web
counter
 

The Slow Rise and Precipitous Fall of Ryan Reynolds' Career

By Dustin Rowles | Posted Under Box Office Round-Ups | Comments (57)



ryan-reynolds-blad647701.jpg

A few weeks ago over on Grantland, Bill Simmons, a.k.a. The Sports Guy, attempted to write intelligently on movies, which is a bit like asking me to write intelligently on the NBA (note: I don’t know anything about the NBA). Bill Simmons basically has three frames of references for all of his pop-culture knowledge: “Saved by the Bell,” “90210,” and Rounders, and yet the man has managed to build a huge career out of basically transcribing phone conversations between himself, his friends, and his father all the while boring us with stories about his fantasy leagues.

What’s frustrating about the piece in question, however, is that — as dumb as his reasoning was — his conclusion was right. In the post, he posited that “People believe Ryan Reynolds is a movie star (even though he isn’t),” and then he went on to disprove the notion that Ryan Reynolds is a “movie star” by comparing Reynolds’ early work to a baseball player’s batting average. The analogy was basically that, in the first ten years of his career, Ryan Reynolds was a .220 hitter, and even though he had a hit with The Proposal, you can’t be a “Movie Star” without career-long consistency.

The analogy is dumb for a number of reasons, chief among them that Bill Simmons is an idiot. The other is that the analogy doesn’t work because, unlike most baseball players, movie stars don’t start out as .300 hitters and maintain career-long consistency. Some of the biggest movie stars “struggled in the minors” for years before finding a break. Look at George Clooney, who spent time on “The Facts of Life” and “ER” and a series of under-performing films before he became a “Movie Star.” In fact, Clooney still only has four films that have broken $100 million — Batman and Robin and the three Ocean’s films — and yet there is little doubt that Clooney is considered a “Movie Star.” Translated into Bill Simmon’s baseball analogy, however, Clooney is a .240 career hitter who had a couple of decent years when he was surrounded by the talent-heavy Yankees.

In the end, though, Simmons was right about Reynolds. He’s not a movie star. At least not yet, and he probably never will be in the Capitol-A MOVIE STAR sense. The failure of his latest film, The Change-Up — which debuted at number four this weekend with only $13.5 million — illustrates Simmons’ point: Reynolds can’t open a film. Ryan Reynolds also gave us an under-performing Green Lantern earlier this summer, and before that, he attempted to use his newfound The Proposal clout to carry a low-budget indie flick, Buried, which barely made $1 million at the box office (despite the fact that it was a very good movie).

But that clout was illusory. The Proposal succeeded on the backs of the well-liked Sandra Bullock and surprisingly, Betty White. Ryan Reynolds was just a pair of charming abs with a quick delivery in that movie. In fact, discounting Buried, Reynolds’ best two films were Adventureland (in which he had a small supporting role) and Definitely, Maybe, which didn’t even muster $35 million at the box office. Reynolds’ best performance was — and will probably always remain — his supporting role in Blade: Trinity. More like that, R-Squared. Put away the goddamn superhero costumes and pick up a pair of pistols.

What we’ve seen this summer is not so much a Movie Star disappointing as much as — conceding Simmons’ point but not his reasoning — Hollywood’s failed attempt to turn a modest comedic actor with a well-sculpted body into a Movie Star. Reynolds is, sad to say, best suited to romantic comedies, and even then, best suited to romantic comedies top-lined by A-list female stars. And if he wants to grow the beard and take out some assholes as part of an action ensemble, that’d work, too. He should join forces with Jeffrey Dean Morgan and Idris Elba in that club of not-quite-and-never-truly-will-be A-list stars.

At this point, Ryan Reynolds only has one chance left to succeed as a major movie star, next year’s Safe House with Denzel Washington. It was a much sought-after role, but my guess is that if it does succeed, Denzel will get the credit. If it fails, then it’s just another in a series of Double-R’s bombs and the plug will finally be pulled on Deadpool. Either way, I suspect that Reynolds will ultimately return from whence he came: Bumbling around in mediocre romantic comedies until he moves on to mediocre family fare.

