Avery Brooks career. Or is he with the prophets?

[Mr. Scott]

I have always wondered why Avery Brooks did not break into the "A" List of actors. I am sure the man is very wealthy and had an excellent career, but he is as good Denzel Washington, or Samuel L. Jackson, black actors of similiar age who gets starring roles. Denzel Washington started on TV, while Samuel L. Jackson basically came from nowhere. I mean, John Travolta is one of the best paid actors in the business, why, I don't know.

His breakout role was on the TV show "Spencer for Hire", playing Hawk, which was on three seasons and then headlined a spinoff which was cancelled after one season. Then, he did some Spencer for hire movies and DS9 in the 1990's. This was his busiest decade. After 2001, nothing.

He has only been in two major motion pictures, as a supporting role in "American History X" (which also has an actress for Voyager in it (Kes) , in the only thing outside of Trek I have seen her in.) and another film called Fifteen Minutes which came out in 2001, three years after DS9. This film had DeNiro, Kelsey Grammar, Edward Burns, a lot of stars.

Then poof, the man disappeared off the radar of mass media. It's like he and Joyce Dewitt took the slow boat to the other side of the Universe. In the 10 years since, he has done no film work. Nothing. No movies, no TV. Not even a one shot guest role on Law and Order. He does live theater now. My guess is he made enough money to make him happy and he does what he likes to do. I wish we would see more of him on film or television. I never saw Spencer for Hire as a kid and have only seen him in DS9 and American History X. Basically, I could watch three seasons of Specer for Hire, one season of his spinoff show Hawk, and "15 Minutes" and I have seen his whole body of work. His whole film/television career was less than 20 years.

Lastly, Star Trek hired mostly television actors, actors who do mostly series TV work and not headliners in films. Scott Bakula is a good example of this. He translates well on T.V, but not in a two hour movie format. I also thinks that for whatever reason, Star Trek stereotypes actors which makes it difficult to get work except in the genre of science fiction, series which are few and far between at times on television. I think this was some of the reasoning behind Terry Farrell bolting DS9, to do something different and not be typecast. But she is a TV actress, while someone like Julia Roberts is a movie actress. I just think that Brooks had the quality to be a major motion picture star and for the most part it did not happen. Why?

Any thoughts?

 

[Joel_Kirk]

My thought is this:

Mr. Brooks is also a stage actor. Just because he isn't onscreen daily doesn't mean he is not working.

He has some affiliation with Rutger's University, the theater area, I believe (one reason I was considering attending that college).

Not everyone want's to be 'A'-list individual; many are content just to be working.

No doubt there will be other 'thoughts'...

 

[John Picard]

My thought is this:

Mr. Brooks is also a stage actor. Just because he isn't onscreen daily doesn't mean he is not working.

He has some affiliation with Rutger's University, the theater area, I believe (one reason I was considering attending that college).

Not everyone want's to be 'A'-list individual; many are content just to be working.

No doubt there will be other 'thoughts'...

You hit the nail on the head. Mr Brooks is an accomplished Shakespearean actor, and IIRC he recited a complete soliloquy from Macbeth on one of the late night talks shows a few years back.

 

[DevilEyes]

Brooks doesn't strike me as a movie actor. He doesn't even strike me as TV actor as much as a stage actor who had a major role on TV, but Trek, particularly DS9, has always employed a lot of stage actors. I can't see his style working on most other TV shows that are less theatrical in nature.

As Joel observed above, if someone is not on film or TV screens it doesn't mean they aren't working - and some actors might prefer theatre to TV and movies, just like, in this day and age especially, some might prefer TV to movies. Why do you think that being an A-lister is the pinnacle of achievement? Sure, it pays more, but if you actually care for the artistic side of the acting job? Let's face it, most of the Hollywood blockbusters are rather formulaic, and many of the A-list stars aren't among the best actors out there, and quite a few of them are basically playing the same role in every movie. You'll often find better and more challenging roles on TV. As Mary McDonnell said when someone asked her a silly question in a con, "What is a film actress doing in a TV show", Roslin on BSG was a much better and more complex role than any she has ever been in any movie. And there are certainly a lot of great roles an actor can get to play in theatre.

 

[flemm]

There are certainly plenty of actors out there who find stage work more fulfilling than film or television. As someone who did a lot of theatre at the collegiate level and a bit of amateur film work, I can understand why. Stage acting allows the actor more freedom (at least in certain respects) than screen work, which is almost like a permanent rehearsal: on stage you have an uninterrupted period of time to develop your character and connect with the audience in ways that are impossible on film. The theater is a living, breathing moment, a collective experience that film does not allow for.

