Are there any genuinely normal, well-adjusted celebrities

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Jennifer Garner, other than her ex husband drama.

+1.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jennifer Garner, other than her ex husband drama.

+1.

+2 I happen to believe her PR is largely true. She's B/C list in terms of work projects and has some humility about that imo. What really separates her from the plebes is that she's super rich. But she's clearly a very hands-on mom for a celebrity and looks completely normal walking around.

Julianne Moore is similar, I think.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Daniel Radcliffe seems remarkably hardworking and stable for a former child actor. The British actors are generally more grounded in the artistic work rather than the celebrity.

He had drinking problems

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Daniel Radcliffe seems remarkably hardworking and stable for a former child actor. The British actors are generally more grounded in the artistic work rather than the celebrity.

Agree with this but I also think proximity to Hollywood, and the age at which you became famous, play a role.

I remember watching this video and thinking about how Olivia Colman comes off as really genuine and normal, and Emilia Clarke seems like she's trying too hard, and maybe lying about some stuff, and just being kind of weird: https://youtu.be/EXIW5zIdFqU?si=i-z2qMlKx9flIXOv

And I think it's just that Colman is really secure in who she is. Her Hollywood fame came much later even though she had been working in the UK for a lot longer, she never spent any time as the ingenue because she's more of a character actress (though also has the chops to play leading roles -- she's the rare actor whose career seems to be truly based on talent and good work), she married someone in the business before either of them were successful and their marriage seems super solid, and she had kids before having them could be particularly disruptive of her career. Like she basically had a pretty normal life and then suddenly some of her TV work got attention in the US thanks to streaming (Broadchurch, Fleabag, the Night Manager) and then she won an Oscar for The Favourite when she was 45. And now she's having this kind of surprise success later in her career. That never happens. I think it makes her unusually grounded and well-adjusted because she got to really mature and have a real life before she became famous.

Meanwhile, Emilia Clarke did Game of Thrones when she was 24, just a couple years into her career. And she immediately became Hollywood-famous and started getting roles in really big budget movies (Terminator, Me Before You, the Hans Solo movie). She had money and was getting recognized in the street essentially from the very beginning of her career. It seems much "luckier" than Colman's trajectory but that's just because people love the idea of overnight success. I think it's actually scary and stressful, and especially when you know your fame and appeal as an actor is, to a great extent, premised on you being young and beautiful, I think it can be destabilizing. I just think she never had a chance to be a regular person, whereas Colman did.

Emilia Clarke had two brain aneurysms, which are probably scarier than anything else in her life, celebrity status included.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Daniel Radcliffe seems remarkably hardworking and stable for a former child actor. The British actors are generally more grounded in the artistic work rather than the celebrity.

He had drinking problems

Yes, and? He's been open about those, and how his very early, wild success and all the attention contributed to his drinking. And the operative word is "had." Doesn't negate the fact he seems to be an extremely hard worker and takes his work seriously but doesn't take himself seriously.

[Anonymous]

I think the ones that move their families away from LA and keep off social media are the most normal.

[Anonymous]

Kevin Bacon and Kyra Sedgewick? They definitely present a very ideal social media image.

[Anonymous]

I don't know if he's still "normal" but I grew up with Chris Evans and he came from a very typical family and his mom is very nice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Doubtful. The kind of person who pursues that sort of constant visibility and fame isn’t well adjusted with good values. I’m not sure why that isn’t obvious. It’s like running for president—the kind of person who thinks they should rule over everyone else isn’t well adjusted with good values. The megalomaniacs, narcissists, borderline personalities, and pathologically avaricious among us do better in the limelight. You don’t want those people hanging around the office and they typically cause chaos in normal settings. The well regulated, securely attached, high values people of the world do better in private and mundane pursuits. Both types of people have their place in the world.

NP. What you say is likely true of "celebrities" but there are plenty of jobbing actors who manage to make their livings from performing, and who are "well regulated, securely attached, high values people." Source: I know a couple of them, and while they'd be the first to note that their jobs are unusual, they also have a lot of gratitude that they can act for a living. But they're not wealthy or followed by paparazzi or pored over on social media, even though they have fans who keep up with their careers. And they have spouses, kids, live in houses in neighborhoods not too different from any neighborhood, have to worry about their health insurance,, budget for kids' college tuition, etc. People like them are the vast majority of working actors. "Celebrities" aren't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Kevin Bacon and Kyra Sedgewick? They definitely present a very ideal social media image.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Daniel Radcliffe seems remarkably hardworking and stable for a former child actor. The British actors are generally more grounded in the artistic work rather than the celebrity.

He had drinking problems

Yes, and? He's been open about those, and how his very early, wild success and all the attention contributed to his drinking. And the operative word is "had." Doesn't negate the fact he seems to be an extremely hard worker and takes his work seriously but doesn't take himself seriously.

He seems like a sweetheart. I hope for all good things for him!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think the ones that move their families away from LA and keep off social media are the most normal.

Jeff Daniels is one of these actors. Has lived in his hometown in Michigan since the mid-'80s and is a big supporter of theater and the arts there. Never embraced the celebrity route yet always works consistently.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Daniel Radcliffe seems remarkably hardworking and stable for a former child actor. The British actors are generally more grounded in the artistic work rather than the celebrity.

He had drinking problems

Yes, and? He's been open about those, and how his very early, wild success and all the attention contributed to his drinking. And the operative word is "had." Doesn't negate the fact he seems to be an extremely hard worker and takes his work seriously but doesn't take himself seriously.

He seems like a sweetheart. I hope for all good things for him!

I haven't seen all that he's done, but he seems willing to take on quirky, even strange, roles, in shows and films he knows are not intended as blockbusters, and he keeps returning to stage roles over and over too. Signs of someone more interested in the work than in the celebrity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Daniel Radcliffe seems remarkably hardworking and stable for a former child actor. The British actors are generally more grounded in the artistic work rather than the celebrity.

Agree with the bolded. I think what he said about fans of Harry Potter feeling conflicted after what JK Rowling said about trans people was incredibly intelligent and soothing. I had a lot of respect for him for saying that.

To all the people who now feel that their experience of the books has been tarnished or diminished, I am deeply sorry for the pain these comments have caused you. I really hope that you don’t entirely lose what was valuable in these stories to you. If these books taught you that love is the strongest force in the universe, capable of overcoming anything; if they taught you that strength is found in diversity, and that dogmatic ideas of pureness lead to the oppression of vulnerable groups; if you believe that a particular character is trans, nonbinary, or gender fluid, or that they are gay or bisexual; if you found anything in these stories that resonated with you and helped you at any time in your life — then that is between you and the book that you read, and it is sacred. And in my opinion nobody can touch that. It means to you what it means to you and I hope that these comments will not taint that too much.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jennifer Garner, other than her ex husband drama.

+1.

+2 I happen to believe her PR is largely true. She's B/C list in terms of work projects and has some humility about that imo. What really separates her from the plebes is that she's super rich. But she's clearly a very hands-on mom for a celebrity and looks completely normal walking around.

Julianne Moore is similar, I think.

Jennifer Garner is kind of a genius for getting that Capital One gig. She can do the commercials and voiceovers (for radio/online ads) while her kids are at school and not miss a mom-beat. Gets paid MILLIONS for being their spokes person for years now. Does a movie every year or two for funsies. Has her farm food as her passion project.