There were other films this weekend at the box office, if you’re curious. Rise of the Planet of the Apes, which features another one of those not-quite-and-never-will-be A-list stars in James Franco, over-performed with a solid $54 million. That number is not only good for Rise, but it’s a boost for critics, who actually did have a rare effect in reversing some of the preconceived opinions on this movie (preconceptions, admittedly, that were created in part by negative pre-release coverage on those very movie sites that provided positive reviews, ours included). It really is an outstanding movie, and demonstrates — as The Dark Knight and Inception before it — that there is an audience for darker films. That’s a lesson I’m sure that Hollywood will once again ignore in favor of another formulaic superhero origins story.

In at number two this weekend, The Smurfs has held well, losing only 41 percent off its opening weekend, adding another $21 million. Meanwhile, Cowboys and Aliens had a much deeper 56 percent drop. Standing at $67 million, the $163 million budgeted film may ultimately fall short of $100 million.

Meanwhile, a trinity of the summer’s best comedies (along with Bridesmaids) comes in at 7, 8, and 9: Crazy, Stupid, Love ($12 million), Friends with Benefits ($4.7 million) and Horrible Bosses ($4.6 million). Expect all three of those films to outperform the likes of Cowboys and Aliens on DVD. And that’s all I have for you this weekend.









Each Time You Like, Share, Tweet or Stumble a Pajiba Post, An Angel Does the Paul Rudd Dance



When I See the Way You Paint Your Lips and I Smell Your Perfume: The Worst Fake Blondes | Congratulations On Your Creepy New Pod Baby: The Odd Life Of Timothy Green Trailer









Comments

Hey now, give Change-Up some credit for being a terrible tired concept, it's not entirely up to Reynolds to make it succeed...anybody around his age asked to play a smarmy douchebag who learns a lesson in love after inexplicably trading bodies with a family man would have thrown up his hands and said "Screw it! I'd rather do commercials!"

Okay, maybe it is Reynolds' fault.

Posted by: LEROOOY at August 7, 2011 11:05 PM

All I got from this is that Dustin is terribly, terribly jealous of this Bill Simmons fellow. I'm going to mention his name again in case it wasn't said enough--Bill Simmons.

Dustin doesn't like/wants to be Bill Simmons. Bill Simmons.

Posted by: Shawn at August 7, 2011 11:08 PM

Bill Simmons Bill Simmons Bill Simmons Bill Simmons Bill Simmons Bill Simmons Bill Simmons Bill Simmons Bill Simmons Bill Simmons Bill Simmons Bill Simmons Bill Simmons Bill Simmons Bill Simmons Bill Simmons Bill Simmons Bill Simmons Bill Simmons Bill Simmons Bill Simmons Bill Simmons Bill Simmons Bill Simmons Bill Simmons Bill Simmons Bill Simmons Bill Simmons Bill Simmons Bill Simmons Bill Simmons Bill Simmons Bill Simmons .... oh my, but this IS fun .... Bill Simmons Bill Simmons Bill Simmons Bill Simmons Bill Simmons Bill Simmons Bill Simmons Bill Simmons Bill Simmons Bill Simmons Bill Simmons Bill Simmons Bill Simmons Bill Simmons Bill Simmons Bill Simmons Bill Simmons Bill Simmons Bill Simmons Bill Simmons Bill Simmons Bill Simmons Bill Simmons Bill Simmons Bill Simmons !!!!!

Posted by: handy_man at August 7, 2011 11:43 PM

I wouldn't underestimate Ryan Reynolds. He is essentially the male version of Jennifer Aniston(except he doesn't have a pathetic personal life). By himself he is not much but you put him with the partner and stuff will happen. Not to mention there is always Deadpool. If you get the a decent 50 mil budget(which is more then enough for an action movie. Seriously what is it with all those huge buget movies altely. It's like directors can't handle money) I can easily see it making 150-200 mil with the right marketing

Posted by: Minto at August 7, 2011 11:44 PM

What we’ve seen this summer is not so much a Movie Star disappointing as much as Hollywood’s failed attempt to turn a modest comedic actor with a well-sculpted body into a Movie Star.

Thank you! I was gonna this bring up when Green Lantern bombed but yeah, Hollywood pushed him to the front when he should have saved his superhero card for The Flash in an ensemble cast like Jeremy Renner is doing now.