I have no idea, of course, why Brooks has done more stage work before and after Trek than anything else. Perhaps he has been trying to get screen work but has just failed. However, more likely he is mostly just interested in the theater moreso than film/tv, and doesn't need the money (which certainly motivates a lot of stage actors to do Law & Order guest appearances and so on). It's pretty funny when you go to any local theater in the NY area, almost everybody has an episode of Law & Order to their credit. If Brooks' main desire were to do screen work I have no doubt he would be doing more of it (not that he would be an A-list actor, which is of course another thing entirely and extremely unlikely for him or anyone).

Regardless of why, I think it's pretty clear even from his work on DS9 that Brooks is a natural born stage actor. He has all the instincts that you need on stage: expansive gestures, booming voice, emphatic speech patterns, larger than life expressions. Whatever the reason, I expect he's doing what he does best. There's a lot of interesting and important work done in the theater that the general public will never know anything about.

 

[TheGodBen]

The reason is quite simple: Samuel L Jackson has a condition in his contract that he must appear in 90% of all movies, so he keeps getting the role of "black guy" thereby keeping aspiring black actors like Avery Brooks out of movies. Denzel Washington and Morgan Freeman fight over the other 10%, while guys like Avery Brooks are forced to do ads spouting technobabble. It's a sad state of affairs.

 

[C.E. Evans]

I believe there's an old Vulcan proverb:

"Not everyone can be William Shatner."

 

[Navaros]

I think the reason that Brooks was never an A-list actor is simply because his acting often isn't very good. Brooks is only a good actor when he is called to act like a normal person. But when he has to show emotion, he cannot handle it.

i.e. Just look at him in "The Big Hit," he comes off like a clown of an amateur actor in that.

Brooks' acting is especially unbelievable and hokey when he has to flip out, as seen several times in DS9, i.e. screaming "I AMMMMMMMMMMMMMM!" at Dukat in WYLB, or his flip out scene in FBTS (some say his acting here is good because he is going crazy, but really, that's just a weak excuse for his terrible acting.)

 

[indolover]

DS9 never had big ratings. And Spencer for Hire was mainly a cult show. Sir Patrick Stewart became a world famous actor since he was the main character and best actor in TNG, and TNG had good ratings.

If DS9 was more ingrained into pop culture like TNG is (well who apart from Trek fans know who Sisko is, even though Sisko is a badass captain?) then maybe Brooks could have starred in Hollywood films.

 

[JarodRussell]

I think it's save to say that Avery Brooks is very content with his career. I think his heart is more with being a stage actor and professor at Rutgers University.

Except for Shatner and Stewart, who else became an A-list actor of the regular cast members?

 

[Joel_Kirk]

DS9 never had big ratings. And Spencer for Hire was mainly a cult show. Sir Patrick Stewart became a world famous actor since he was the main character and best actor in TNG, and TNG had good ratings.

So, because of Patrick Stewart, TNG was known from California to Botswana...to the Brazilian Amazon jungles?

All other performers in TNG were just horrible, compared to Patrick Stewart? (Meaning, for all we know, Sir Patrick Stewart could have been the sole performer on TNG, and it would have become the international hit....the Titanic or Avatar of television?)

If DS9 was more ingrained into pop culture like TNG is (well who apart from Trek fans know who Sisko is, even though Sisko is a badass captain?) then maybe Brooks could have starred in Hollywood films.

So, if DS9 was known from California to Botswana...to the Brazilian Amazon Jungles...and talked about daily by people of all ages, backgrounds....pop songs sung on the radio....then Brooks should have starred in Hollywood films?

 

[indolover]

none else that I can think of. No Voyager, Enterprise or DS9 cast are A-list really.

Takei, Nimoy, well all of the living TOS cast are A-list, and again this is down to pop culture/ratings. TOS IMO was poo, but it still is the Trek series (along with TNG) that the average Joe knows about the most.

 

[Joel_Kirk]

none else that I can think of. No Voyager, Enterprise or DS9 cast are A-list really.

Takei, Nimoy, well all of the living TOS cast are A-list, and again this is down to pop culture/ratings. TOS IMO was poo, but it still is the Trek series (along with TNG) that the average Joe knows about the most.

So, Takei, Nimoy (being 'A-list,' as you say) are able to command a movie on their own? Sir Patrick Stewart is able to command a film on his name alone?

All this because TOS (being poo next to TNG) is associated with Sir Patrick Stewart? (Of course, whom any average Joe would know).

Interesting....

 

[indolover]

DS9 never had big ratings. And Spencer for Hire was mainly a cult show. Sir Patrick Stewart became a world famous actor since he was the main character and best actor in TNG, and TNG had good ratings.

So, because of Patrick Stewart, TNG was known from California to Botswana...to the Brazilian Amazon jungles?

All other performers in TNG were just horrible, compared to Patrick Stewart? (Meaning, for all we know, Sir Patrick Stewart could have been the sole performer on TNG, and it would have become the international hit....the Titanic or Avatar of television?)

