It is no secret that I often whine about the lack of mid-budget, star-driven, adult-skewing thrillers in this fantasy-tent pole era. And while there has certainly been a slight resurgence in the form over the last year, it still remains a fact that most of the stars of today and yesterday (or their respective agents) would rather hitch their tent to an established franchise rather than try their hand at the star vehicle. In a time when Tom Hanks tried (needlessly I'd argue) to cling to relevancy by stepping into the Dan Brown universe and where even Will Smith was so traumatized by the 'failure' of Seven Pounds that he went speeding back to Men in Black (and may end up doing another Independence Day), Denzel Washington is arguably the last of a dying breed. He is a true movie star in the purest sense of the term and a reminder of the kind of movies, like Safe House that were once made by such stars when the term had any real value.
He is arguably among the most reliable box office draws in the business. And he has made his career and his fortune by putting his name and his neck out their time and time again. He has never made a superhero film or fantasy tent pole. He has never starred in a sequel. He has made a couple remakes, but both The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3 and The Manchurian Candidate were pretty darn good thrillers. Point being, Denzel Washington makes explicitly old-fashioned movies. He makes sentimental, often true life melodramas (Remember the Titans, John Q), historical dramas (Malcolm X, The Hurricane, American Gangster), politically-topical action pictures (The Siege, Inside Man, Unstoppable) and white-knuckle thrillers (Training Day, Out of Time, Man On Fire, etc). Pretty much every Denzel Washington star vehicle is just that: an original genre picture that features a solid supporting cast and a narrative set squarely on Earth. The closest he's come to out-and-out fantasy, The Book of Eli and Deja Vu, are still character-driven action dramas that don't overdose on special effects or fantasy elements at the expense of the narrative.
His films aren't always good (I'm not a fan of American Gangster or John Q) and they aren't always box office smashes (neither of the two films he directed, Antoine Fisher or The Great Debaters, were financially successful), but they provide the kind of old-fashioned movie-making that is in sadly short supply in this day-and-age. What separates Denzel Washington from the pack of alleged next generation of stars is that he can actually open a movie to $20 million or more all by himself. What separates him from the stars of his generation is that he is still making the kind of movies that made him a sensation in the 1990s. Perhaps one of the reasons that Denzel Washington has maintained his star power for the last 20 years is that he still goes out of his way to make 'the kind of movies they just don't make anymore'.
Follow Scott Mendelson on Twitter: www.twitter.com/ScottMendelson
Another unique thing about Washington's career occurred to me: he's a handsome, charismatic star, and women love him -- you can always count on Denzel for a good date movie -- yet he rarely plays a romantic lead.
His character might have a wife or girlfriend, but the relationship isn't what drives the story. In a Denzel movie, the love interest always feels obligatory. (James Cagney and John Wayne had this in common -- you didn't buy a ticket to see Jimmy or the Duke make love to the leading lady. But neither of those guys had Denzel's female appeal.)
Also should mention Brad Pitt. He's also avoided the sequel/tentpole route, which is admirable considering the zillions he could make with a nice little franchise to call his own.
Pitt's taste in scripts is more eclectic than Washington's, and he seems to be less interested in making the Hollywood vehicles that are Denzel's bread and butter, but he always brings a dash of genuine movie star to everything he does.
Otherwise, totally agree. Denzel Washington is in a class by himself.
He should have won for Malcolm X and Hurricane. I can even make the case that he, and not Tom Hanks, should have won for Phiadelphia.
But I think Russell Crowe is more of the throwback to the type of old fashioned movie star the writer tries to describe.
Crowe has palyed a Roman general, a swash buckling British sea captain, a schizophrenic Nobel prize winning mathematician and a tough as nails 1950s police detective (LA Confidential.)
Though they have indeed been involved in franchises and fantasy, as you say Denzel hasn't done, I think 50 years from now they will be remembered just as respectfully as Denzel Washington. And I certainly think we'll see some "old-fashioned" stars in the future. For example, I've always said that Jennifer Lawrence is going to be around for a long time.
There will always be "sell-outs" out there, but for as many of those as we have, there will be an equal or greater amount of truly talented actors that the public holds in high regard just like Denzel.
I can understand that, but I don't see why we should put a negative spin on the idea that we are running low on "old-fashioned" stars. It's just the evolution of the industry. The way acting and filmmaking has changed is why we have what we do today.
I don't see Long or King ever becoming real "stars". They are definitely successful, especially King on Southland. But both are pretty set in their ways, and Hollywood doesn't look too kindly on aging women. Unless their first name is Meryl.
The in-between movies that are close to life, touch you & make you smile..