So who did RR screw over for the Green Lantern role? Does anyone know?

Posted by: haplo at August 8, 2011 12:05 AM

Anyone else find it interesting that the article linked to was dismissed as such:

The analogy is dumb for a number of reasons, chief among them that Bill Simmons is an idiot.

But the reviled analogy isn't present at all? Way to take a smug shit in your own Doucheflakes.

Posted by: really at August 8, 2011 12:16 AM

So let's spend 70% of an article talking about how much you dislike somebody even though you agree with him. I believe the quote I'm looking for is "Lighten up Francis."

Posted by: Matt at August 8, 2011 1:01 AM

Tell Ryan Reynolds I'll be parked a couple of blocks around the corner from Santa Monica Boulevard.

Wait, didn't I already see Mark-Paul Gosselaar down there in some Movie of the Week?

Posted by: Jerry at August 8, 2011 1:36 AM

I think his biggest problem is that he isn't in the least bit remarkable. He's cute, yes, but there's cuter guys out there. He's funny, but not that funny. He's made good movies, but he's not the best part about them. The guy is just OK. I mostly just remember him having a smirk, but I don't remember anything particularly outstanding about him. And you don't become a Movie Star unless you have something more than the average funny/cute guy out there. And he just doesn't. I don't think he has what it takes to really carry a movie on his own, and I think his year has proven that.

Posted by: Figgy at August 8, 2011 1:44 AM

Oh, and pairing him in a movie with Jason Bateman, who will never, ever, EVER even come close to being a Big Star? Whose stupid idea was that?

Posted by: Figgy at August 8, 2011 1:48 AM

Before we go any further, I think it's important to speak to Reynolds' choices for this year. One was a CGI-heavy third-tier superhero that most people couldn't pick out of a line-up. The other was a switched bodies comedy, which often are the Rob Schneider of comedy concepts. Ryan has to learn that it's just as important to pick the right project as it is to act the shit out of it.

That said, I wouldn't be so quick to write him off just yet for two reasons. One, besides Leo DiCaprio, there are very few actors in his age range that are bonafide stars (another one of the Golden Pajibans, Ryan Gosling, is starring in an ensemble rom-com where it's Steve Carrell leading the pack). Two, as you pointed out, George Clooney took a while to become a "Movie Star" -- remember when his first movies after "ER" were From Dusk Till Dawn and The Peacemaker? It takes time to become "Movie Star."

Posted by: Fredo at August 8, 2011 2:26 AM

Do I think Bill Simmons is a chauvinist asshole, at worst? Yes, I have read his Vegas articles, his WNBA comments, and seen all the many lists ranking female "worth" usually in terms of looks and perceived fuckability. But notice what I did there? I explained why I thought he was an chauvinist asshole.

Throwing out "he's an idiot" because you disagree with his comparison of movie stars to batting averages? Or because you disagree with his writing style? Well, that seems just a little "idiotic" considering I seem to remember one of your own writers utilizing the "retro diary" gimmick a few years back for some awards show article.

Obviously, even though we both have issues with him as maybe a person, we still read his articles. Why? Because he is an easy breezy read, and if you can get through infuriating entitled BOSTON BOSTON BOSTON articles, his gimmicks are relatable, and his persona is familiar. When he says "hey, Ryan Reynolds doesn't seem like a star to me", well it feels like he is just voicing what many of us have thought all along despite what "movie people" or pop culture experts have said.

For me personally, as a 28 year old woman who probably falls right into Ryan Reynolds target audience, R squared just doesn't do it. His eyes are a little too intense, his bite a little too sharp. Every smile will be a smirk and I'll always wonder what's going on inside that head. I imagine Ryan Renolds has an internal dialog going all the time that's cutting and brutally honest. Don't get me wrong, I'm sure it's HILARIOUS and I would love to hear it- but I wouldn't want it focused on me. Because of that disconnect, I'd probably Netflix his movies, but spend $13? Unless it's a great ensemble cast that can even him out-nah.

