Do you think Mark Hamill and Viggo Mortensen have similar career paths?

Mark Hamill was the lead in the OT and gained all of his fame from Star Wars. Since then he has never regained that popularity but has had a loyal fan following since. He's one of my favoite actors as well.

Viggo was the lead in the LOTR trilogy and just did Hildalgo, but I have a feeling he never will regain the popularity he enjoyed from LOTR.

Both actors were leads in their respective trilogies but were not the fan favorites. Harrison Ford stole the lime-light as Han and Orlando Bloom did the same as Legolas.

Can anyone think of more similarities and do you think Viggo will move into obscurity as Mark did for a while?

 

Hamill and Bloom both can't act; whereas Viggo can.

E_S

 

Well I doubt there will be a film of the same size as the Lord of the Ring trilogy. So hard to say if he will rise to those heights once again. Still Viggo is a better actor then Hamill and I hope he has a better agent. Hamill seemed to make some bad choices in his film acting career. Also Viggo was in another of other big budget films before LOTR. ONe that comes to mind is Crimison Tide. I think Star Wars was the first one Hamil did. Still Hamill's talent as a voice actor is far better placed then as a screen actor. Though I think I remember hearing is is a pretty broadway actor. Just bad decisions did Mark Hamill in, in my opinion. I doubt Mortensen will have that problem.

 

The difference between Hamill and Viggo is that Viggo had a good career for many years prior to LOTR. He has always been known as a very good character actor and he's more interested in smaller more artsy kind of films like Walk on the moon, Indian Runner etc rather than big budget ones (which he says he only done for money so he can support his passion for painting, mucic and phography).
I believe Voiggo will have as good career as he wants too. It depends on how ambitious he is.

If you compare him to, say, Orlando Bloom the difference in their career maintanence couldn't be more different. Orlando is obsessed with being as famous as he possibly can be, hence his taking supporting roles in big budget movies with much more famous co-stars. Just look at Pirates and Troy. Those who have seen Troy says Pitt and Eric Bana blows Orlando off screen, just like Johnny Depp did in Pirates. orlando really can't act. He is one trick pony (lift his chin, squint with eyes, open mouth to talk, he does this in all his films). His first true test if he can carry a film or not won't come until he is the only above the title star in it. It may happen next year when he has his first lead movie opening but again he chickened out by taking part in a big budget role for Ridley Scott whose name alone as a director garantues a huge big box office gross, so that movie won't have that much to do with Orlando after all.

Orlando is the flavour of the month. He has very few fans who aren't young teeange girls. I believe Viggo's career in the long run will be much better than Orlando's if you judge by star powers.

 

Mark was in his 20s for Star Wars and looked the same as he does in real life. He got typecast but has still done plenty of stage and voice work.

Viggo, on the other hand, is in his 40s (I think) and has been around for 20 years. His appearance as Aragorn is very specific to LOTR and its possible many filmgoers wouldn't recognize him on the street or in other movies. He seems quite talented and I would imagine he'd have offers pouring in right now. It all depends on his own goals and on making the right choices.

 

Let's not forget the Hamill had a horrible car wreck that destroyed his face. His face was reconstructed and he doesn't look like he did in ANH. Now none of this has anything to do with talent but Hollywood being what it is looks at the outside first. I think that Hamill lost many roles because of his drastic physical change.

 

What about Natalie compared to Carrie? Sure Natalie's getting a strady stream of movies, but she's not exactly a 'star,' IMO. Hopefully, she'll avoid the path her predecessor took (although Carrie has recovered magnificently).

 

You all have made great points, and the one that I'd like to focus on is the fact that right now Viggo is a big name because of LOTR. Mark was a huge name because of SW and had many offers but never really regained his popularity. He'll forever be branded the actor who played Luke Skywalker and I believe Viggo will always be the actor who played Aragorn.

 

Well, Hamill can act, whereas Mortensen can't. That surely doesn't bode well for Viggo's career, if the way that Hamill went is any indication of hollywood trends. Viggo also is much older, and doesn't have a single respectable film or acting job to his name before his fame took off (besides Hidalgo, and even that is questionable) Add to that the fact that if he doesn't play a role where he is completely smothered in makeup, his gender is quite hard to determine, I don't see too many sappy dramatic roles which Hollywood loves so much in his future. If Hamill couldn't do it with his whole life ahead of him, I don't see how Viggo can when he's already in his declining years.

 

I'm always dissapointed that Hamill kinda fizzeled out. He was a great actor.

 

Viggo acted for years before LOTR. I don't think he cares about being a superstar.

 

Aside fron the chin dimple I don't think there is much of a comparison.
As has been mentioned before, Mortensen had a career before LOTR came along. Sure, he'll always be known as Aragorn, but he is more of a character actor who will always be in something if he chooses to (bit of a flake, you know). Hamill, on the other hand, was discovered to be a not-very-good actor. He's good at voices, and a good sport at lampooning himself, but other than that he was not all that good. Not that he needed the work any way since Lucas gave all his SW actors points on the movie.