237 thoughts on “Top 100 Movie Stars”

1. Bob and Cogerson

   It does seem to me there are at least two different ways of looking at icons.

   Bing Crosby is a good example.

   It has been called the most popular multi-media star of the first half of the century.
   Records–he sold more records than anyone. He had 317 charted singles up to 1954 (next best singer–Billy Murray at 169). He had 36 number one hits (next best–Al Jolson at 23).
   Movies–He seems to have been the top ticket-seller of the 1940’s, and probably second only to Gable among ticket-sellers of the 1930’s and 1940’s. The Quigley polls voted him the number one box office star for five straight years from 1944 to 1948.
   Radio–his show was consistently in the top ten.

   So if you are doing icons on the basis of history, I no way of leaving Bing off such a list.

   On the other hand, his success did not endure. There recently was a documentary on his life and they had a tape of Bing remarking on how his career had declined, with Hollywood no longer wanting him. I don’t think the generations after his care that much about him. He is not totally forgotten. White Christmas still pops up during the holiday season, and his voice is still pumped in doing Christmas tunes.

   But he is an icon of the past, not one which means much today.

   Reply

   1. Hey John….I think Bing’s career declined for sure….but he had a great run…..and unless an early death occurs all the legends have experienced that…..with the exception of Cary Grant. Wayne’s last 10 years were successful at the box office….but nowhere near the classics he made before. Gable struggled after leaving MGM. So I think he was being hard on himself….as a 30 year run as a top box office draw is pretty impressive.

      That is a lot of hits for Bing on the record side….for the longest time….he was just the old guy that was singing with David Bowie on a Christmas song….lol.

      Reply

2. AFTERNOON JOHN
   1 An entertainments historian on the radio opined that if the first performers that persons know is say Crosby and Cooper and the persons are perhaps mesmerised by the two stars they can convince themselves that no future star will ever be as good and they might never get over Crosby and Cooper. I remember a British radio presenter {Benny Green] who was obsessed with Sinatra and Bing and on an occasion when he went to a live concert of the ageing Sinatra there was a woman behind him who ventured to suggest to her friend that Frankie’s voice wasn’t what it used to be and Green claimed he turned on her and said “Neither’s your face but you still bring it out in public.”

   2 Conversely audiences of the modern generation whose movie experiences began with perhaps Leo Di Caprio or Jennifer Lawrence could be enthralled with them to the point that their ire is aroused by being told about the supposed superiority of past idols, whom they possibly regard as virtual prehistoric relics. I recall when I served with the Armed Forces in the early 60s I was in the Forces’ canteen and the duke box was of course crammed with the records of the likes of Elvis. I love Elvis’ voice but on that day I played the sole 1940s record that was there and there was nudging, winking and giggling at my expense among colleagues in the canteen

   3 In short each generation wants its OWN idols and has its own tastes and that’s why it’s hard to get agreement if you produce a survey or ranking list that spans decades far apart and includes multiple fields of activity. Part of my attraction to the Cogerson site is that it caters for all generations and tastes and the ranking lists are based on published objective criteria across the board so to put it in cinematic terms Bruce can be regarded as our own Paul Scofield –truly A Man for all Seasons!

   4 Some historians also contend that every field of human endeavour goes through a golden period at some point or other and it is believed by certain observers that with the explosion of entertainment and the widespread exposure of individuals from various fields in the 2nd half of the 20th century 1950 -2000 was broadly the golden age of icons which has since been diluted because the accolade of “icon” is today over used as a tribute to people especially in the entertainments industries who have achieved little and are simply “famous for being famous”.

   “Popular icons are an innovation made possible by the mass media since for example the coming of television and the explosion of the pop scene under Presley etc. Earlier generations simply did not have such objects of veneration though in the case of say Laurence Oliver his greatness as an actor makes him stand out from others in pre 1950 times and with Gable it was the fact that he was the archetypal Hollywood idol of the 1930s and 1940s.”

   Reply

   1. Hi Bob

      Excellent post.

      I especially like “each generation has its OWN icons and its own tastes”

      In the end, history decides, and for the second half of the 20th century, we are too close to tell. We still need more perspective.

      I never criticized anyone for being on the list. I only wondered why some others like Wayne aren’t on it, and considering that Wayne stills wins polls as the most popular American star the better part of a century after he started, and nearly four decades after he died, I think that a valid question.

