Throughout Hollywood’s history certain actors have burst onto the world of popular cinema and attained the status and recognition of a cultural icon. An icon can be defined as a symbol or a representation of a specific ideal. When this concept is transferred to the world of cinema, and when one takes into account the reach the industry has in terms of perception and influence, these individuals attain a level of great cultural importance. Often actors within Hollywood will tend to be directly linked to the roles they play on screen. This is often regardless of the true personality and likeness to the actor their characters embody. This essay seeks to discuss and analyse actors of past generations, whose work within the industry still resonates to this day. As well as this, emerging actors of the present will be compared to these past icons. Conclusions will be drawn in respect to whether the most popular actors of today will stand the test of time, and potentially be regarded as icons of cinema in the future.
Perhaps one of the most enduring legacies of any Hollywood actor is that of Steve McQueen. “The King of Cool” was well known for his notorious behaviour on the film set and his personal life. He typically settled into roles in which he played the “anti-hero”. He fitted this role on and off screen and throughout his career he gained a certain reputation of notoriety. McQueen often neglected to speak of his rough upbringing, but the true reality of his childhood was a grim reality. He was born to a teenage prostitute in Indianapolis, who would subsequently abandon him for years at a time. It could be speculated this is where his well-documented mistreatment of women, both physiologically and physically stemmed.
During McQueen’s teenage years he associated himself with street gangs in Los Angeles, before joining the United States Military. It could be speculated that this is where he found the discipline and direction for his acting career that followed. He then eventually found himself on Hollywood’s main stage in films such as “The Great Escape”, “Bullitt”, “The Thomas Crown Affair” and “Papillion”. McQueen died aged 50 due to lung cancer. Part of his popularity was due to the fact that his career erupted during the height of anti-Vietnam activity in the U.S, during the 1960’s and 70’s. For this reason a persona that represented anti-establishment tendencies, on and off screen was of obvious adoration by the masses.
One could propose that McQueen was a powerful public figure of the 1960’s and 70’s America. The public held him in high regard; another reason for this was he epitomized the American dream. His success in the film industry came from desperate beginnings. “When I believe in something, I fight like hell for it.”(McQueen) McQueen’s constant rebellion against all forms of authority throughout his life and career gave him the cultural recognition that the name “Steve McQueen” now signifies. Retrospectively the actor symbolises the counter culture of an era. The actor achieved the status of an Icon through this perception that the public embraced. Baudry and Meltz reinforce this theory that, “(…) the spectator’s relationship to the screen is no longer discussed with pictorial reference alone, but to the institution itself.” (Price, B 2010)Cinema goers were relating their feelings towards the government to McQueen himself, as a vehicle for their discontent.
When considering actors who represent the “hero” character in film, the Hollywood leviathan Clint Eastwood fits the role. There are few actors or directors within the film industry that have continued to produce work of such consistent substance than Eastwood. He acts and directs much own his own work. He was born in 1930 in San Francisco, and spent much of his childhood moving around northern California. His family settled to Oregon where he spent much of his youth. In 1951 he moved to Seattle where he joined the military. It wasn’t until 1955 that he found his way to the world of acting, when he secured a role on the television show “Rawhide” (1959-66) for six years.
Eastwood’s first three films “A fistful of dollars” (1964), “For a few Dollars More” (1965) and “The Good the Bad and the Ugly” (1966) are prime examples of the spaghetti western genre, which dominated Hollywood. Although Eastwood was cast as the hero of these epic westerns, he was an un-conventional hero. The character he played in each film, “The man with no name” was not the typical hero of the western narrative. He portrayed a socially absent character whose dialogue was extremely minimal. His character questioned the typical ideological conception of early Americans on the frontier. It appeared that he was the outsider in the wild-west storylines, as opposed to earlier films of the genre where white American characters were in abundance. The depiction of the West in these films was of a vast and disjointed landscape and peoples, which does not depict the accepted reality of the early foundations of the United States.
This characterisation was attributed to Eastwood throughout his career. He was cast as, and continues to be cast as the stone faced hero, who neglected any rewards that came with his unintentional morally just actions. Eastwood’s trademark squint and hissing line delivery has cemented his persona in Hollywood to this day. He is an elder of Hollywood and a cultural icon, this is not due to the sheer span of his career but to the pedigree of the work he has been involved in. His significance comes from the fact that he has displayed heroism in his roles, but in such a way that forces the viewer to re-assess their concept of it. “Any filmmaker seeking to create a film that positions the spectator as an independent must break the spell of cinematic illusionism” (Wheatley C: 2009). Eastwood has become his on screen persona, as the unintentional hero of Hollywood.
Here two examples of Hollywood icons are outlined. The two figures have transcended their roles on screen, and attained a status reserved for only the most accomplished in Hollywood. At present there are an abundance of Hollywood actors that are known the world over. However in order to determine on whether their personas on and off screen, will stand the test of time is worthy of attention. Big budget narratives tend to dominate cinema screens at present and often these pictures tend to utilise popular stars for the fan base they inevitably draw. However, the stars demanding the most acclaim today, amongst cinema purists and the casual observer tend to have a successful background in independent cinema.
