It used to be that movie stars were very relevant to pop culture, briggite bardot, audrey hepburn and of course the infamous Marilyn Monroe. More recently, Johnny Depp, Leonardo Dicaprio and Tom cruise were heartthrobs in their twenties ( the 80's early 90's) and Julia Roberts too. now the only global superstars are pop stars. Do you think movie stars can regain the throne as the original global super stars?Why do you think the media shifted focus to pop stars?

In recent years, mostly because of Britney Spears, and then again because of Lady Gaga. But film stars are still global superstars. Their celebrity just behaves differently.

yea people don't really stan them as much and new pop stars are being created more frequently than movie stars.

I find stanning actors to be just as fun as musicians tbh.
But yeah I think the only HUGE global actors are veterans, films these days don't focus a lot on one character like they used to.
People like Johnny Depp, Julia Roberts, Brad Pitt, etc constantly starred in movies that focused completely on them.
I don't see a lot of films like that anymore, it's more of a collaborative effort. Or maybe I'm just not paying attention because actors lately are terribly boring

Angelina Jolie >>>

Exactly! where are all the fresh, young, new actors?

I think music reaches a wider audience then film does especially these days with Youtube and piracy which can explain why pop stars are more "global" then actors are. A popular 3 minute song will probably reach a larger amount of people than a 120 minute film giving the pop star more "celebrity" and relevancy around the world.

Do I see that changing anytime soon? No, I think pop stars for the most part will remain more "global".

I see your point. I think you made really good observations

Thank you

I've wondered this too. I think another reason is because there are so many movies and TV shows, so there a ton of people in the acting industry. The pop industry is also huge, but harder to break into, and I feel the strong players are more concentrated and more prominent then your average actor/actress. Does this make sense?

Also, music itself is just something people listen to more often than watching a tv show/movie.

Judging by the fact that Lady Gaga, for example, released a perfume and toured all year and nothing else, and was still more talked about than any females but Hillary Clinton and Michelle Obama... no.

What I like about the film industry is there is less age discrimination. In music they want to throw you away when you are 30. While actors can still be relevant as long as they want to work

It's also a little less dependent on looks.

Yes movies are more driven on franchises and concept than actual actors.

The film industry is much more lucrative than music, though.

No way most modern actors have no where near the amount of money musicians have.

Most actors don't even earn 1 mil per film anymore. the 25 million deal that occured in the 80's and 90's is long gone! the only way an actor can see that kind of money is in a franchise sequel.

the movies gross more but the studio pockets most of the money not the actors. Singers earn from ticket sales in multiple countries.

Actors arent the only people working on films. The directors, producers, screenwriters, cinematographers, ect, ect

Wereas musicians dont make money from just albums and singles, but also through touring.