Talk:AFI's 100 Years...100 Stars

	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles
	This article is supported by the American cinema task force.

United States: Cinema Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Film portal This article is supported by WikiProject Film - American cinema task force.

Lists Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is the subject of a request emailed to the Volunteer Response Team (VRT).

Issues identified are: Verifying that the lists are public domain. Specifically excluding the logo.
The VRTS ticket number is 2007041310002766.

Please discuss these issues here, being mindful of the policies on biographies of living persons.

Vivien Leigh

At least one factual error in this article. Article says that Vivien Leigh was born in the United Kingdom, but the truth is that even the Wikipedia article on her [[1]] admits that she was born in Darjeeling, India. The facts that her parents were British and that India was then under British rule are only incidental. I will edit this article to correct the error. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Doctorsundar (talk • contribs) 00:07, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Host

I changed the host as the special was hosted by Shirley Temple not Drew Barrymoore.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.64.144.73 (talk) 19:16, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

General title question

Why is the list called 100 Years... 100 Stars when it actually consists of only 50 names?—Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.165.150.132 (talk) 16:41, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I know, the explanation was that the series had 50 "screen legends" (the list) presented by 50 current stars, which would result in 100 stars total. It was probably a copout that AFI resulted to after figuring they couldn't call enough people legends with a straight face. I don't have a source though so I won't add it to the article (and the second sentence is original research in any case). - Bobet 13:44, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If it's 100 Years ... 100 Stars shouldn't the 50 presenters be listed as well (not that some of them are legendary, one was Miss Piggy)? The names are listed on the AFI page but not who presented to who.NevarMaor (talk) 13:44, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This critique makes perfect sense to me. Since Newone was kind enough to provide the list of the other 50 (below), I simply did a cut/paste into the article.--Vybr8 (talk) 16:32, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The discrepancy between the number in the title and the number of stars remains unexplained (and annoying) in the article.Un school 05:49, 21 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I agree this is worth explaining in the article. If someone can find a source confirming "100 stars" was meant to include the 50 ranked stars plus 50 presenters, please add it. RCTodd (talk) 17:14, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sorting comments

"Men" comes before "Women" alphabetically, and that is how it was originally sorted. Please stop changing it.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.244.81.206 (talk) 19:19, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Alphabetization of two groups (when the addition of other groups is extremely unlikely to happen) is not particularly important. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Joie de Vivre (talk • contribs) 23:20, 1 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Permissions

For copyright clarification for this list, please see OTRS ticket 2007041310002766. Mak (talk) 01:34, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

POV template

Please see the discussion at Talk:Human height#Listing of female and male. 68.163.233.173 21:20, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rename

