Comments on: Top 10 Most Successful Actors at the Box Office http://www.toptenz.net/top-10-most-successful-actors-at-the-box-office.php Life, on the short list. Sun, 21 Mar 2010 19:56:28 -0400 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Lee Gale http://www.toptenz.net/top-10-most-successful-actors-at-the-box-office.php#comment-7712 Lee Gale Mon, 01 Mar 2010 21:38:08 +0000 http://www.toptenz.net/?p=3380#comment-7712 Im sorry but this is a farce. Where is Daniel Ratcliffe ? , surely you must consider the lead character in Harry Potter films to be considered (after all you included Samuel Jacksons 5 sec iron man apperance) and these have grossed over $7bil and counting Im sorry but this is a farce. Where is Daniel Ratcliffe ? , surely you must consider the lead character in Harry Potter films to be considered (after all you included Samuel Jacksons 5 sec iron man apperance) and these have grossed over $7bil and counting

]]> By: ? http://www.toptenz.net/top-10-most-successful-actors-at-the-box-office.php#comment-6896 ? Tue, 26 Jan 2010 07:27:00 +0000 http://www.toptenz.net/?p=3380#comment-6896 why is frank welker an honorable mention when he has the highest worldwide gross? why is frank welker an honorable mention when he has the highest worldwide gross?

]]> By: master http://www.toptenz.net/top-10-most-successful-actors-at-the-box-office.php#comment-6861 master Sun, 24 Jan 2010 19:35:24 +0000 http://www.toptenz.net/?p=3380#comment-6861 People people Number 1 ROBERT DE NIRO Number 2 SYLVESTER STALLONE Number 3(why not someone from comedy,they are really good) JIM CARREY Your list are good,but my is better :) :) :) barararahahahahah People people

Number 1 ROBERT DE NIRO
Number 2 SYLVESTER STALLONE
Number 3(why not someone from comedy,they are really good) JIM CARREY

Your list are good,but my is better :) :) :)

barararahahahahah

]]> By: webhead http://www.toptenz.net/top-10-most-successful-actors-at-the-box-office.php#comment-6606 webhead Sun, 10 Jan 2010 11:40:14 +0000 http://www.toptenz.net/?p=3380#comment-6606 where is john cusack? he's very famous......he almost have over 100 movies and all of them are grerat!!!!!!!!!! where is john cusack? he’s very famous……he almost have over 100 movies and all of them are grerat!!!!!!!!!!

]]> By: selva http://www.toptenz.net/top-10-most-successful-actors-at-the-box-office.php#comment-6410 selva Thu, 31 Dec 2009 06:15:20 +0000 http://www.toptenz.net/?p=3380#comment-6410 where is universal superstar ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER and where is john travolta, etc., This is absolutely fake.... where is universal superstar ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER and where is john travolta, etc.,
This is absolutely fake….

]]> By: Kevin C http://www.toptenz.net/top-10-most-successful-actors-at-the-box-office.php#comment-5334 Kevin C Tue, 27 Oct 2009 16:26:14 +0000 http://www.toptenz.net/?p=3380#comment-5334 I also think it's interesting that if you did this list for the women, Emma Watson would beat out Glenn Close, Meryll Streep and Julia Roberts I also think it’s interesting that if you did this list for the women, Emma Watson would beat out Glenn Close, Meryll Streep and Julia Roberts

]]> By: Kevin C http://www.toptenz.net/top-10-most-successful-actors-at-the-box-office.php#comment-5331 Kevin C Tue, 27 Oct 2009 16:01:52 +0000 http://www.toptenz.net/?p=3380#comment-5331 What about Robbie Coltrane? Between all the Harry Potter movies, Desperaux, 2 Bond movies, Ocean's Twelve, Van Helsing, From Hell, etc, he is clocking in at 7.1B. Definitely should be on the honorable mention list What about Robbie Coltrane? Between all the Harry Potter movies, Desperaux, 2 Bond movies, Ocean’s Twelve, Van Helsing, From Hell, etc, he is clocking in at 7.1B. Definitely should be on the honorable mention list

]]> By: Marvel Man http://www.toptenz.net/top-10-most-successful-actors-at-the-box-office.php#comment-5310 Marvel Man Mon, 26 Oct 2009 05:48:06 +0000 http://www.toptenz.net/?p=3380#comment-5310 Nice list, but I was dissapointed in seeing the great Tom Hanks beaten by Sam Jackson. Besides, why didn't you count The Simpsons or Cars? You counted Iron Man, and Sam only appeared for 10 seconds, at the most. If you counted that, surely Tom's other work should also be recognized.... Nice list, but I was dissapointed in seeing the great Tom Hanks beaten by Sam Jackson.

Besides, why didn’t you count The Simpsons or Cars? You counted Iron Man, and Sam only appeared for 10 seconds, at the most. If you counted that, surely Tom’s other work should also be recognized….

]]> By: movielover http://www.toptenz.net/top-10-most-successful-actors-at-the-box-office.php#comment-5305 movielover Sun, 25 Oct 2009 19:38:40 +0000 http://www.toptenz.net/?p=3380#comment-5305 I like Samuel L. Jackson and Tom Hanks . They are great actors I like Samuel L. Jackson and Tom Hanks . They are great actors

]]> By: Rich http://www.toptenz.net/top-10-most-successful-actors-at-the-box-office.php#comment-5293 Rich Sun, 25 Oct 2009 05:29:51 +0000 http://www.toptenz.net/?p=3380#comment-5293 This is, by far, one of the dumbest rankings I have ever seen. I can't believe you are all making a big deal of this. Ranking the success of actors based solely upon the box office success of the movies in which they acted, regardless, for the most part, of their involvement in the movies, is absolutely ridiculous. First, each actor cannot necessarily take full credit for the total gross of each of his/her movies. As has been pointed out, Samuel L. Jackson's roles in many, if not most, of his movies are supporting roles. Did people flock to the box office to buy a ticket to see Iron Man or the Star Wars films because Samuel L. Jackson was playing a secondary role in it? I think not. Second, as has also been pointed out, this list obviously favors more recent actors because of ticket price inflation. So, according to this absurd list, earlier actors such as Cary Grant, Katherine Hepburn or Jimmy Stewart are not successful, despite their long careers, hundreds of movies and critical acclaim. See the stupidity? This is, by far, one of the dumbest rankings I have ever seen. I can’t believe you are all making a big deal of this. Ranking the success of actors based solely upon the box office success of the movies in which they acted, regardless, for the most part, of their involvement in the movies, is absolutely ridiculous. First, each actor cannot necessarily take full credit for the total gross of each of his/her movies. As has been pointed out, Samuel L. Jackson’s roles in many, if not most, of his movies are supporting roles. Did people flock to the box office to buy a ticket to see Iron Man or the Star Wars films because Samuel L. Jackson was playing a secondary role in it? I think not. Second, as has also been pointed out, this list obviously favors more recent actors because of ticket price inflation. So, according to this absurd list, earlier actors such as Cary Grant, Katherine Hepburn or Jimmy Stewart are not successful, despite their long careers, hundreds of movies and critical acclaim. See the stupidity?

]]>