In the second week of the class one of the key things I think we talked about in the first part of the week was about actors and the movie being made with that actor in mind vs the actor going to be in an already constructed plot. This also ties into actors training and how they portray themselves in their roll which we discussed in the second half of the week. I think both topics are interesting and go hand in hand with each other.

Now for the first part I want to bring in some examples of the ways in which certain films have gone about this.

The first actor I want to talk about is Ryan Reynolds as seen above. I think he is a fantastic example of the idea of a movie being made for a specific actor. I have noticed that more and more of his roles lately seem to be very similar to the way he portrays himself when he isn’t acting. I think this also has a lot to do with him being a producer on said films, for example Deadpool and Free Guy. By creating movies that he seems to play a character with energy similar to his own he creates a following purely around himself and his personality that he shows which makes fans want to see movies he is in because they already know what they will get out of them.

On the opposite side would be actors that have a following and create a brand for themselves based on the knowledge of them simply being an amazing actor. Their fans know that whatever that actor is in will be well done and therefore they want to watch anything with them in it, I think a great example of this is Anne Hathaway.

Anne Hathaway is an amazing actor that will play a huge range of roles. She will go from winning an Academy Award in a film like Les Misérables to staring in a comedy that gets 13% on Rotten Tomatoes like The Husltle. Her playing such a range in characters in such a range of genres keeps her fans interested and knowing that she can play her role well in whatever she’s in which draws people to seeing her films, instead of the film drawing a fan to the actor like in series like Harry Potter or The Hunger Games. 

Now in the second half of the week we talked about the training of an actor and how they portray themselves on the screen. In the article Bette Davis: actor/star the topic of a stars training and acting techniques is brought up in regards to how actors can use their certain acting techniques to maintain their image throughout their different works. 

In the article it brings up the idea that I talked about earlier in that some actors have a role that they have constructed and they have an image that makes their role for example “Greta Garbo’s and Marlene Dietrich’s star status rested largely on their beauty, glamour, sexual allure, mystery, charm and charisma, Davis (supposedly lacking these qualities) achieved stardom, success and recognition through her ability to create credible characters, to engage her audience emotionally (usually provoking tears) and to produce original, compelling and dramatic performances.” (Shingler & Gledhill, 2008). This drives home the idea of stars using their ability to act as their image instead of it being based on their appearance or personality. 

The article talks about the ways in which Bette Davis played her roles and specifically why she was regarded as such a good actor. The way she threw herself into the role using her whole body from her background in interpretive dance and didn’t just recite her lines contributed to making her such an all around amazing actor.

While some stars make a name for themselves with their personality, charm, and looks, others rely on their background and training to really show why they deserve the fame that they have. Both ways of going about being a celebrity have been shown in the past to work quite well and still to this day the same strategies are being implemented. It’s interesting to look at a movie today and wonder which really came first when they went to make the movie. Was it the movie made with the star in mind or did the star make themself into the character they were given. It truly is a which came first the chicken or the egg question.