The death of the era where movie stars reigned supreme can only be a good thing for the industry - and for audiences. From the dawn of western cinema in the early 20th century all the way through to the 1990s, blockbuster movies were so often defined by which actors starred in them. Whether it be Cary Grant, Humphrey Bogart, Clint Eastwood, Tom Cruise, Brad Pitt or Mel Gibson, big names drew big bucks, and true A-listers regularly outshone the movies they appeared in. In the age of the movie star, any film that landed George Clooney in its lead role could expect guaranteed success - even if said film was nothing more than 2 hours of Clooney being charmingly flustered around an attractive woman.
That status quo began to shift upon the turn of the millennium. Stars were still being made - Keanu Reeves, Leonardo DiCaprio, Johnny Depp, etc - but all-encompassing stars of the silver screen becoming rarer, and their box office influence was waning. Marquee names were no longer enough to entice profitable audiences, and a major star's latest cinematic vehicle could still flop with bad reviews or mismanaged marketing. Whereas once upon a time, audiences would see "the new Tom Cruise movie" because it was "the new Tom Cruise movie," cinema-goers now decide whether to pay their hard-earned money based on other factors.
For some, the end of the "movie star age" is a sad death knell for simpler, more romantic times at the local multiplex. Indeed, a recent Sunday Times interview with Matt Damon (in support of his new Stillwater release) lamented how the Jason Bourne actor is one of precious few traditional Hollywood leading men left, showing more than a whiff of nostalgia for the good old days. "Old" the days of the movie star might be; whether they were "good" is another matter entirely.
In any Hollywood era where actors determined a film's success, those wielding the greatest influence have been very white, very male, and very straight. There are exceptions, of course, with the likes of Will Smith and Samuel L. Jackson, or Julia Roberts and Ingrid Bergman, but even the most cursory of glances toward history reveals a noticeable lack of diversity among the top-level, most coveted stars. These problems still haven't vanished in 2021, but as the power of the movie star faded and big-name actors stopped guaranteeing hits, studios were left with less reason to perpetuate their outdated notion of what a "headlining talent" looks like. The struggle for an equal industry (in all senses) goes on, but the fight would be even more difficult had the movie star era with its entrenched stereotypes hadn't already died out naturally.
But movie stars didn't just vanish; they were replaced by a brand new philosophy - "the story is king." Sometime around 2000, audiences collectively ceased watching movies just because "famous actor X" was on the bill. Decisions would instead be based on how compelling the story premise looked and how greatly the visuals impressed. This shift was inevitable, as modern technology allowed movie fans to know more about films before reaching the theater. Whereas yesteryear's audience usually had nothing but a cast list to go on, the new millennium's mass media explosion made trailers, news and reviews more widely accessible. As a result, bad movies could tank even after assembling an all-star cast, and good films could succeed despite being full of complete unknowns.
Not only did this phenomenon level out the Hollywood playing field somewhat, but it feels more justified for a movie to live or die based upon its content, rather than which actors the budget could afford. No longer able to rely on star power, movie studios were subsequently forced to prioritize writing good stories and making good movies, regardless of the actors involved. Both that, and the deconstruction of the traditional "movie star" mold, can only be good things, whatever the nostalgic might suggest.