Director of "Moon" says enough with the 20 something leading actors

[Aesop Rocks]

In Hollywood, 40 is the new 30.

 

[Project862006]

i hope he is referring to shia/efron/tatum/ type

 

[MadVillainy]

I mean but Tatum is 30 anyways

and Shia is a good actor

Efron is funny but really needs to find the right role

 

[Dr. Evil]

If you want to look at it from a comedic standpoint as well:

- Adam Sandler
- Will Ferrell
- Ben Stiller
- Jack Black
- Steve Carell
- Paul Rudd
- Zach Galifianakis

All over 40 as well and all have found success in comedies.

 

[matrix_ghost]

I thin kthe more important thing about Jones's twitter was this "
"Leading men need to look like they have LIVED."

Ít's not so much that 20 year actors aren't talented ( look at Shia) but they often get cast for roles where they need to play much older characters and fail because they look so young.

baerrt's examples of Eddie Murphy is a good one. Hell when he was doing Delirious he was 22.
Or try Christopher Reeve. He was 25 or 26 when he made Superman. By today's standards Reeve looked like someone in his mid 30's

 

[dark_b]

I mean but Tatum is 30 anyways

he looks like he is 20. he is using way to much make up,way to much women products

 

[JeetKuneDo]

Very interesting thing to think about.

I don't think I care that much. Thinking back, it is true that John Wayne, James Stewart, Cary Grant, Henry Fonda, Clark Gable, Paul Newman, ect became much better after they left their 20s behind...

But Chloe Moretz was the most interesting actor in Kick Ass, Michael J. Fox was awesome in Back to the Future...so I'd hate to exclude potential greatness over this.

 

[danoyse]

But Chloe Moretz was the most interesting actor in Kick Ass, Michael J. Fox was awesome in Back to the Future...so I'd hate to exclude potential greatness over this.

But they were playing younger characters, so they had to be younger. Actually, Michael J. Fox was playing a 17-year-old when he was 23, so he was older.

But I think it depends on the character - and I agree they don't always have to cast a 20-something to play every major action movie role these days if the role doesn't exactly call for it.

 

[redhawk23]

ok how many leading men (big actors) do we have in their 20s
Jake Gyllenhall...and there are some other ones to a lesser extent but I think Jake Gyllenhall is one of the biggest young leading man. Shia LaBeouf is another, but most of the times he is cast as a young character

But
Brad Pitt
George Clooney
Johnny Depp
Leonardo DiCaprio
Will Smith
Matt Damon
Jamie Foxx

Are all over 40 and are the biggest actors around right now. I dont see why he complaining

Dicaprio is in his mid 30s hes more than 10 years younger than depp last time I checked.

 

[redhawk23]

gah! lag.

also I agree that there really are not a whole lot of young leading men, but then we do have Chris Evans as Captain America. I like him as an actor and I will with hold judgement until I see the movie, but I really don't get the whole leader of the avengers vibe from him.

and whoa ryan reynolds is quite a bit older than I expected.

 

[terry78]

gah! lag.

also I agree that there really are not a whole lot of young leading men, but then we do have Chris Evans as Captain America. I like him as an actor and I will with hold judgement until I see the movie, but I really don't get the whole leader of the avengers vibe from him.

and whoa ryan reynolds is quite a bit older than I expected.

Steve Rogers was in his 20s when he got froze though. That's somewhat of the irony of him being so loved and admired. He still looks almost like a teenager, but his mentality and skills overrule it.

 

[MadVillainy]

yeah I forgot to change the age.

But basically what I was saying that their more 33+ leading men then under 30 ones

 

[C. Lee]

So what are your thoughts? Do your prefer older leading actors and actresses or younger? Be honest. Perhaps you really don't care?

I grew up mostly watching movies from the 30's, 40's, 50's, and 60's....when adults were the leading men and women of films....so yeah, I prefer older actors in the lead roles. Not only can they ACT as opposed to modeling thier roles....they actually look believable.

I realize that in this current youth obsessed society that anyone over 25 is considered ancient and useless....so I don't expect any big change in Hollywood in the near future.