Posted by: brdkelli at August 8, 2011 4:09 AM

Jesus, I've had problems with some of Dustin's articles and reviews before, he seems to dismiss certain movies without being willing to give them a chance, not a great quality in a movie critic, and his review for Bridesmaids at one point basically said, "Like an Apatow movie only funnier, because it has women."
This article is the worst yet, you can't disparage a writer and article as an idiot and than in your own article reiterate all of the points he made in a far less thought out and more poorly written article. My problems with your writing tendencies aside that is beneath you.

Posted by: Matty at August 8, 2011 7:08 AM

...His eyes are a little too intense...

I would have more rudely described them as beady and close set.

Posted by: snapnhiss at August 8, 2011 7:29 AM

I still couldn't tell Ryan reynold and Jason Lee apart. I always credit "Earl" and Chipmunks to Ryan.
Note to self: Ryan is the sweet looking dude with sensitive eyes, Jason is Dave Grohl.

Posted by: Adrien at August 8, 2011 8:48 AM

I don't agree on your mention of James Franco. He's tomorrow's Tom Hanks, you can write that down.

Posted by: zito at August 8, 2011 8:49 AM

After 30 years of teaching actors, I will say this about RR, he isn't an actor he's a personality.

Posted by: Professor Isles at August 8, 2011 8:56 AM

"The guy is just OK. I mostly just remember him having a smirk, but I don't remember anything particularly outstanding about him. And you don't become a Movie Star unless you have something more than the average funny/cute guy out there."

If I may go Bill Simmons here for a moment, it's like picking a rookie to draft in the NBA. They need to have some sort of talent that makes them stand out. A player can be sub par in a number of areas, but if he can create his own shot then he'll stick with some team. Is Eddie Murphy a great actor? No, but during his peak run you knew when he showed up on screen he was going to be the funniest thing in it.

You could have subbed a lot of different guys into The Proposal and it wouldn't have made a difference. Interesting to think RR married Scarlett Johansson. It's like a Hollywood power couple and yet neither can carry a movie, but they get talked about ad nauseam on the internet due to their looks.

Posted by: Matt at August 8, 2011 9:00 AM

It'd be a shame if they pull the plug on Deadpool. That is the perfect role for RR. The only way it could be even better would be if Deadpool ran around shirtless all the time.

Posted by: MelBivDevoe at August 8, 2011 9:24 AM

Although Buried didn't make any money it showed RR has more range than people give him credit for. He's made some bad decisions but I'm not writing him off just yet.

Posted by: e at August 8, 2011 9:30 AM

Although Buried didn't make any money it showed RR has more range than people give him credit for. He's made some bad decisions but I'm not writing him off just yet.

Posted by: e at August 8, 2011 9:31 AM

Leaving aside the contentious Bill Simmons issue, Reynolds' best performance was - and will probably always remain - his role in Waiting.

Posted by: Pete at August 8, 2011 9:48 AM

Simmons may be an idiot, but he's used his pull at ESPN to get great projects off the ground that they otherwise would not have bothered with -- 30-for-30 was his brainchild, as was Grantland.

Posted by: sansho1 at August 8, 2011 9:51 AM

Two Guys, A Girl, and A Pizza Place was without a doubt his best performance. That show rules.

Posted by: quirk at August 8, 2011 10:08 AM

you wish you were the writer that simmons is....

Posted by: Greg at August 8, 2011 10:21 AM

i never understood Ryan Reynolds'appeal but he's really good in BURIED

Posted by: carrie at August 8, 2011 10:32 AM

I had no idea there was such a sensitive Bill Simmons nerve on this site. If I'd known, I'd have poked at that nerve YEARS AGO.

Seriously, though: Grantland is fantastic, and I pick on Simmons out of affection (how would I know that he only had three frames of reference if I didn't read his columns? Because he does. Have three frames of reference. I mean, really.)

And really, SportsGuy, tell me MORE about what your Dad thought of your fantasy draft? Or maybe reminisce some more about when you used to be on Kimmel. PLEASE DO TELL ME MORE ABOUT THAT TIME ON KIMMEL.

Posted by: Dustin Rowles at August 8, 2011 10:36 AM

Dustin, when I said that Simmons may be an idiot, what I meant was that Simmons may actually be an idiot.