If DS9 was more ingrained into pop culture like TNG is (well who apart from Trek fans know who Sisko is, even though Sisko is a badass captain?) then maybe Brooks could have starred in Hollywood films.

So, if DS9 was known from California to Botswana...to the Brazilian Amazon Jungles...and talked about daily by people of all ages, backgrounds....pop songs sung on the radio....then Brooks should have starred in Hollywood films?

IMO, Stewart was the best actor in TNG. and because of its high ratings, and because he was the main character in the show, this is why he has starred in a lot of Hollywood films.

And yes, if DS9 was more popular of a show, Brooks may have got more Hollywood leads. This is how most former TV stars got into Hollywood movies. Think of Tom Selleck or Teri Hatcher, both made their names in TV first before getting into movies.

 

[JarodRussell]

Takei and Nimoy are not A-listers. After looking up what A-list means exactly I also take back my claim that Shatner and Stewart are A-listers. Yet Shatner and Stewart are the most active/famous/lucky actors in the business. They are compared to the Star Trek cast what Harrison Ford is to the Star Wars cast. Well, not really. Shatner and Stewart are the ones who were already quite active before taking the roles in Star Trek.

 

[Joel_Kirk]

DS9 never had big ratings. And Spencer for Hire was mainly a cult show. Sir Patrick Stewart became a world famous actor since he was the main character and best actor in TNG, and TNG had good ratings.

So, because of Patrick Stewart, TNG was known from California to Botswana...to the Brazilian Amazon jungles?

All other performers in TNG were just horrible, compared to Patrick Stewart? (Meaning, for all we know, Sir Patrick Stewart could have been the sole performer on TNG, and it would have become the international hit....the Titanic or Avatar of television?)

If DS9 was more ingrained into pop culture like TNG is (well who apart from Trek fans know who Sisko is, even though Sisko is a badass captain?) then maybe Brooks could have starred in Hollywood films.

So, if DS9 was known from California to Botswana...to the Brazilian Amazon Jungles...and talked about daily by people of all ages, backgrounds....pop songs sung on the radio....then Brooks should have starred in Hollywood films?

IMO, Stewart was the best actor in TNG. and because of its high ratings, and because he was the main character in the show, this is why he has starred in a lot of Hollywood films.

Hmmm, Gunmen...Dune...Lifeforce...TNG films...

Yes, those are a lot of Hollywood films...

And yes, if DS9 was more popular of a show, Brooks may have got more Hollywood leads. This is how most former TV stars got into Hollywood movies. Think of Tom Selleck or Teri Hatcher, both made their names in TV first before getting into movies.

Very sad for Brooks, to not have the huge success of Tom Selleck and Teri Hatcher...

If only DS9 was the popular show....that the average Joe (or Jane) knew..

Drat.

 

[indolover]

Very sad for Brooks, to not have the huge success of Tom Selleck and Teri Hatcher...

If only DS9 was the popular show....that the average Joe (or Jane) knew..

Drat.

yep, the reason hardly anybody outside of Trek fandom knows who Brooks is.

The reason for this, as I have said or at least alluded to, is that Brooks has done nothing of note to warrant being a household name. Shatner and Stewart are stars largely because they were the main characters in the most known of Trek series. How else do big TV stars, since Shatner and Stewart became big due to TV, get big? It's due to ratings and exposure. TOS and TNG had this, whilst DS9 did not, even if DS9 was a rocking show.

So to answer the OP again, Brooks never got any big Hollywood deals since he could not cotton on to success from television. A film studio couldn't place him in a film and draw people in it since it has the famous character from DS9. It's just a good way of drawing extra box office revenue, since many people see films if it contains a favourite or well known actor. Yep, spend tens of millions of dollars on a film in its production, with no way of reaping a good return on it.

Stewart was active before TNG, but he was a world star before it, certainly not.

 

[Joel_Kirk]

Very sad for Brooks, to not have the huge success of Tom Selleck and Teri Hatcher...

If only DS9 was the popular show....that the average Joe (or Jane) knew..

Drat.

yep, the reason hardly anybody outside of Trek fandom knows who Brooks is.

Wow....

You state this as fact!

You must have traveled far and wide to really set that stone....

The reason for this, as I have said or at least alluded to, is that Brooks has done nothing of note to warrant being a household name. Shatner and Stewart are stars largely because they were the main characters in the most known of Trek series. How else do big TV stars, since Shatner and Stewart became big due to TV, get big? It's due to ratings and exposure. TOS and TNG had this, whilst DS9 did not, even if DS9 was a rocking show.

Drat.

If only DS9 was widely known outside the fandom.

So to answer the OP again, Brooks never got any big Hollywood deals since he could not cotton on to success from television. A film studio couldn't place him in a film and draw people in it since it has the famous character from DS9. It's just a good way of drawing extra box office revenue, since many people see films if it contains a favourite or well known actor. Yep, spend tens of millions of dollars on a film in its production, with no way of reaping a good return on it.