      Thanks for reprinting the justification for Olivier and Gable. I agree with their reasons and would put both, and of course Chaplin (I would think a no-brainer) on my list if I made one.

      Anyway, thanks for the post.

      Reply

      1. 🙂

         Reply

   2. Bob

      One other thing. I did not mean to imply any criticism at all by referring to a “coffee-table” book. I am not that much into book marketing, but I understand the term to mean a high-quality effort meant for an up-scale market.

      Reply

3. 1 As Howard Keel expressed it “A prophet is without honour in his own home town – so to h**l with the teachers !

   2 Not only is the 29% good from our viewpoint but the promotional cover of the book is taken up almost entirely with a large photo of Monroe, Bud and Elvis are in a strip of miniatures alongside Marilyn,, she is sprawled right across the first two pages of the inside of the book, Harrison Ford and Sean Connery completely occupy the last two pages, and the back page is taken up with photos of Clint, Judy and (again) Mr Mumbles in his Wild One garb. It ‘s difficult to conclude from that kind of promotion that the authors do not regard the movie stars as their main selling point.

   Reply

   1. Bob

      Where exactly does this list come from?

      I take it that it is not yours?

      What book is it from?

      Reply

      1. HI JOHN
         I anticipated this kind of reply from you but great that you are interested. I reproduce now my post of earlier today that explains matters. The book concedes that few of the icons are from the first half of the century because it argues there wasn’t the mass media back then that created too many icons and the book gives very detailed reasons for contending that.. All the more power to Chaplin, Vivien Leigh, Judy Garland etc and King Gable for standing out. The authors predict that not everybody would agree with their selections – have they met you John? BOB

         1 I said that I would not stray into Dan’s list making territory for a while but after I made that commitment I was given the early Xmas present of a book purporting to profile with a separate chapter per person the 100 greatest worldwide ‘icons’ of all time and it is called simply
         “Icons”. ***

         2 Like Time magazine’s 100 Greatest People of the 20th Century it is all-embracing and includes intellectuals such as Albert Einstein, humanitarians like Mother Theresa , sports personalities of the Muhammad Ali and Tiger Woods calibre, politicians like JFK and Barak Obama, revolutionaries such as Che Guevara, singers including Beatles Cher, Michael Jackson, technical people from the movie world such as Disney and Spielberg and even the Simpsons

         3 The Book says that it’s criteria for selection was that the people concerned be ”the first, the best, or simply the most memorable in their various fields.” My next post will provide a list of the 29 movie stars chosen and they will be in alphabetical order as they are placed in the book. I hope that it will be of passing interest to you.

         ***Igloo Books Ltd, Cottage Farm, Sywell, NN6 OBJ

         Reply

         1. Bob

            This sounds like an interesting coffee-table book. Forgive me for quoting, but this line jumps out–“the 100 greatest worldwide ‘icons’ of all time’–Are these 29 movie stars competing with the political, cultural, and religious figures of all nations over all of history?

            Just a couple of small points–My other post was a bit jokey, but I do find hard, or even impossible, to justify the exclusion of John Wayne and Katherine Hepburn.

            And my reaction is that the 29 movie stars selected are very provincial. Mostly American or British stars. The only outriders are Schwarzenegger who was born in Austria but immigrated to America for a Hollywood career, and Bruce Lee, who was born in San Francisco and became a name in Hollywood before exploding on the world scene with Hong Kong Movies.

            What about Jean Gabin, Toshiro Mifune, or Marcello Mastroianni among the men. Or Ingrid Bergman or Sophia Loren among the women. The two actresses had Hollywood careers, but were also, and in Loren’s case mainly, international stars.

            And all the singers you mentioned were again westerners. What about Teresa Teng, for example. Did she make the list?

            But this book and its point of view raises for me much more important questions than these sorts of issues, which I will address in another post.

            Reply

            1. 🙂

         2. Bob and Cogerson

            Forgive me for quoting, but I want to make clear what I am responding to. “The book concedes that few of the icons are from the first half of the century because it argues that there wasn’t the mass media back then which created too many icons and the book gives very detailed reasons for contending that.”

            I hope you sometime take the time to give me (and others) an overview of their reasoning behind this argument as I find it very interesting.

            For now, I just don’t think they are correct.