Posted by: sansho1 at August 8, 2011 10:42 AM

Dustin, you cannot claim the Sports Guy has only three frames of reference and not mention The Karate Kid. At last count he had approximately 4,308 mentions of the movie in his column. I think Daniel-San has a byline on Grantland. I do approve at poking at people's raw nerves. Just keep away from You Can't Do That On Television (Greatest show ever!) or it's gonna get nasty.

Posted by: Mrcreosote at August 8, 2011 10:48 AM

Gunnery Sergeant Rowles: How tall are you, Private Simmons?

Private Bill Simmons: Sir, five-foot-nine, sir!

Gunnery Sergeant Rowles: Five-foot-nine. I didn't know they stacked shit that high.

Posted by: Friendless Nerd at August 8, 2011 10:50 AM

Dustin, if you care about your website, please leave the writing to professionals like TK, Daniel Carlson, Joanne Robinson and Cindy Davis. If you don't possess the self-awareness to realize just how far you've fallen since the beginning of Pajiba, then you truly are as ignorant as you come across in pieces like this one. The last decent (and I'm being generous) article you wrote was your review of V for Vendetta. Five years ago. You have been absolutely insufferable ever since. I know the tagline for this website is scathing reviews for bitchy people, but you've been trying way too hard for way too long. Be grateful that you have such talented writers contributing to Pajiba; take a backseat and let them do their thing. Please.

Posted by: Keith at August 8, 2011 10:55 AM

Dude, really?

Posted by: sansho1 at August 8, 2011 11:10 AM

You cant fool me! This article is just an excuse for you to post a shirtless pic of Reynolds. Your love for him will never fade.


As for Simmons when it comes to the NBA I listen to him. Anything else = just another idiot.

Posted by: logan at August 8, 2011 11:20 AM

You wanna know why I think you don't read Simmons even though you "know" his three pop culture reference points? Because those are the same three pop culture reference points that every jealous hack brings up in criticism of the Sports Guy. Here's a news flash for ya...Simmons very, very rarely brings up 90210, Saved by the Bell, or Rounders anymore. You're much more likely to see a reference to Jersey Shore, Real World Road Rules Challenge, or The Wire.

I enjoy reading (or hearing) Simmons' take on almost anything because he isn't (and doesn't pretend to be) an expert on anything except NBA basketball. I'm sorry if reading his take on entertainment hurts you because you think anybody who can't breakdown the ways in which modern superhero movies copy their themes from mid 20th century Japanese cinema shouldn't be able to talk about movies. Expertise is over rated; I enjoy Simmons' thoughts because they're ones that I could have too (if I was clever or funny enough).

Finally, don't cop out and say that you're just trying to hit some nerves and that you are picking on him out of affection. Maybe if you're comments went beyond "durr, he's an idiot" you'd come off as something besides a troll.

Posted by: Tyler at August 8, 2011 11:21 AM

Of course he has more than three frames of reference, but saying so gets to the heart of the matter with Simmons -- he reuses the same frames of reference because he truly has only one frame of reference, which is the emotions generated by having witnessed these events as Bill Simmons. Nobody writes himself into his columns as much as he does, and nobody abandons any pretense of objectivity as gleefully. That makes for undeniably engaging writing, but you have to share at least some of his biases and/or rooting interests to really enjoy him, I think.

Posted by: sansho1 at August 8, 2011 11:40 AM

Rise of the Planet of the Apes was not a very good movie.

I said it.

Posted by: Wow at August 8, 2011 11:50 AM

You guys are all forgetting the Teen Wolf/Teen Wolf Too references.

Besides, if you want some real Simmons bashing, go to Deadspin/KSK.


As for Simmons when it comes to the NBA I listen to him. Anything else = just another idiot.

(Logan is spot on. Simmons' propensity to get awesome guests on his Podcasts has kept him alive for a looooong time.)

So who's next after Ryan Reynolds? We've already been able to cross off Garrett Hedlund and that Alex PettycoatJunction loser.

Posted by: D-Day at August 8, 2011 11:53 AM

Smokin Aces. Enough said.

Posted by: chessterr at August 8, 2011 11:55 AM

But...
I don't understand, it always
Looked 
Like Mr. Reynolds 

Should be a big star.
I think I 
Might have been 
Missing the the point, 
Overly concentrating on
Nice abs when I 
Should have looked for talent. 

