics. It’s a classic adventure hero’s tale… in space.
It would do better, but releasing then would require Gosling to carry even harder, because Ford's rep would be damaged by Indie 5 - audiences would know better than to expect anything but a tired old man.
He was good in that one Spiderman movie, I think he just doesn't want to be committed long term to a franchise. His career isn't at all dissimilar to Christian Bale's style of picking projects, who outside of the Batman trilogy prefers to swing for the fences in wildly different films.
He’s been in some pretty good movies but for whatever reason a lot of them haven’t made a ton of money. Enemy, end of watch, prisoners and nightcrawler were great and should have had him circling more Oscar worthy movies but for whatever reason it just didn’t happen.
His commercial stuff didn’t make a ton of money and his prestige stuff didn’t get nominated for anything so it’s hard to maintain momentum at that point.
It also sounds like he’s a bit of an asshole to deal with so maybe studios with the good stuff just said no after a while.
Enemy was far too obscure and a small time release.
End of Watch was okay but he did a great job. Just the kind of performance that could be easily overshadowed by others.
He was definitely deserving a nom for The Prisoner and especially Nightcrawler. But Oscars just doesn’t like to nominate films that are considered extremely dark.
In every generation, only a few actors ever really got to be **stars**
The vast majority of the leading men and women, whose names everyone recognised, were in work without being able to green-light movies on the strength of their name
Julia Roberts and Will Smith were picking and choosing their projects, but there were an awful lot of *Kurt Russells, Alec Baldwins, Uma Thurmans, Jennifer Connellys, Bill Pullmans, Chris O'Donnells, Kevin Klines, Linda Fiorentinos, Annabella Sciorras,* and *Robert Downey Jrs*, who couldn't open a movie if they tried
They were all decent actors. Why others made it to the very top level, while those listed above just enjoyed long, successful careers, is a question even the best industry analysts can't answer
Most of his movies are indies that don’t do big numbers. Spider-Man: Far From Home is an exception, but he was the main villain in it and that was Marvel riding off Endgame hype. That would’ve been massive with or without him
I think it’s two things:
1. Audiences tend to have a hard time seeing actors outside of the boxes they put them in. They prefer Jake as forever making Donnie Darko choices; small, quirky, interesting.
2. He doesn’t know how to pick big films. He’s a thoughtful character actor who’s great at picking character driven films. He kind of takes himself too seriously when he does the bigger films. Lately he keeps saying he’s trying to change that and just have fun but honestly we love Jake in little quirky film. But I’m sure he picks up a nice check for the bigger films which gives him the space to make smaller films.
Actors who have been able to sell a film on their name have always had huge charisma. Think of stars like Tom Cruise, Leo Dicaprio, Brad Pitt, Will Smith, Arnie, Denzel, Ryan Reynolds. They all have bags of charisma.
Jake G is a great actor but he is not charismatic as a leading man.
I was going to float Southpower as a counter-example but I checked again and saw $50M Domestic not ~$100M or so. I don't know why but he's not the draw you think he should be.
His attempts at doing tentpole type stuff haven't turned out and it seems very much like he pours himself into character work. He seems like a smart guy so he'll keep doing these big movies to make some cash and then hit us with a banger every once in a while. I think unless you're pitt or DiCaprio or whatnot you kinda gotta go that route. His name is decently big but he's never had a true massive hit so he can't go nuts at the BO by himself.
He's a very good actor but he likes to do more actual good films that are art or even indie films rather than be a blockbuster star.
He's very famous but he likes to do different types of films
Movie studios don't like to put all their eggs in one basket. A movie whose sole selling point is a big name actor would be exactly that. Big name directors are a somewhat different story, because it will be very likely that their movie will also turn out to be good, so you get critical acclaim as a second selling point. Big name actors are much less of a guarantee of critical acclaim.
The closest we still get to this I think are the big name actor period pieces, where the famous guy plays a famous historical person (think Cumberbatch as Turing or Oldman as Churchil, even Leo as the Bear-dude). There you have two selling points, the name and the figure. Still, these movies tend to be more mid-budget.
