I am not even sure if there is an A list anymore instead of just a huge b list. Fine by, spread the opurtunity for great roles around.
After Star Trek 3 would you want an immediate reboot?
- Thread starter xavier
- Start date
I am not even sure if there is an A list anymore instead of just a huge b list. Fine by, spread the opurtunity for great roles around.
I just adore Zoe.
Surely Chris Pine is an A-lister as well, or on the way up if nothing else?
...who writes these lists by the way?
I just adore Zoe.
Surely Chris Pine is an A-lister as well, or on the way up if nothing else?
...who writes these lists by the way?
Indeed.
Also, Simon Pegg and Karl Urban are at least A- lists, if not above. I have loved everything that I have seen him in, and Simon Pegg is a talented actor, both live performance and voice acting.
I think a question is more of who will be playing the villain in 3.
I already know what the next few films will be.
nuTVH we get a humpback whale from the past. And then the humpback whale turns in to a celestial being and has an epic battle with the cylinder in earths orbit.
Then we get nuTFF. Pretty much just the same movie.
Then we get nuTUC. No more shakespeare, that'll turn off the lowest common denominator. Spock will hate klingons, and kirk will volunteer him for the mission. The cloaked bird of Prey will also be impervious to all phaser and torpedo fire, and be the size of 10 enterprises.
And then we get the swan song, as kirk narrates the opening monologue to trek, while the enterprise sails off in to the stars.
nuTVH we get a humpback whale from the past. And then the humpback whale turns in to a celestial being and has an epic battle with the cylinder in earths orbit.
Then we get nuTFF. Pretty much just the same movie.
Then we get nuTUC. No more shakespeare, that'll turn off the lowest common denominator. Spock will hate klingons, and kirk will volunteer him for the mission. The cloaked bird of Prey will also be impervious to all phaser and torpedo fire, and be the size of 10 enterprises.
And then we get the swan song, as kirk narrates the opening monologue to trek, while the enterprise sails off in to the stars.
I just adore Zoe.
Surely Chris Pine is an A-lister as well, or on the way up if nothing else?
...who writes these lists by the way?
Indeed.
Also, Simon Pegg and Karl Urban are at least A- lists, if not above. I have loved everything that I have seen him in, and Simon Pegg is a talented actor, both live performance and voice acting.
I think a question is more of who will be playing the villain in 3.
Neither of them are A list. And there's no above A list.
Dicaprio, fassbender, tom hardy, christian bale, phoenix, downey jr., scarlett, charlize, jennifer lawrence, etc. are A listers.
Any future Trek would be well advised to steer clear of the kind of ultra ham fisted use of Shakespeare seen in STVI. It was dumb.wulfio said:
I just adore Zoe.
Surely Chris Pine is an A-lister as well, or on the way up if nothing else?
...who writes these lists by the way?
Indeed.
Also, Simon Pegg and Karl Urban are at least A- lists, if not above. I have loved everything that I have seen him in, and Simon Pegg is a talented actor, both live performance and voice acting.
I think a question is more of who will be playing the villain in 3.
Neither of them are A list. And there's no above A list.
Dicaprio, fassbender, tom hardy, christian bale, phoenix, downey jr., scarlett, charlize, jennifer lawrence, etc. are A listers.
I will disagree with Pegg not being on that list, as he is a very skilled actor. Urban is still questionable but I think that is because of the roles that he has played not necessarily a lack of talent.
However, I personally have not been impressed with Lawrence, but I am not familiar enough with her work to speak with any confidence. I would not be inclined to put her on the same level as Scarlett, though.
I think Shakespeare can be used, in the right doses. The overplay in TUC would not work, but the ideas of to be found in Shakespeare, as well as allusions, can work well. Trek has demonstrated that time and again.
It helps to remember that "A-list" has a lot less to do with talent or acting skill than it does with bankability. There have been lots of very good actors who were never A-list, and there have been more than a few A-listers who really weren't good actors but had sufficient charisma or appeal to carry a film and guarantee its box office success.
I didn't mind it. It served some purpose. Chang gives himself away at Kirk's trial with the Richard II quote.
Which should be enough to impress me? There are several Oscars with fewer awards that are more talented.
As M'Sharak pointed out, "A List" does not mean "most talented. I stand corrected in my understanding of "A List." In my opinion, Pegg should be on the A list for his talent-that doesn't always translate in to money, though. Scarlett definitely deserves her place there, but I will always question the decisions of Hollywood as to what they consider "good"
That is my small rebellion. YMMV
Yes, A list unfortunately does not always equate with talent. In my circle of friends and work colleagues Simon Pegg and Karl Urban do not register with them. They know Chris Pine and Zoe but maybe because Simon and Karl are not American based they don't know them? I can't really give you a reason other than to say that these two men are not 'famous' 'famous'. They can pretty much walk down the streets and not be noticed. Rarely if ever are they mentioned on the gossip pages.
Exactly I agree. the term A list can not really be defined as one thing. there are three types of A list Actors.
1. The first one represents the actors know for charisma and maybe great looks and can open a film but they have never really been considered as serious actors perfect examples are people like Vin Dessel or the rock aka Dwayne Johnson
2. The second type of A list are the ones who do not have a great track record at the box office or in terms of commercial earning (you hardly see them on any forbes richest lists of film stars) but yet they have gone on to win or get nominated for major Hollywood awards like Oscars, Batfas and golden globes examples of this actors are Hilary Swank and Daniel Day Lewis
3. The third type of A list are the ones that have achieved success in both the first two areas, in the sense that they are considered serious actors who have been nominated and won lots of oscars and golden globes and other serious Hollywood awards but at the same time they are extremely bankable, have achieved great box office records and have had great commercial success and acclaim in different sort of film from fantasy to sci fi to comedy to drama . examples of this actors are tom hanks, will smith. the late Robin Williams and tom cruise.
So yes, A list is not as simple to define as most people say. I consider all trek actors as a list because they do fall under one of this 3 categories although Zoe Saldana seems to be the most successful of all trek actors at this moment.
Last edited:
Ya and no studio will give a $200 mill movie to either Pegg or Urban to star in, therefore they're not A-listers.
I love them both, but they're not.
As for the talent thing, as it has been alluded to already, talent != A-list. Although looking at my list I will concede now that they were all ultra talented, so I will throw Sam Worthington on the A-list list as well.
I love them both, but they're not.
As for the talent thing, as it has been alluded to already, talent != A-list. Although looking at my list I will concede now that they were all ultra talented, so I will throw Sam Worthington on the A-list list as well.
what kind of trust? to star in a big budget film?
Why wait? I'd like a good reboot right now.
The trust that his name alone guarantees 200 mill if there are a lot of special effects.
Similar threads