Posted by: Blake Shrapnel at August 8, 2011 12:45 PM

oooohhhhhh that picture, hes the only reason i own blade trinity. UNF!!!!!

Posted by: yo momma at August 8, 2011 2:15 PM


does movie star equate solely to box office take ? i think ryan
reynolds is terrific but roles like " the change-up "will never
enhance his acting reputation. he is an actor/movie star and that
is how he makes his living. he did this film to make a buck. if
a more serious adult vehicle shows up and he is given a shot at
it, i have no doubt that he will acquit himself admirably.
as a matter of fact , if he gets a role in some apatow movie which are always overrated, his reputation may improve.

speaking of " movie stars " look at the latest payday for ryan
gosling. he is a legitimately fine actor with a great resume but
winds up in " stupid, crazy whatever "in a role that makes
reynolds turn in " change-up " look like olivier doing " hamlet."

goslings character development consisted of a close up of
his well shined shoes and his oft repeated line to a series of
one night stands , " let's get outta here ". this throwaway role
in a terrible movie in no way diminishes my regard for gosling
or my conviction that he is a seriously gifted actor. it's a movie.
actors work for money and hollywood doesn't turn out enough
serious films to provide a living for the collection of actors
vying for work .... so they show up in some dumb films. ryan
reynolds is fine and i am sure he will prove it in years to come.

finally, i think the shot at dustin's writing was off base. noone
listens to more sports talk radio than i do and i challenge the
notion that bill simmons or anyone else is an " nba expert ".
expertise should be reserved for accomplishments that
transcend studying box scores and understanding the nuances
of the salary cap.

Posted by: snake at August 8, 2011 2:22 PM

http://www.the-numbers.com/people/GCLOO.php

Clooney has three more $100 million (US gross only) then the author mentioned.

Posted by: Dimitri at August 8, 2011 2:46 PM

I don't understand how you can say Franco is in the same boat as Reynolds. Franco's a year younger, and has already acted in at least six movies that made more money and became more engrained in pop culture than anything Reynolds will act in during the foreseeable future. Franco did the single biggest carry job in a movie any actor could ever do in 127 Hours last year alone, the worst movies Franco was ever in (Spider-Man 3, Your Highness) aren't even as bad as the two worst movies Reynolds starred in this year. he's already at a level that Reynolds doesn't look to ever reach.

It's not because Reynolds isn't any good, he's just a very good talent competing against spectacular talent in a business that demands the best. If you're not the best, you rely on luck, and Reynolds just doesn't have either the perfection or the luck to push him as a top guy at any point in the foreseeable future.

Posted by: Devil Child at August 8, 2011 3:40 PM

but winds up in " stupid, crazy whatever "in a role that makes reynolds turn in " change-up " look like olivier doing " hamlet.

Well that's a strange quote, since the reviews make Reynolds' "turn as Hamlet" look like Affleck like Gigli, while the movie fronted my monsieur Gosling has unquestionably better reviews. You can't call a steaming log of shit a potato because you're hungry.

Posted by: D-Day at August 8, 2011 5:30 PM

And no I'm not really sure if that last line's relevant, but you'll be thinking about it next time you see a baked Idaho spud pop out the oven.

Posted by: D-Day at August 8, 2011 5:49 PM

It's like a very eloquent Dear John letter ..

Posted by: duckandcover at August 8, 2011 6:52 PM

I wonder how much time Dustin spent as a kid poking at wasps nests for fun? I don't care if I agree or disagree, whether it's honesty or Devil's advocacy, I will always enjoy his reviews.

Posted by: cinekat at August 9, 2011 9:40 AM

I, for one, enjoyed the hell out of this article. In fact, I'd like to see an expansion, maybe a roundtable 'mongst the Pajiba staff about why we don't seem to be creating any more true capital letter Movie Stars lately.