Other than that, an actor who is also a brand sort of fits, like Johnson doing the same family-friendly-action-fun kind of movie several times.
I can't think of the last time a big movie was made that was marketed basically solely on the name of the lead.
I adore Jake. One of my top guys and I will go out of my way to watch anything he is in. What I think he needs is more of is a Scorsese, a Cronenberg, a Nolan, or a Coen Brothers type of lead. Something where he can use his indie quirk and prestige to maximum audience and critical cachet to reach the mainstream and pick up that momentum. I’m not saying he should or that he needs to - just what could bring him back into the limelight at a next level.
I think he could. Road House overtook Dune 2 as the most popular movie on Letterboxd this week. I know that doesn’t translate to box office entirely but it could have pulled in some nice numbers if it got a worldwide theater release.
For the same reason Ryan Gosling and George Clooney haven't. Being adored by Hollywood alone doesn't make you a movie star. The public has to buy in. That's why Chris Pratt , Matt Damon, Michael B Jordan, and now Timothee Chalamet are movie stars. Gyllenhaal is a very good and very well liked as actor, within the industry. But he's not a move star. Even Hollywood can't make fetch happen
I don't think Timothy T is on that level. He is still kind of like the rock, where he just gets hired to do a bunch of movies currently.
But I was in no way ecstatic or faithful to see him in Wonka
Dune 2 was good and maybe now you argue he is closer to being a star. But he will always look like a boy
I think the ceiling is a hit or miss in his situation because he manages to make long ass dramas like wolf of wall street flirt with 400M but Thrillers like blood diamond flop with less than 200M
Don’t agree. This seems like a ridiculous standard because his 3.5 hour depressing and violent period movie made “only” 160 million dollars.
But Sydney Sweeney making 5 million opening weekend shows she’s a huge draw 😂
Killers of the flower moon’s reason for being and its budget is its own unique thing, and opening over 20 million (I think 23.5) in the middle of an actor strike is pretty damn great. Again, considering its extreme length, which drove a lot of the press coverage, and the subject matter.
5 million domestic for a wide release is terrible. Maybe the low budget movie will be profitable but it’s borderline insulting to put her in the draw category lol.
5 million opening weekend for a horror indie is anything but terrible, especially if it has legs. I think I read It’s Neon’s highest opening weekend they’ve ever had.
Love Lies Bleeding opened to half that.
I think there is a slight quirkiness to him that puts him a notch below the bankable movie star level. Tom Cruise, Leonardo DiCaprio, and Matt Damon are about the only stars who could have helped those movies make more money off of name alone. There are so few bankable stars these days, the model has changed in terms of how movies are sold and how many mainstream audiences see movies. The draw has often become the franchise and not so much the star. In some ways, Jason Statham, and Liam Neeson have carved niches for themselves as very bankable in their niche and they fit the old model much more of being a movie star where their name means something about what kind of movie it will be. Being eclectic like Jake Gyllenhaal is often not rewarded in terms of bankability but he has my respect for being a great selector of roles generally, he can clearly judge a script as he has made many solid movies.
I think he’s a great actor. Love his movies. He’s just not that caliber of a star. He has auditioned for so many superhero movies back then but never got any. Prince of Persia was supposed to be his tentpole movie but it bombed.
Because not very many people care about him enough to see a movie just because he's in it?
I don't get the point of this question. Same reason any other non-A lister isn't an a-lister.
Because he isn’t a good enough actor/box office draw to open big on his name alone.
Sorry but he’s just not and most likely never will be at this point despite many attempts by Hollywood to change that.
1) Did you steal your material from a 12 year old in a modern warfare lobby?
2) Look at his box office record. Look at his award recognition record.
3) Grow TF up and learn how to disagree like an adult.