            First, you didn’t need modern mass media to create an icon. The printed word did it. There were pop culture icons in the 19th century–Buffalo Bill, for example, and John L. Sullivan. Everyone seems to have known who they were. I remember doing some research in San Francisco papers of the latter years of the 19th century and being fascinated by how many times Sullivan came up, and not just on the sports pages. Like a modern sports star, he was interviewed on all kinds of subjects outside of boxing. Newspapers and magazines made Sullivan famous even in small towns and among folks who never saw him in the flesh or in anything except a photograph.

            I remember very two famous men in my youth were Babe Ruth and Jack Dempsey. They had long retired (and Ruth was dead). Films weren’t available. So why were they famous? Certainly just general culture, fathers telling sons and the like, but mainly magazines. A young person found out they had been famous in a previous generation. We read of their exploits.

            As a matter of fact, their very distance may have made them more iconic. Films exist of Dempsey, but we only knew him back then through sportswriters’ breathlessly recreating his fights. We knew Ruth mainly through his stats. Still photos and films obviously gave a limited picture. Ruth’s stats remain awesome. But when Dempsey’s films became readily available to fans, the legend might have come down to earth a bit. The awesome opponents sometimes looked fat and crude. Being a bit beyond reach helps in creating legendary stature.

            Second, of course, there was mass media. Film and radio reached most of the population. The top ticket-selling movies of the 1920’s was The Big Parade. It sold an estimated 52.5 million tickets in the US when the American population was about 115 million (off the census). The ticket sales amounted to 46% of the population. Other films were not far behind, and later Snow White and Gone with the Wind were even more popular.

            As for radio, it reached mass audiences also. The highest rated Super Bowl on TV is Super Bowl XLIX with a 47.5 rating. Radio used the same rating system. The highest rated sporting event in the radio era was the Louis-Schmeling fight with a 63 rating. The Louis-Conn fight had a 55 rating. So what evidence can one give that a modern sports star is more famous in his world (with modern mass communication) than Joe Louis was in his?

            The Seabiscuit-War Admiral match race was similar, and almost everybody probably saw the film of the race in theatres later.

            And speaking of horses, Dan Patch and Man o’ War were known by almost everyone. Dan Patch had his own line of products, such as Dan Patch snuff (It was still around when I was young) In 1906 Dan Patch paced a record mile at the Minnesota state fair before a crowd of 93,000. Even horses were icons back then.

            Reply

            1. 1 Thanks again for your interest As always you make some excellent points and I was disappointed that none of my top 5 idols [Widmark, Peck, Jimmy Stewart, Laddie and Morgan Freeman in that order] was included and indeed only one of my entire Top 10 all-time favourite actors/actresses got a mention.

               2 However in honouring just 100 people from a variety of fields over many decades the authors of the book clearly had to be highly selective and as Bruce says the actors/actresses comprised 28 % of the total profiles and indeed that figure rises to 32% when you include Walt Disney, Steven Spielberg, Mickey Mouse and Quintin Tarentino all of whom are on the list. [The authors justify the imbalance between entertainers and non-entertainers by pointing out that the former get much more exposure than most people in other fields. A brilliant surgeon who saves lives is in my view worth a thousand Coopers but how many people know that surgeon?]

               3 It would have been unreasonable to expect us to have done better than 32% and of course the authors are not saying that Cooper and Bing for example were not icons but that (a) powerful changes in technology and the mediums have created more and stronger icons from all types of human activity in the second part of the 20th century than ever before and (b) from the earlier half of the century Gable (THE matinee idol and heartthrob) Chaplin (the great SILENT star) and Olivier (the exemplary stage AND screen actor) stand out from all other icons of their time. Who’s to say the authors are wrong? as there are many lists that include one or all of these 3. In short in the words of Tina Turner’s song the authors are opining-

               You’re simply the best,
               Better than all the rest.
               Better than anyone,
               Anyone I ever met.

               4 It might be considered rather presumptuous and indeed egotistical for you or I to insist that our perceived icons were better than those in the book which I do indeed read with my coffee! And should we close our minds to other people’s opinions in what is not an exact science? However Bruce has said somewhere on this site that he thinks the primary reason for the creation of a list of “Greats” is to get us talking and arguing. On this occasion let’s play their game no further.

            2. Cogerson and Bob

               Then there is one other point, which I think is more directed at Cogerson (and about which I will also post on the site index to get his response). I think it really a crucial point which has been floating inchoate about my mind but finally came together listening to political commentator.

