Hoping for yesterday: why Tom Hanks, Harrison Ford, and the big movie stars of our generation are not going to magically reclaim their past stardom.

This is a slightly updated version of an essay I wrote back in late May.

This Fourth of July holiday, we have seen the release of Larry Crowne, a poorly reviewed romantic comedy starring Julia Roberts and Tom Hanks.  The film will not top $20 million over the four-day weekend (on just a $30 million budget, natch), which will countless pundits to wonder why Hanks and Roberts aren't mega stars anymore.  Two months ago, we saw the wide release of Jodie Foster's flawed-but-interesting drama The Beaver, which failed to even gross $1 million for a variety of factors (mixed reviews, weird premise, a terrible trailer, etc).  But the film is being held to the perhaps unfair standard of determining whether or not Mel Gibson can return to his former box office glory.  Never mind that the film should no more be expected to perform like Lethal Weapon 4 than The Man Without A Face, the media has been abuzz with articles along the lines of 'Can The Beaver save Mel Gibson?"  This year will see much hand-wringing about the sustainable stardom of some of the very biggest 1980s/1990s stars.  Over 2011, we have seen or will see the alleged box office comebacks of Mel Gibson, Tom Hanks, Julia Roberts, Harrison Ford, Jim Carrey, and Tom Cruise, plus the continuing saga of Arnold Schwarzenegger's post-'governator' movie plans.  Without obsessing too much on certain offscreen behaviors that jeopardize the popularity of a few of those names, the question is: Why should we be expecting these former mega-stars to still be at the peak of their stardom?

Julia Roberts's peak of her popularity was during a six year period, from June 1997 (My Best Friend's Wedding) to December 2003 (when Mona Lisa's Smile underwhelmed but still grossed $141 million worldwide on a $65 million budget).  Harrison Ford's peak was from 1992 to 2000, an eight year period with several big hits (The Fugitive, Air Force One, What Lies Beneath, etc) that were not associated with Star Wars or Indiana Jones.  Tom Hanks went from quirky and well-liked comic actor to genuine movie star in 1992 with A League of Her Own.  He spent the next ten years (up to 2002's Catch Me If You Can) more or less as Mr. America, a comic and dramatic powerhouse who used his stardom to get interesting films made and came to represent the aw-shuck appeal of the idealized American movie star.  Since then he has found success with known properties (the Dan Brown novels, Toy Story 3), but has barely put his feet into the non-established-property pool.   Fair or not, Charlie Wilson's War, The Ladykillers, and The Terminal were not projects befitting the world's biggest movie star.   

Mel Gibson of course has issues far bigger than his stardom to sort out.  Without getting into that mess, we can acknowledge that Mel Gibson's peak years were from 1992 (Lethal Weapon 3) to 2002 (Signs, which was his biggest domestic grosser with $227 million).  As for Mr. Schwarzenegger, he too has a major public relations issue to deal with at the moment.  I've discussed his career at length previously, so let me merely reiterate that Arnold Schwarzenegger was really only 'the biggest action star in the world!' from 1990-1996, or from Total Recall to Eraser.  Tom Cruise may be the exception.  He has basically had an uninterrupted hit streak since Top Gun in 1986, give or take some relative under-performers (Far and Away, Mission: Impossible III, Knight and Day) and some artier films (Magnolia, Eyes Wide Shut, Lions For Lambs) along the way.  We still don't know to what effect his offputting PR-moves have actually damaged his brand, as War of the Worlds was his highest-grossing ever and Valkyrie performed about as well as could have been expected.  But if his star has indeed faded, it will be at the end of a seemingly unprecedented run of around twenty years (if we count 2005 as the end of Tom Cruise: Invincible Movie Star).

As you can see, all of these actors had their moment at the top.  And, all of them eventually faded from 'biggest movie star' to just 'a movie star'.  Eventually they will simply fade away or become 'veteran character actor' (see: Douglas, Michael).   But let's be honest for a second.  Tom Hanks is never going to return to his Forrest Gump/Saving Private Ryan glory days.  Tom Cruise is never going to again be the Tom Cruise of A Few Good Men and Jerry Maguire.  How many of you fantasized about the movie stars that your parents were into?  Will your young daughters have crushes on John Cusack too?  Julia Roberts may still look great, but the youth-centered culture is more likely to put Emma Roberts on a magazine cover than Julia.  Mel Gibson and Arnold Schwarzenegger have their own major issues to deal with, but how many years did they really have as butt-kicking action stars anyway?  As for Harrison Ford, he's almost seventy years old.  Star Wars was literally half-a-lifetime ago.  He may have a viable third act if his newfound willingness to act his age in films like Morning Glory is any indication.  But, unless he's around to pass the torch to Shia Lebeouf in a fifth Indiana Jones picture, his days as an action lead are over.

The reason that Ford, Hanks, Roberts, and others like them (Jim Carrey, Bruce Willis, Nicolas Cage, etc) aren't the big stars they once were is pretty simple: they got older, we got older, and our children didn't or won't have the same interest in them that we did.  This is not to say that these actors should be ashamed that they are no longer mega stars.  But this is a call to the media to simply let these performers age with grace instead of being pressured or expected to recapture the glorious triumphs of decades past.   It's been nine years since Jim Carrey out-and-out ruled the box office.  And in that time he's morphed into an actor who plays around in different genres (Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, The Number 24, I Love You Philip Morris) while occasionally retreating to the broad comic mugging that is his signature (Fun With Dick and Jane, Yes Man, Mr. Popper's Penguins, etc).  I don't know who the stars of tomorrow will be, and the lack of successors is of course one of the reasons for the hand-wringing.  An entire decade of FX-intensive fantasy films is partially to blame for that, and I would argue that the ever-escalating tabloidization of the entertainment industry has robbed the would-be next generation of stars of their mystique.   But no matter who takes their place (if the next generation of films even requires movie stars), it is time to accept that the stars of yesterday are just that.

Scott Mendelson