....So, you're certain that Brooks is in a room somewhere upset that that he didn't have the 'most popular show' and was daily receiving those Hollywood deals?

Stewart was active before TNG, but he was a world star before it, certainly not.

So, he was active before TNG, and was a 'world star'....but he certainly 'was not' active before TNG....and a world star?

He...was both at the same time???!!

No wonder he got all those Hollywood deals!!

 

[indolover]

Very sad for Brooks, to not have the huge success of Tom Selleck and Teri Hatcher...

If only DS9 was the popular show....that the average Joe (or Jane) knew..

Drat.

yep, the reason hardly anybody outside of Trek fandom knows who Brooks is.

Wow....

You state this as fact!

You must have traveled far and wide to really set that stone....:lol





Drat.

If only DS9 was widely known outside the fandom.

So to answer the OP again, Brooks never got any big Hollywood deals since he could not cotton on to success from television. A film studio couldn't place him in a film and draw people in it since it has the famous character from DS9. It's just a good way of drawing extra box office revenue, since many people see films if it contains a favourite or well known actor. Yep, spend tens of millions of dollars on a film in its production, with no way of reaping a good return on it.

....So, you're certain that Brooks is in a room somewhere upset that that he didn't have the 'most popular show' and was daily receiving those Hollywood deals?

Stewart was active before TNG, but he was a world star before it, certainly not.

So, he was active before TNG, and was a world star....but he certainly 'was not' active before TNG....and a world star?

He was both at the same time?!!

No wonder he got all those Hollywood deals!!

Certain of what? lol.. My argument draws on fact. TV stars in highly rated TV shows often get breaks in Hollywood films, since studios cotton onto their success. This is just one explanation why Brooks has not been heavily involved in Hollywood. Whether Brooks gives a shit at not being in big Hollywood films, who knows, i cannot look into his soul lol. He more likely than not is just happy doing theatre, or just chilling and relaxing. he is over sixty, so why not? most people reaching that age look forward to chilling in retirement, since he is coming up to that age.

As for whether Brooks is widely known outside Trek fandom, well neither of us can say for certain, since we don't know all six billion persons on Earth. Most persons in the world though don't care much for science fiction or Star Trek, and if they do only have knowledge of the most known characters, such as Kirk, Spock, Scotty, Picard, Data, Worf, etc

But Trek actors such as Shatner and Stewart certainly have far more media exposure than Brooks does, this is not so contentious. There are no widely popular Brooks roasts, and Brooks has never received the highest civilian honour in his own country. Most persons in acting only receive such high awards in large part due to being highly noted.

 

[Joel_Kirk]

yep, the reason hardly anybody outside of Trek fandom knows who Brooks is.

Wow....

You state this as fact!

You must have traveled far and wide to really set that stone....:lol





Drat.

If only DS9 was widely known outside the fandom.



....So, you're certain that Brooks is in a room somewhere upset that that he didn't have the 'most popular show' and was daily receiving those Hollywood deals?

Stewart was active before TNG, but he was a world star before it, certainly not.

So, he was active before TNG, and was a world star....but he certainly 'was not' active before TNG....and a world star?

He was both at the same time?!!

No wonder he got all those Hollywood deals!!

Certain of what? lol.. My argument draws on fact. TV stars in highly rated TV shows often get breaks in Hollywood films, since studios cotton onto their success. This is just one explanation why Brooks has not been heavily involved in Hollywood. Whether Brooks gives a shit at not being in big Hollywood films, who knows, i cannot look into his soul lol. He more likely than not is just happy doing theatre, or just chilling and relaxing. he is over sixty, so why not? most people reaching that age look forward to chilling in retirement, since he is coming up to that age.

So based on your extensive, factual knowledge he is 'chilling'...either unhappy with theater or living out his very old age.

Awww....

As for whether Brooks is widely known outside Trek fandom, well neither of us can say for certain, since we don't know all six billion persons on Earth. Most persons in the world though don't care much for science fiction or Star Trek, and if they do only have knowledge of the most known characters, such as Kirk, Spock, Scotty, Picard, Data, Worf, etc

So all six billion people who don't care for science fiction (or Trek) would only know Kirk, Spock, Scotty, Picard, Data, Worf...by name, no less....since they are the most known characters...

Based on your factual knowledge, would they know Sulu, Crusher, LaForge....?

But Trek actors such as Shatner and Stewart certainly have far more media exposure than Brooks does, this is not so contentious. There are no widely popular Brooks roasts, and Brooks has never received the highest civilian honour in his own country. Most persons in acting only receive such high awards in large part due to being highly noted.

Poor Mr. Brooks.

He didn't have a roast....or was knighted by President Obama...Bush...or Clinton...

What a world we live in....