               That is what the commentator called “The Funnel Effect”

               This commentator (Dick Morris) mentioned that big money didn’t have the impact on the 2016 presidential election that the insiders thought it would. Jeb Bush and Hillary Clinton raised by far the most money, but it didn’t turn out to have much use at all (for Bush) or to have decisive effect (for Clinton). Why? The collapse of the funnel effect. From the time of the rise of the mass media, popular culture was like a funnel, so everything and everyone came together at certain points, mainly the radio and TV networks. If someone wanted to reach a large audience, he could do it by buying network time. But that no longer works as the public is no longer there. It has splintered. The internet is proving more effective in reaching folks than paid commercials. It is like renting a theatre for an audience which isn’t there.

               Concerning movies, I think the funnel effect is also vanishing. Lots of movies in the old days got mass audiences. I think not so much any more, and the audiences as a percentage of population is nothing like it used to be except for a few rare blockbusters. This decline is masked by the population increase.

               What this boils down to is that probably no active actor has quite the impact on popular culture that someone like Chaplin had, or the popularity of such as Gable or Wayne over their careers. Wayne was voted the most popular movie star in 2014 in a Harris poll. That same year Gone with the Wind was voted the favorite movie.

               Certainly, the results of both polls are striking and, when you consider it, strong indication of the effect the splintering of popular culture has had, allowing a star and a movie from the distant pass to still top popularity polls.

            3. Hey John lots of good stuff here. Most I am pretty aware of…but have to admit I know almost nothing about Dan Patch…I will have to google him. But it sounds like he was a great horse indeed. Thanks for sharing all of this information.

            4. Hey John…I agree with you. Interesting examples of the “The Funnel Effect”. I would say Obama did a great job of seeing the different avenues to reach people…especially in 2008. I like the visual of an empty theater.

               You are right now movie star will have influence that Chaplin and Wayne had back in the day. If you look at the biggest stars of the Top 20 years…I think Angelina Jolie would be near the top….yet her movie career is not too impressive when you look at box office numbers….she falls into a star but not a movie star category….and apparently she might already be retired from acting.

               Technology is changing so fast…my little ones now spend a huge amount of time on You Tube…some of those You Tube people are huge to a massive amount of people….yet unknown to me. I think I am getting old…lol. Thanks for a thought provoking comment.

   2. Movies and movie stars sell books and magazines. Back in my HubPage days….I was talking to one of the admins. and they said they rated all the subjects they had from best to worst….in their minds entertainment was one of the Worst subjects to write about…that never made sense to me. Good Keel quote.

      Reply

4. LIST OF GREATEST MOVIES ICONS OF ALL TIME

   MALES
   Woody Allen
   Fred Astaire
   Humphrey Bogart
   Marlon Brando
   Charlie Chaplin
   Sean Connery
   Robert De Niro
   James Dean
   Clint Eastwood
   Harrison Ford
   Michael J Fox
   Clark Gable
   Cary Grant
   Bruce Lee
   Steve McQueen
   Paul Newman
   Jack Nicholson
   Laurence Olivier
   Elvis Presley
   Arnold Schwarzenegger
   Frank Sinatra

   FEMALES
   Judy Garland
   Audrey Hepburn
   Grace Kelly
   Vivien Leigh
   Marilyn Monroe
   Barbra Streisand
   Elizabeth Taylor

   Reply

   1. Good to see Bruce Lee on that list of movie icons Bob. I was a huge fan back in the 70s, posters on the wall, everything. He was my ‘James Dean’ .

      For anyone wondering why Vivien Leigh is on the list, she played IMO the most famous female character in movie history – Scarlett O’Hara. You can’t get more iconic than that.

      btw I think you left out um… whatsername from the Thin Man series… [Enough Steve!]

      🙂

      Reply

      1. Hey Steve…I have UMR pages on all of these greats with the exception of one of your childhood favorites….how did that happen? Now that you mention….the absence of Myrna Loy really does diminish that list…now that I think about it….lol. Thanks for the visit and the comment.

         Reply

         1. Hi Bruce, good to have you back in the Cogerson Movieverse. Now more or less a movie chat room interrupted by pages of film facts and stats. 😉

            A Bruce Lee page might not be worth it, he only completed 4 great martial arts classics before his untimely death in 1973, a 5th film was completed later using doubles. Plus box office grosses on his three HK films might be difficult to find.

