Action Heroes Of Yesterday Compared To Action Heroes Of Today

Tools    





I am not going to go into an indebt analyses and multiple comparisons but instead will just choose one representative of an era compared to another one.
My choice would be Steve McQueen vs. Tom Cruise.
Steve represented an era when men were men. He was a genuine tough guy on and off the screen and very believable and realistic in his roles.
Tom Cruise is a product of modern technology and fantasy and in movies is provided with unrealistic abilities.
Both men loved and drove motorcycles but that's about the only thing they had in common.
If you don't mind, find and mention for yourself two action actors of two different eras that you would like to compare.



Good theme for a thread.

I'll go with Dolph Lundgren Vs Jason Statham

Both are exceptionally physically fit and are known for doing their own stunts but 6 feet 5.5 inch Lundgren, again a guy from the old days, was reknowned for being simply a hard b*stard.
In Rocky IV he nearly killed his fellow actors and has even fought in UFC bouts, and only lost by a decision rather than knockout. He's even boasted about being able to take out Mike Tyson when Tyson was in his prime.

Statham, co-star in The Expendables, is, these days anyway, more of a stuntman who can act... Tough? Yes... Lundgren tough? Not a chance.
__________________
Originally Posted by doubledenim
Garbage bag people fighting hippy love babies.

Bots gotta be bottin'



Interesting comparison. Actually Jason is a world class diver and a very good athlete. As far as martial arts goes, he learned quickly and a lot from Corey Yuen.
I like Jason in action flicks. He is one white, small man that is quite capable and believable.
On the other hand, Dolph is the real deal. I know [ he is from my same karate school, Kyo-ku Shin Kai -{ San Dan }, although he studied in Sweden ].
Now, he would have beed perfect for the Jack Reacher character ( 6'5", 250 lbs. )



28 days...6 hours...42 minutes...12 seconds
You're gonna run out of action stars of today to compare to.
__________________
"A laugh can be a very powerful thing. Why, sometimes in life, it's the only weapon we have."

Suspect's Reviews



Ok... another one... action stars... hmmm...

Mr T Vs Daniel Craig

Mr T: Raised in a slum... witnessed rape and murder from an early age in his neighbourhood... played American Football, Wrestling and even Martial Arts at school... enlisted in the Military Police and was awarded Top Trainee out of over 6000 other recruits... worked as a Bouncer in a rough area and had over 200 street fights... then moved into the Bodyguard Business where he protected anyone from Steve McQueen to Muhammed Ali... he was even hired for; from Wiki: "tracking runaway teenagers, locating missing persons, and large firms asking him to collect past-due payments by force"

He was even once approached to assassinate a person, but he refused.

He then took part in a boxing match against another guy to see who was the toughest Bouncer... Mr T won the fight within 20 seconds, his opponent was a 280lb Honolulu Bouncer... in Mr T's second fight, he won within 55 seconds.

At one point he got punished while in the Military Police and his job/punishment was to chop down trees with an axe. In a 3 hour 30 minute stint, he chopped down 70 trees.

He also majored in mathematics.


Daniel Craig: Brought up in an area of Liverpool... started acting at age 6 and attended serious acting lessons just after... has appeared in many drama film roles and drama TV roles and recently moved into more and more action orientated films, including James Bond.



Daniel Craig is a good actor but a charming and charismatic James Bond he is not. I know the producers wanted a major image change to a darker and grittier James Bond, but I still have trouble seeing him as that.
I'm not hot on the James Bond image make-over to begin with.
Sean Connery was so perfect in the role that it was hard for him to play anything else but still be seen as Bond.
I wish they had ended it with him. Everything after was just less.



Steven Seagal Vs Tom Hardy


Seagal was born in Michigan to decent home, moved to Japan when he was a teenager and studied real Aikido, eventually headed an Aikido Organisation... then moved back to America and taught his art to genuine fighters and also became a stunt coordinator for films and a film star in his own right.
He has also been a Law Enforcer in Louisiana and has even been in trouble for various sex crimes including female sex slave trafficking and assault and for killing a kid's pet puppy while on a Bust with Louisiana Cops.
Seagal though thinks he's God's gift to women, as can be seen in every film he makes, with every film having the same plot too. And the same acting.




Tom Hardy was born in London, also to a decent homelife... has been into acting for a long time and won a modelling competition as a young 20 something in 1998... he then got a break in 2001 in Ridley Scott's Black Hawk Down and after some success after the modelling comp and acting, he became a crack addict and alcoholic but eventually fought his addiction.

Though not as real life tough as Seagal, his fighting drug addiction and overall acting prowess and having a lack of complete and utter love for himself... beats Seagal hands down.



I don't think Seagal thinks he is God's gift to women. He knows he is grossly overweight and tries to hide it with that black leather thrench coat you see in so many of his movies. He just has a problem with his sex drive. Is he still a tough dude? No doubt.

Tom Hardy I don't know much about but I don't see him as an action hero,
although I did like him in Lawless. It's kind of funny how they overdressed him and shot angles to make him look bigger than he is but overall, he definitely ably portrayed a tough mountain man.



You're gonna run out of action stars of today to compare to.