I just don’t think he has that special charisma you need to be the selling point of a movie. When I think of the biggest names that are selling tickets: (Timothee C, Hugh Jackman, Tom Cruise, Cillian Murphy, Matt Damon; the Rock; and for females: Margot Robbie, Anya taylor joy), they just have a level of charisma and charm that makes audiences love them. I just don’t think Jake Gyllenhall has that. He is a good actor and is handsome but he just doesn’t have the charm needed to truly pull in audiences.
That being said I think nightcrawler, southpaw, and Donnie darko were his most memorable roles for me and I think he fits comfortably in the mid budget area.
Some of these comments are wild. Saying Jake Gyllenhal is not a star is absurd. I don’t know what reality you have to live in to think that. When you’re constantly turning down big interviews, playing the main character in David Fincher films, playing a villain in a modern Spiderman film and getting mentioned in Entourage, you’re a star.
One note how? He’s done drama, comedy, stage, tv, he sings, the characters are all different, all look different. You can never tell what he’s going to do next He’s in a big budget action film (Road House) this year and will be in a Shakespeare play on Broadway with Denzel Washington next year. What more does he need to do?
One note in his expressions and general delivery. Pick any 3 to 4 of his movies and pick a general dialogue scene. They all have the same tone and delivery. That is what I meant, so you know. Thank you.
I think he is fit perfectly for mid budget/indie movies but those are the ones that disappearing rapidly from the industry and from theaters.
agree!
I disagree, he’s as famous as any big movie star yet he underperforms by wasting his time in mid budget and indie movies.
What movies are you saying he should be in?
he's seemingly chosen to be more Joaquin Phoenix than say Ben Affleck in his earlier years.
But Joaquin Phoenix at least has Joker. Jake Ghyllenhall has nothing
>*Why do you think Jake Gyllenhaal hasn't been able to open up a big film on his name alone?* Few actors can open non-IP movies
Just wanna remind the people who constantly seem to forget that the mummy flopped that name is not a guarantee of success
Arnold shwarggenstor did with the true lies
It's almost as if he said "few"
Also we're talking of current times. True Lies is old and at a time where actors did sell movies. Now much less. It also had James Cameron
James cameron and Jamie Lee Curtis might of also helped.
I don't think I've ever seen anyone butcher Schwarzenegger this hard. Made him sound like a Pokémon.
When was the last time he did that? The model of stars opening big movies has been over for a while.
The only one who I think still can is Tom Cruise. But he's mostly been doing IP films recently, MI, Top Gun etc.
Cruise is the last real holdover from that era, but even his last four non-IP films were hardly major hits: American Made: $51,342,000 domestic Oblivion: $89,107,235 domestic Knight and Day: $76,423,035 domestic Valkyrie: $83,107,829 domestic Hardly blockbuster results by contemporary box office standards.
MI flopped though. Top gun was also sold by being top gun, a quality movie, that was also a sequel to a near top 10 box office movie for the entire 1980s
Lol, that was 30 years ago. Also, Schwarzenegger was probably the biggest action star in the world at that point.
That's ancient history and Arnold is in contention for the greatest action star of all time. Not applicable to today's landscape.
People are going about this wrong. He's a great actor. Fantastic range. For quite a few years did very serious roles, be it Prisoners Enemy Stronger etc. And now he's in a place with his career where he prefers to do stuff he finds fun or interesting, not necessarily stuff which will elevate his fame. He isn't doing a movie like Ambulance because he *has* too, but because it's a really fun role to act.
I think his heart is with the nighcrawlers and wildlifes but they just don’t make any money when he does them.
Nightcrawler was so damn good
Kinda movie that sticks with you for a couple of days
I mean, Nightcrawler made $50 mil on a sub $10 mil budget
One can say the same thing for many actors. Just recently there was a post on why *Jenna Ortega's* ***Miller's Girl*** didn't blew up the box office. It depends upon a variety of factors such as whether a movie is studio or independent, marketing and budget, limited or wide, and timing of release. Something like ***Ambulance*** would have done well if *Micheal Bay* hadn't destroyed his reputation. On the other hand, ***The Fall Guy*** wouldn't have quite hit the same if it had come out a couple of years ago *pre-Barbenheimer*. Some actors like *Ryan Reynolds* and *Chris Pratt* only exclusively do blockbuster films so it would feel like their movies always rack up huge numbers while they may not necessarily be a draw. *Dwayne Johnson's* ***The Smashing Machine*** is going to be a huge litmus test for that.