Is AFI so snobby that it can't even vote in one modern actor?--Lindsay (talk) 04:31, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, they are smart enough to know that, in 50 years, someone who's popular now can be virtually forgotten. Many people who were equally popular as names on this list in the 1940s and 50s aren't on it because they didn't stand the test of time. My guess is that in, say, the year 2058 only Tom Hanks, Meryl Streep, Julia Roberts, and Denzel Washington will be household names from the current era. (And people will look at Jim Carrey, Adam Sandler, and Will Ferrell movies and be mystified at their success). Two other factors: 1. Many of the actors who voted on the list would end up voting for each other if there were no date limit. And 2. Many of them are so abysmally ignorant of movie history that the list would be populated by nothing BUT current actors if there were no date limit. Much of the praise you hear them make for the classic actors is fed to them through scripts written by the producers of these retrospectives. Remember, celebrity interviews on screen or in print are 90% carefully orchestrated bullcrap. Sharpvisuals (talk) 20:34, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Methinks thou dost protest too much. Standing the test of time is a bit of a joke, because the movies from the '30's, '40's, and '50's are rarely watched, if ever. The reality is that the choices are made so far into the past that no one real cares who you pick - most of the listed "stars" have never been heard of by a modern audiences, much less have had their movies been watched by same. Your guess that only Hanks, Streep, Roberts, and Washington will be household name reeks of subjective viewpoint, and therefore is rejected out of hand. This, quite frankly, is the problem with these "approved" lists - very subjective, and lacking courage to elect modern representatives for fear of backlash. 124.104.112.165 (talk) 15:15, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sharpvis, I agree entirely with your line of reasoning. However I believe that Hanks and Julia Roberts will be accorded by history the oblivion they deserve, while Anchorman will be studied in schools. But that kind of supports your point really. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.192.112.144 (talk) 22:54, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I dont know about snobby, but Nicholson probably should have made the list, and Charlton Heston absolutely should have. James Dean is more remembered for what he never became, as opposed to whatever he was, and the Sidney Portier inclusion reeks of PC. Portier is a great actor, but what has he ever done that is bigger than the guy who played Moses and Ben Hur? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.235.136.218 (talk) 03:12, 23 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why is the topic of this particular thread under Rename? This looks like a discussion of the list rather than the article itself. Your views about who should and should not be on the list is completely inappropriate here. Go to IMDb and discuss it there, please. MagnoliaSouth ^(talk) 22:19, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The reason the list looks like it does is that the people voting for it were industry veterans who would have been in their sixties, seventies and eighties when the list was made in 1999. People tend to be biased towards culture they grew up with, and the people who grew up in the forties and fifties will always view the actors and actresses from the Golden Age of Hollywood as the greatest actors in history. If made today, the list would probably also contain people like Clint Eastwood, Diane Keaton, Meryl Streep, Charlton Heston, Al Pacino, Robert DeNiro, etc, who were big stars in the sixties and seventies. For the same reason older movie critics always tend to dislike modern films, comparing them unfavourably to the "classics". It always takes a few decades for a film to end up on lists over "greatest movies". 2001: A Space Odyssey and Shawshank Redemption are two classic examples. Scifist (talk) 22:35, 23 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wikitable

I recently changed the wikitable in this article to one matching that of the tables in the other AFI 100 Years... series articles (in fact, I did this with two or three of the articles which weren't tabled at all). I was just wondering if the anon who reverted that edit would please explain why. I feel it best that each of these articles be tabled similarly to ease in the understanding of the information presented therein. Chickenmonkey (talk) 03:07, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Meryl Streep

Where is Meryl Streep on that list? She is widely know as todays "greatest living actress" and shes not on the list...oh please. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.3.8.1 (talk) 05:50, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article states: The American Film Institute defined an "American screen legend" as an actor or a team of actors with a significant screen presence in American feature-length (40 min) films whose screen debut occurred in or before 1950, or whose screen debut occurred after 1950 but whose death has marked a completed body of work. Under these criteria, Streep does not qualify. Streep's first feature film was Julia in 1977 — well after the 1950 cut-off date. In fact, Streep was only born in 1949. So, she is not considered to be one of the "old time" actors ... those with enough years under their belts to be called "screen legends". Thanks. (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 02:27, 9 May 2011 (UTC))[reply]

#20

There's no way that River Phoenix made the list. Who's supposed to be there? Ackatsis (talk) 10:55, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, it was the Marx Brothers! Thanks to whoever corrected that. Ackatsis (talk) 14:31, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Longest career

micky rooney not lillian gish has the longest career? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lymmjohn (talk • contribs) 19:52, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Theatrical films in which each appeared (not including those released after their deaths), according to IMDb:

Mickey Rooney: 1927-2014

Lillian Gish: 1914-1987

BMJ-pdx (talk) 20:20, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Elvis over Humphrey? Shirley Temple over Bette Davis?