Mostly though, hear hear on the Simmons hate. He's been an incredibly lazy writer for years now (I can't speak to the quality of his podcasts or the 30 for 30 series). So while he may be creating great content elsewhere, his columns have absolutely suffered. However, I gave him up because of the constant casual misogyny. I mean, it just pops up in random places like a nervous tic. You have a daughter, man! Maybe think about the messages your work will send to her? I rather wonder if Dustin's well-known feminism is behind at least part of his distaste. If so, keep up the good work, Dustin!

Posted by: bravesjade at August 9, 2011 9:41 AM

I thought Ryan Reynolds was rather good in The Nines. But I also thought he'd found his level.

I also thought he stank in Blade 3. But then that whole movie stank, so - no harm, no foul.

Posted by: PaulB at August 9, 2011 4:15 PM

Hey, I like Bill Simmons! He's one of the funnier sports writers around these days.

Posted by: ChristianH at August 9, 2011 5:27 PM

Wait, I looked it up. I was thinking of someone else.

Posted by: ChristianH at August 9, 2011 5:59 PM

Ryan Reynolds, Olivia Wilde, Blake Lively...They all are fake stars and someone very hard tries to convince public that they are movie stars. They ain't. I remember that specific moment when it all started with Ryan. It was the moment when they gave him People’s sexiest man alive title. And from that moment they began threat him like he is some big A-List movie star.

That Burried movie got little attention. He got that Green Lantern role, he started to show up at every event and awards show like he is some A-Lister. And I was like: "What the eff? What this Van Wilder actor is doing here?"

Problem with Ryan is that he is BORING. That’s why he will never be Movie superstar. He always looks the same – same haircut, same face expression, same acting note. Just like Jennifer Aniston – he always plays the same role in every movie.

Posted by: Shy at August 10, 2011 4:36 AM

You know I can look at paparazzi pictures of Brad Pitt, Leo Dicaprio, Shia LaBeauf, Bradley Cooper and many other. But we never see paparazzi pictures of Ryan Reynolds. Because they won’t sell. Because it’s boring to watch him. Same hair, same face. That’s why he will never sell as Leading man.

Posted by: Shy at August 10, 2011 4:39 AM

The analogy is dumb for a number of reasons, chief among them that Bill Simmons is an idiot.

====


Ding ding ding! Simmons is a hack.

Posted by: AJ at August 10, 2011 6:35 PM

I am now an avowed enemy of Pajibans in general. Not just because Dustin's a jealous hater.

Mainly, it's because none of you are insightful enough to realize that Van Wilder was Double-R's best performance ever. As an aside, Kal Penn's best performance ever was also in Van Wilder.

Posted by: Arrogant Bastard at August 16, 2011 2:20 PM

I was agreeing with your article until the James Franco statement. I think the guy has well and truly made it and I don't think his 'a-list' status is going to be revoked any time soon.

Posted by: Finda at September 15, 2011 2:35 PM

When I read nasty posts on Reynolds, a hilarious gag in Woody Allen’s Zelig comes to mind: ‘I worked with Freud in Vienna. We broke over the concept of penis envy. Freud felt that it should be limited to women.’ Buried was excellent. The film cost 1M USD and made 20M USD internationally and won international critics' awards. Not a small feat, considering the type of film and considering that it was shot in two weeks. In Green Lantern he was deemed the best thing of the film, which presented critical aspects. The Proposal totalled around 320M USD and was NOT driven exclusively by Bullock. Shall we talk about 'All about Steve' with Bullock/Cooper which earned her the Razzie award? Let him grow in his profession. You tend to confuse the actor with the characters he interprets. I don't think he particularly likes to takes his shirt off. And he looks great even with his clothes on. Stop citing Dicaprio, Clooney & Co. Dicaprio and Clooney are rapidly losing the allure they once had and, let's face it, Dicaprio mostly acts with his forehead (where would he be without his frown?) and Clooney mostly makes REALLY shitty movies. As for the rest of the stars in embryo cited, they are often so dull, monochord and marble-mouthed that they are exasperating. What was hideous about Simmons' article was the TIMING and the patronizing tone. I do believe that, had blogs existed in the fifties and sixties, the movie stars of the past would not have lasted more than a couple of years. Marilyn would have been a 'slut with boobs and no brain', Brando and Dean would have been 'pretty boys most certainly gay', etc. Live and let live.

Posted by: Leah at September 29, 2011 5:12 PM