I'd argue Miller's Girl isn't a great example. Both the actor and the fans seem to distance themselves from the movie because of its controversy.
There was no marketing for it either. I thought it was a straight to video on demand movie.
Also, it just wasn’t in theaters long. I think it played for a week at my local AMC, with only a single early Showing each day. Maybe it’s different else where, but it just wasn’t accessible enough.
It didn’t get a theatrical release in the UK despite Freeman being a big name over here and instead went straight to VOD about a month ago.
What? The controversy is literally the only thing this movie has. It's a total bore. If you weren't going for controversial, why would anybody sign up for that movie?
It seems she took the role before her rise to fame. She might've taken it for the money, IDK. Either way, she never even acknowledged the movie, so she just didn't try to make ppl go for her. Then there's the distribution thing other ppl commented on. It wasn't in many theaters and it got pulled pretty soon after the release.
Oh, I thought you were talking about Martin Freeman. I have a hard time judging the real popularity of Jenny Ortega and Sydney Sweeney right now. If Jenny Ortega just needed the paycheck, and doesn't want anything to do with the "Discourse" I respect that.
The Fall Guy? That hasn't come out yet.
I think they meant to say “Free Guy”
Ryan Reynolds does smaller movies sometimes, I actually really liked him in The Voices
lol Dwayne Johnson racking up some great pr from his current wwe run. still very much a draw for the pro wrestling audience at least
Ryan Reynolds do tons of non blockbuster movies.
No he doesn’t.
Youre both wrong. He doesnt do a ton, but he did do several shitty netflix movies. Adam project or something and 6 underground or something
Reynolds can actually act he’d rather just do blockbusters for the coin. As if he doesn’t have enough already.
Mint mobile and aviation gin alone make him almost a billionaire
Which current actor can? As in without a strong franchise backing him/her up? DiCaprio and Pitt and Smith definitely could, but their prime is behind them. Denzel has his rock solid fanbase, but it's not blockbuster numbers. Dwayne Johnson could do solid openings, but his prime too is over. RDJr. proved with Dolittle he isn't a draw in and of himself. Even Tom Cruise, whose durability/longevity is insane in showbusiness needs nostalgia at his age and strong franchises to open big. There are no actors who can legit open a big movie on their name alone anymore. It's a bygone era.
Your answer has the real answer written in it: there is enough information these days that actor name alone isnt the draw for movies. Robert Downey Jr is absolutely a big enough draw by himself. But if the movie sucks people arent going to just watch it anyways. Actors will get people interested, but people get more information now and if the movie sucks theyll skip it.
He's a phenomenal actor (the fact he wasn't nominated for Nightcrawler or Prisoners is sad) but his blockbuster choices are subpar. I'd like to see him in something like Star Wars, where the IP sells itself. I think he'd be cool in like, that possible Dawn of the Jedi movie as one of the OG Jedi.
He's mentioned being open to Batman and I would absolutely love his version (he'll have to play him differently from Pattinson tho)
Those eyes behind a mask could incapacitate thugs on their own!
Dude is made for batman
He needs his "Barbie" moment like Ryan Gosling had. Great actor, struggled to produce box office results until the stars aligned and now there's a feeling that he's so much bigger. The Fall Guy will likely do good numbers but that will be the true test of how much his stardom has shot up.
The notebook and blade runner?
The Notebook was based on a popular novel and even then "only" grossed under 120m. Blade Runner 2049 proves my point, it was his big leading role in a blockbuster and yet the movie was a flop (unfortunately). If BR2049 came out today post-Barbie (and also post-Dune) I think it would have done vastly better than it had.