            Would ‘Asta’ appear on a list of iconic movie animals? I think so. Did you know Asta has his own fan page? Myrna ‘box office queen’ Loy has a few too… 🙂

            Reply

            1. Hey Steve….I am here all the time just sometimes I have to decide between new material and responding to comments. The increase in comments is a good problem to have.

               I have a page on James Dean and his 3 movies….so I should probably get a page on Bruce Lee too.

               I thought Asta’s best role was in The Awful Truth….but no nomination….he was ripped off. Asta would indeed be on that list of iconic animals. Thanks for the comment.

      2. Give her her proper title “the most successful box office actress of all time.” I think it’s academic though as John will probably “shoot the messenger” anyway. Glad the list interested you though.

         Reply

         1. Lol

            Reply

   2. Hey Bob….thanks for sharing this list from your early Christmas present. I think only Michael J. Fox seems out of place….and I really like him. I have pages on all of these people with the exception of Bruce Lee. I do not even think he is on the request list. As for people missing…the biggest one in my mind is Katherine Hepburn. Seems she should be there. You had Judy Garland listed under both Males and Females….but I edited it for you. Good stuff.

      Reply

      1. Thanks for the editing. Naturally I was disappointed that most of my own idols were missing – eg Duke, Laddie, Greg and Widmark.

         Reply

         1. I feel your pain. Duke and Kate missing hurt the most….they must have really hated a Rooster Cogburn….lol.

            Reply

   3. Bob & Steve & Cogerson

      Some of the comments confuse me about it, but I assume this is Bob’s list.

      My major reaction. NO JOHN WAYNE!!?? You got to give Bob (or whoever made this list) credit for sand for tossing the Duke onto the trash heap. And no James Stewart?

      Elvis is an obvious pop culture icon, but one of the great movie icons? I think he would hold about the same place in pop culture if he had never made a movie. Interesting to consider him a movie icon above, for example, Charlton Heston.

      Of the woman, no Katherine Hepburn? No Bette Davis? No Joan Crawford? No Garbo? No Dietrich? I guess that is understandable,

      but no Myrna Loy? Unforgivable.

      What impresses me is that the center of gravity is strongly the second half of the century. Give credit to those whose peak years were prior to the fifties–Chaplin, Gable, Bogart, Garland, and Leigh.
      Astaire and Sinatra and Grant and Olivier more or less bridge the first and second half of the century. The rest are completely second half of the century icons.

      Bottom line–only Chaplin, Gable, Garland, Leigh, and arguably Astaire, peaked before WWII. Seems to indicate to me that these “icons” are more about memory than history.

      Reply

      1. Hey John….It was a list from an early Christmas present. I agree with you 100% about Wayne’s absence…does not make sense to me either. Like all lists they are born to be argued with….lol. Thanks for the feedback.

         Reply

5. 1 I said that I would not stray into Dan’s list making territory for a while but after I made that commitment I was given the early Xmas present of a book purporting to profile with a separate chapter per person the 100 greatest worldwide ‘icons’ of all time and it is called simply
   “Icons”. ***

   2 Like Time magazine’s 100 Greatest People of the 20th Century it is all-embracing and includes intellectuals such as Albert Einstein, humanitarians like Mother Theresa , sports personalities of the Muhammad Ali and Tiger Woods calibre, politicians like JFK and Barak Obama, revolutionaries such as Che Guevara, singers including Beatles Cher, Michael Jackson, technical people from the movie world such as Disney and Spielberg and even the Simpsons

   3 The Book says that it’s criteria for selection was that the people concerned be ”the first, the best, or simply the most memorable in their various fields.” My next post will provide a list of the 29 movie stars chosen and they will be in alphabetical order as they are placed in the book. I hope that it will be of passing interest to you.

   ***Igloo Books Ltd, Cottage Farm, Sywell, NN6 OBJ

   Reply

   1. Hey Bob….sounds like a great early Christmas gift. So 29% of the “icons” came from the the movie world…that seems a little high….but I will take it. I was going to do a page on “Best Teacher Movies”…and I was going to poll the teachers I work with…..but after the first 6 or 7 teachers I asked…”What is your favorite teaching movie”….my number one responses with 100% of the answers…”Movies…I do not have time for movies”. Don’t they realize movies are what make the world spin on it’s axis?…lol. Look forward to your list.

      Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.