And for those that will surely say "You're old Lee, of course you like old actors.".....I say reread my first sentence in the post. As a child in the 1960's....I watched movies starring Humphrey Bogart, Errol Flynn, Bette Davis, Burt Lancaster, John Wayne, Sophia Loren, Basil Rathbone, etc from the 30's, 40's, 50's, and 60's....they were men and women who looked and acted like men and women....not pouting teenage anorexic models.

 

[Hunter Rider]

But they were playing younger characters, so they had to be younger. Actually, Michael J. Fox was playing a 17-year-old when he was 23, so he was older.

But I think it depends on the character - and I agree they don't always have to cast a 20-something to play every major action movie role these days if the role doesn't exactly call for it.

I was just thinking about Michael J Fox as I was reading through this thread.

It really is all about the role, Jones statement isn't so much bold as silly in it's sweeping nature when you look around this years blockbusters nearly every one has a lead over 30 except Twilight and Potter, and both those have lead characters in school.

So far Shia, Effron and whomever else qualifies for the 20 year old leading man roles have not tried to play a character beyond their age range.

 

[kickass]

So.............my friends are actors.......and they're in their early-mid 20's. Should they not jump at the chance to audition for a leading role if it means great things for their careers? Should they just "wait it out" until they're in their 30's? How does that benefit any of them?

I disagree with his comment completely.

 

[TheVileOne]

Those are still leading roles for young boy-ish types instead of more experienced older males.

LeBouf's part in EAGLE EYE was actually a guy in his early 30's.

And yes we need more men in leading roles and not green horn boys. Someone like Mark Valley or Jon Hamm should've played Captain America and not Chris Evans.

 

[dark_b]

So.............my friends are actors.......and they're in their early-mid 20's. Should they not jump at the chance to audition for a leading role if it means great things for their careers? Should they just "wait it out" until they're in their 30's? How does that benefit any of them?

I disagree with his comment completely.

so because my friend is an actor i need to support pretty young faces for leading blocbusters?

he can get a jobe in a sitcom or he get a job in smallville or melrose place.

 

[Laderlappen]

I dont get where this 'there is no big actors over 30 today' thing here comes from. Most big actors today are over 30. I wouldnt say today is different from 30 or 50 years ago.

 

[kickass]

so because my friend is an actor i need to support pretty young faces for leading blocbusters?

he can get a jobe in a sitcom or he get a job in smallville or melrose place.

Yeah, except, NO.

Like many people here have already said, it's all about the role. Who cares about pretty young faces if those pretty young faces can ACT. What is really comes down to is jealousy, and people are haters towards anyone younger than them.

We already have more than enough young actors who are terrific in what they do. There's no question about it. What's the problem?

 

[Project862006]

please show me these young pretty boy leading men lol

tatum is the only one i can see


90% of the leading actors today

Depp
Pitt
Butler
Damon
DiCaprio
Will Smith
Bale
Jackman
RDJ

are all over 35

 

[Brother Jack]

What does he mean exactly? That there are too many movies about young people? Or that too many young people play they are old people? If he means that, I sure haven't noticed...

In principle I do tend to agree that older leading men are more interesting, but that is usually because the roles tend to be better written. Although it is hard to put any kind of rule when it comes to these kinds of things. Scratch that, it's impossible.

What I think he means is that there are too many films being made today that dumbed down to appeal to a very young audience, which includes casting young actors for things. Casting young leads isn't bad on principle, but it is a problem when those actors suck.

 

[Silvermoth]

In Jones' defense, he specifically mentioned leading men in their early twenties. Since Jake Gylenhaal is in his late twenties, the comments are still sensible and do not at all make him a hypocrite.

 

[Hunter Rider]

In Jones' defense, he specifically mentioned leading men in their early twenties. Since Jake Gylenhaal is in his late twenties, the comments are still sensible and do not at all make him a hypocrite.

They aren't sensible b/c the main stars in movies are all over 30 and Jake looks a LOT younger than 29.

 

[terry78]

I think in essence he wants more Sam Rockwells and Daniel Craigs and less CW stars.

 

[MadVillainy]

I think in essence he wants more Sam Rockwells and Daniel Craigs and less CW stars.

BUt how many CW stars are big leading men?