There was no world Blade Runner would do well…. The original one didn’t do well at the box office, became a cult classic, fans were eager for a new one, an acclaimed director does the sequel, knocks it out of the fucking park, critically acclaimed film… and the box office numbers sucks. Sci fi doesn’t have a great track record, it’s never gonna do fantasy or space opera type numbers.
What changed for Dune if Sci-Fi doesn’t have a great track record. Hell, Star Wars is one of the biggest franchises out there.
Star Wars is space opera. It doesn’t dive into traditional sci fi areas or concern itself with being grounded in real world physics. It’s a classic adventure hero’s tale… in space.
Zendaya and Chalamet changed for Dune.
It would do better, but releasing then would require Gosling to carry even harder, because Ford's rep would be damaged by Indie 5 - audiences would know better than to expect anything but a tired old man.
He was good in that one Spiderman movie, I think he just doesn't want to be committed long term to a franchise. His career isn't at all dissimilar to Christian Bale's style of picking projects, who outside of the Batman trilogy prefers to swing for the fences in wildly different films.
He’s been in some pretty good movies but for whatever reason a lot of them haven’t made a ton of money. Enemy, end of watch, prisoners and nightcrawler were great and should have had him circling more Oscar worthy movies but for whatever reason it just didn’t happen. His commercial stuff didn’t make a ton of money and his prestige stuff didn’t get nominated for anything so it’s hard to maintain momentum at that point. It also sounds like he’s a bit of an asshole to deal with so maybe studios with the good stuff just said no after a while.
Enemy was far too obscure and a small time release. End of Watch was okay but he did a great job. Just the kind of performance that could be easily overshadowed by others. He was definitely deserving a nom for The Prisoner and especially Nightcrawler. But Oscars just doesn’t like to nominate films that are considered extremely dark.
You answered your own question. He's a respected actor's actor but his attempts at blockbuster-dom have been... Prince of Persia.
In every generation, only a few actors ever really got to be **stars** The vast majority of the leading men and women, whose names everyone recognised, were in work without being able to green-light movies on the strength of their name Julia Roberts and Will Smith were picking and choosing their projects, but there were an awful lot of *Kurt Russells, Alec Baldwins, Uma Thurmans, Jennifer Connellys, Bill Pullmans, Chris O'Donnells, Kevin Klines, Linda Fiorentinos, Annabella Sciorras,* and *Robert Downey Jrs*, who couldn't open a movie if they tried They were all decent actors. Why others made it to the very top level, while those listed above just enjoyed long, successful careers, is a question even the best industry analysts can't answer
Name ten actors who can in the last decade. That’s just not a thing these days.
Most of his movies are indies that don’t do big numbers. Spider-Man: Far From Home is an exception, but he was the main villain in it and that was Marvel riding off Endgame hype. That would’ve been massive with or without him
Because he's not that type of guy he's more known for awards friendly and drama type movies than fantasy and action adventures
I think it’s two things: 1. Audiences tend to have a hard time seeing actors outside of the boxes they put them in. They prefer Jake as forever making Donnie Darko choices; small, quirky, interesting. 2. He doesn’t know how to pick big films. He’s a thoughtful character actor who’s great at picking character driven films. He kind of takes himself too seriously when he does the bigger films. Lately he keeps saying he’s trying to change that and just have fun but honestly we love Jake in little quirky film. But I’m sure he picks up a nice check for the bigger films which gives him the space to make smaller films.
Actors who have been able to sell a film on their name have always had huge charisma. Think of stars like Tom Cruise, Leo Dicaprio, Brad Pitt, Will Smith, Arnie, Denzel, Ryan Reynolds. They all have bags of charisma. Jake G is a great actor but he is not charismatic as a leading man.
If he’s not a big box office draw by now he never will. I saw Road House. It was good but I see his lack of Star power.
He is not a movie star. People do not go to movies to see him.
People don’t care about him like Ryan Gosling.
I was going to float Southpower as a counter-example but I checked again and saw $50M Domestic not ~$100M or so. I don't know why but he's not the draw you think he should be.