I just modified the article because some idiot wants to put Elvis Presley (while a huge legend in the music world, was NOT a legend as far as film acting is concerned) over Humphrey Bogart, and Shirley Temple over Bette Davis. In all honesty, I understand that there's certain things that are questionable about this list, but because Wikipedia's an OBJECTIVE encyclopedia that, in this article, is telling what the AFI put, we should honor that list and not tamper with it. Be mature. Remember, just because the AFI put it on their list doesn't make it the supreme law of all time or anything stupid like that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.74.98.199 (talk) 21:05, 22 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Criteria

it looks like there is some kind of year limitations for this list. does anyone know what those are? -207.118.79.67 (talk) 06:14, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article states: The American Film Institute defined an "American screen legend" as an actor or a team of actors with a significant screen presence in American feature-length (40 min) films whose screen debut occurred in or before 1950, or whose screen debut occurred after 1950 but whose death has marked a completed body of work. The list is further limited, it seems, to only 25 actors and only 25 actresses. Thanks. (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 02:36, 9 May 2011 (UTC))[reply]

Keaton

Currentlty, the article states "Keaton's careers went into decline very quickly in the 1930s. " While this is a true statement, it is also misleading, since Keaton continued to work pretty consistently up until his death in 1966. He made more than fifty films (and numerous television appearances) between 1940 and 1966. Shsilver (talk) 18:33, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bogart/Hepburn

I believe it is of note to include in the additional information section that number one legends Katharine Hepburn and Humphrey Bogart both starred together in the widely successful The African Queen. Thanks 122.57.5.71 (talk) 11:02, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

tagged

This article has some tags: 1. It includes a list of references, related reading or external links, but its sources remain unclear because it lacks inline citations. 2. It relies largely or entirely upon a single source. 3. It relies on references to primary sources or sources affiliated with the subject, rather than references from independent authors and third-party publications. Tagged since October 2011.
1. this article has 3 external links, of which 1st and 3rd have the "50 legends" list. The tag is not needed since the first link is a website, and current page has the list. Even better is the third link, which is a one-page pdf file, so it can be referenced as page 1 of 1.
2. & 3. this article does not have any such information or analyze, it would need other sources than the original.
Other thing is if it should have some more information, then it should be referenced from elsewhere. And it seems the list of presenters is not sourced at all. But these tags are not the right ones in this situation. 82.141.65.245 (talk) 11:17, 25 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Groucho Marx

Groucho aka Julius was not born in Germany. He was born in New York City. (Nor were any of the other Marx brothers born in Germany.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.73.243.147 (talk) 11:45, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Add a lifespan section.

We should add a lifespan and a career span section to their names. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thenabster126 (talk • contribs) 18:06, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nobody listens here.

Add a lifespan section to their names. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:6001:E790:5800:C47F:7A26:6950:F54F (talk) 00:51, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Huh?

Extraordinary - to my mind - that Hoffman, Newman & Redford were not nominated among the 250. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.151.210.84 (talk) 17:34, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Mary Pickford

Mary Pickford was born in Canada not the USA

Better photo of Henry Fonda?

Can someone provide a better photo of Henry Fonda? (One that meets copyright restrictions, of course.) The current one barely looks like him. BMJ-pdx (talk) 20:06, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Audrey Hepburn

How could this article not mention War and Peace where she earned several awards? 149.20.204.231 (talk) 15:29, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Audrey Hepburn known for

I added films such as Charade, Funny Face, Nun's Story, and Wait Until Dark to her small list of films she is known for, but someone cut them back to 4 while everyone else seems to be getting 6-8 films listed. What is the reason? The impact that Funny Face still has in the fashion world, Wait Until Dark is the originator of the term "jump scare," Charade was just selected for preservation by the National Film Registry, and the Nun's Story was one of the highest grossers of 1959. Nun's Story and Wait Until Dark are also 2 out of 5 of her Oscar Nominations. I'm changing it back, and if anyone feels the need to edit it, please make your reason known. Jmendenhall829 (talk) 18:36, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Date formats

Why are the dates listed in DD MM YYYY format when this is the American Film Institute's list of primarily American actors?

Gcjnst (talk) 19:02, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]