One example of an actor who is appearing in both big budget and indie films is Michael Fassbender. Fassbender is the son of a Northern Irish mother and German father. One of the most provocative films he has appeared in was “Hunger” (2008), directed by Steve McQueen (director). The film addressed “the troubles” in Northern Ireland which spanned from the 1960’s to the late 1990’s. Fassbender played the role of the IRA political prisoner Bobby Sands, who initiated a hunger strike whilst in prison in order to oppose the British government, “I lost about 14 kilos and weighed 59 kilos by the end. It was the only way we could do it and make it convincing” (Fassbender). Sands died after 66 days of self-imposed protest. For the role, Fassbender had to endure a substantial weight loss regime to emulate the reality of the event. His interpretation of Bobby Sands final moments transfer to the film with dramatic effect. The film does not follow the traditional narrative framework as the importance of the characters is not immediately explained. Many scenes are deliberately monotonous and at times make for uncomfortable viewing. This is an effort from the director to transport the viewer into the films setting and psyche.
Fassbender has since appeared in large franchises such as “X-Men: First Class” (2011). The actor’s ability to transfer his talents to larger productions is a testament to his diversity. He was cast as “Magneto”, a role previously held by Sir Ian McKellan. Fassbender succeeded in creating his own persona under the character and managed to execute an approach that was distinctly different from McKellan’s interpretation. However Fassbender has simultaneously been involved in smaller projects. For Example in “Shame” (2011) Fassbender is cast as a sex addict, struggling with an unorthodox addiction. The film was also directed by Steve McQueen. The pair has a tendency to tackle social and political issues with their work. Fassbender has the capacity to become an enduring presence in Hollywood if he succeeds in incorporating roles consisting of substance whilst appearing in larger franchises.
A further example of an article of this calibre is a Canadian, Ryan Gosling. The actor has managed to achieve not only an iconic status, but a cult following. Gosling has appeared in a large catalogue of films, however recently he is appearing as the lead in several films of merit. These include “The Ides of March” (2011) and “Crazy Stupid Love” (2011). Although he was initially known for his role in “The Notebook” (2004), he has gone on to become arguably one of the biggest male actors in Hollywood. Although his film catalogue continues to achieve commercial success, he has managed to compile an impressive list of indie films including “Half Nelson” (2006), “Blue Valentine” (2010) and the exceptional neo-noir film “Drive” (2011).All three of these examples were directed by Nicolas Winding Refn.
Gosling and Refn had a very specific goal when it came to creating Drive. Gosling’s character is never named throughout the films entirety. The film makes use of minimal dialogue, especially from Goslings character and the soundtrack is an entrancing mix of 80’s electro which instils the film with certain uniqueness. Goslings performance held a reminiscent feel of Steve McQueen’s role in “Bullitt”, as he echoed McQueen’s impassiveness and sombre exterior his character portrayed. The same could be said of many of Eastwood’s performances. Again with Gosling, he has succeeded in lending his acting talents to both non-conformist indie productions as well as big budget traditional narratives.
The public’s seemingly universal acceptance and devotion to actors such as Michaell Fassender and Ryan Gosling does not go without a fair explanation. A large proportion of content produced by Hollywood in this era consists of overused plots and structures. For an actor to establish him or herself within the largest hub for entertainment production on earth, they must seek to separate themselves from the conventional actor. However the actors and films that have been discussed within this essay all concern leading male characters, which are responsible for portraying the “hero” figure.
A common factor that can be applied to both McQueen and Eastwood is that both sought to redefine the traditional portrayal of the “hero”. Both of the actor’s efforts to break the mould have been successful and they have subsequently cemented their positions as film and cultural icons. With the case of Fassbender and Gosling, the point could be made that these actors are indirectly creating this impact again. By their examples of leading male roles, both have chosen to incorporate a different approach than those that have gone before. Their portrayal or the “hero” does not consist of a testosterone fuelled “Statham” or “Seagal” esque performances. Haneke suggests, “All the viewer requires- although he requires absolutely- is that the actor should behave as though he is not being seen(…)”(Price B: 2010).These actors have attempted to portray a more realistic and ultimately more human approach to Hollywood’s most clichéd role in film.
Fassbender and Gosling have succeeded in redefining the role of the “hero” in this respect. Much the same as McQueen and Eastwood did before them. As Hollywood continues to produce more and more categorized material, the opportunity for actors to achieve this status, largely falls upon their efforts in the indie genre. However the actors in question are showing intelligent career choices with the films they are choosing to dedicate their talents to. Also, the approach the two are bringing to the machismo role is paying off, as the universal acclaim both continue to receive stands as a testament to their talents.
Chris Durham. (2012). Absent Heroism: Reconsidering Clint Eastwood’s Star Persona. Available: http://www.scope.nottingham.ac.uk/article.php?issue=7&id=191. Last accessed 20th April 2012.
IMDB. (2011). Michael Fassbender Biography. Available: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1055413/bio. Last accessed 23rd April 2013.
IMDB. (2011). Ryan Gosling Biography. Available: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0331516/bio. Last Accessed 23rd April 2013.
McQueen Trust. (2012). Quotes. Available: http://stevemcqueen.com/quotes.php. Last accessed 20th April 2013.
Price, B (2010). On Michael Heke. Michigan: Wayne State University Press. pp40.
Price, B (2010). On Michael Heke. Michigan: Wayne State University Press. pp41
Scott, A O. (2011). Fasten Your Seat Belts, the Chevy Is Taking Off.Available: http://movies.nytimes.com/2011/09/16/movies/drive-with-ryan-gosling-review.html?_r=0. Last accessed 23rd April 2013.
Wheatley, C (2009). Michael Hekes Cinema: The Ethic of the Image. United States: Berghahn Books. pp39