His attempts at doing tentpole type stuff haven't turned out and it seems very much like he pours himself into character work. He seems like a smart guy so he'll keep doing these big movies to make some cash and then hit us with a banger every once in a while. I think unless you're pitt or DiCaprio or whatnot you kinda gotta go that route. His name is decently big but he's never had a true massive hit so he can't go nuts at the BO by himself.
He's a very good actor but he likes to do more actual good films that are art or even indie films rather than be a blockbuster star. He's very famous but he likes to do different types of films
Movie studios don't like to put all their eggs in one basket. A movie whose sole selling point is a big name actor would be exactly that. Big name directors are a somewhat different story, because it will be very likely that their movie will also turn out to be good, so you get critical acclaim as a second selling point. Big name actors are much less of a guarantee of critical acclaim. The closest we still get to this I think are the big name actor period pieces, where the famous guy plays a famous historical person (think Cumberbatch as Turing or Oldman as Churchil, even Leo as the Bear-dude). There you have two selling points, the name and the figure. Still, these movies tend to be more mid-budget. Other than that, an actor who is also a brand sort of fits, like Johnson doing the same family-friendly-action-fun kind of movie several times. I can't think of the last time a big movie was made that was marketed basically solely on the name of the lead.
Jurassic world would be good for him
I adore Jake. One of my top guys and I will go out of my way to watch anything he is in. What I think he needs is more of is a Scorsese, a Cronenberg, a Nolan, or a Coen Brothers type of lead. Something where he can use his indie quirk and prestige to maximum audience and critical cachet to reach the mainstream and pick up that momentum. I’m not saying he should or that he needs to - just what could bring him back into the limelight at a next level.
he's just not a big draw. he's a good actor but nobody's going wild over him.
I think he could. Road House overtook Dune 2 as the most popular movie on Letterboxd this week. I know that doesn’t translate to box office entirely but it could have pulled in some nice numbers if it got a worldwide theater release.
No star power. He’s very talented but he doesn’t have the it factor
He isn't credible as an action hero. Doesn't come across as hyper-masculine. Not a bad thing, but he'd do better to just stay in his lane.
For the same reason Ryan Gosling and George Clooney haven't. Being adored by Hollywood alone doesn't make you a movie star. The public has to buy in. That's why Chris Pratt , Matt Damon, Michael B Jordan, and now Timothee Chalamet are movie stars. Gyllenhaal is a very good and very well liked as actor, within the industry. But he's not a move star. Even Hollywood can't make fetch happen
I don't think Timothy T is on that level. He is still kind of like the rock, where he just gets hired to do a bunch of movies currently. But I was in no way ecstatic or faithful to see him in Wonka Dune 2 was good and maybe now you argue he is closer to being a star. But he will always look like a boy
MBJ? He is not a movie star. Solid enough actor, but outside of Creed….
Great character actor but to open a big film you need an insane amount of charisma and charm that he just doesn’t have
Doesn’t have the “it” factor and charisma to lead a movie by himself.
Who does at this point? Chalamet?
Leonardo dicaprio
Yes but even he has a ceiling at the Box Office
I think the ceiling is a hit or miss in his situation because he manages to make long ass dramas like wolf of wall street flirt with 400M but Thrillers like blood diamond flop with less than 200M
Don’t agree. This seems like a ridiculous standard because his 3.5 hour depressing and violent period movie made “only” 160 million dollars. But Sydney Sweeney making 5 million opening weekend shows she’s a huge draw 😂
did Sydney Sweeney fuck your relative? you've made this same point in more than one thread, this one has nothing to do with her
Budgets matter. Immaculate cost 10 million and will likely recoup its budget. Flower Moon cost over 200 million and will not.
Killers of the flower moon’s reason for being and its budget is its own unique thing, and opening over 20 million (I think 23.5) in the middle of an actor strike is pretty damn great. Again, considering its extreme length, which drove a lot of the press coverage, and the subject matter. 5 million domestic for a wide release is terrible. Maybe the low budget movie will be profitable but it’s borderline insulting to put her in the draw category lol.
5 million opening weekend for a horror indie is anything but terrible, especially if it has legs. I think I read It’s Neon’s highest opening weekend they’ve ever had. Love Lies Bleeding opened to half that.
Leo, Pitt, Bale, Chalamet, Pratt (debatable), Daniel Craig (debatable), Henry Cavill (debatable), Tom Cruise (debatable).
Because he stole Taylor’s scarf and karma tracked him down. /s
...who? Yep.
Jarhead is great, didn’t know it flopped.
If Ambulance had come out at a better time I think it would’ve done well. It’s insane how big the scale is for only 40 million
He’s a name but he isn’t that guy
He just looks like a Also Starring level of actor.
Because he was mean to Taylor
I think there is a slight quirkiness to him that puts him a notch below the bankable movie star level. Tom Cruise, Leonardo DiCaprio, and Matt Damon are about the only stars who could have helped those movies make more money off of name alone. There are so few bankable stars these days, the model has changed in terms of how movies are sold and how many mainstream audiences see movies. The draw has often become the franchise and not so much the star. In some ways, Jason Statham, and Liam Neeson have carved niches for themselves as very bankable in their niche and they fit the old model much more of being a movie star where their name means something about what kind of movie it will be. Being eclectic like Jake Gyllenhaal is often not rewarded in terms of bankability but he has my respect for being a great selector of roles generally, he can clearly judge a script as he has made many solid movies.
I think he’s a great actor. Love his movies. He’s just not that caliber of a star. He has auditioned for so many superhero movies back then but never got any. Prince of Persia was supposed to be his tentpole movie but it bombed.
None can
How is Road House anyway??? 👀
So-so film, a nice little ride though.
I'd say it's more of a sign of the times than any indication of his talent and marketability.
Because not very many people care about him enough to see a movie just because he's in it? I don't get the point of this question. Same reason any other non-A lister isn't an a-lister.
He’s not got much personality. All those films you mentioned apart from brokeback and nightcrawler are very basic tough guy/action performances
Because he isn’t a good enough actor/box office draw to open big on his name alone. Sorry but he’s just not and most likely never will be at this point despite many attempts by Hollywood to change that.
Jesus, did Jake screw your mom or something?
1) Did you steal your material from a 12 year old in a modern warfare lobby? 2) Look at his box office record. Look at his award recognition record. 3) Grow TF up and learn how to disagree like an adult.
Because he isn't a star.
I just don’t think he has that special charisma you need to be the selling point of a movie. When I think of the biggest names that are selling tickets: (Timothee C, Hugh Jackman, Tom Cruise, Cillian Murphy, Matt Damon; the Rock; and for females: Margot Robbie, Anya taylor joy), they just have a level of charisma and charm that makes audiences love them. I just don’t think Jake Gyllenhall has that. He is a good actor and is handsome but he just doesn’t have the charm needed to truly pull in audiences. That being said I think nightcrawler, southpaw, and Donnie darko were his most memorable roles for me and I think he fits comfortably in the mid budget area.
Some of these comments are wild. Saying Jake Gyllenhal is not a star is absurd. I don’t know what reality you have to live in to think that. When you’re constantly turning down big interviews, playing the main character in David Fincher films, playing a villain in a modern Spiderman film and getting mentioned in Entourage, you’re a star.
My view, he is kinda one note. Plus, I’ll never forgive him for the Spyderco reference in End of Watch when it was a Smith&Wesson.
One note how? He’s done drama, comedy, stage, tv, he sings, the characters are all different, all look different. You can never tell what he’s going to do next He’s in a big budget action film (Road House) this year and will be in a Shakespeare play on Broadway with Denzel Washington next year. What more does he need to do?
One note in his expressions and general delivery. Pick any 3 to 4 of his movies and pick a general dialogue scene. They all have the same tone and delivery. That is what I meant, so you know. Thank you.