Where have all the actors gone?

I'm humming Paula Cole in my head right now. Either that or "Stacked Actors" off There's Nothing Left to Lose. I don't know what Paula Cole's done since the Dawson's Creek soundtrack, but the Foo Fighters have turned into classic rock revivalists/heavy metallers. But the song title is apt enough for what I'm thinking about. It seems like many actors these days are actually single-purpose tools- they can do one thing. Over and over. Does anyone actually act these days? Who are the current versatile actors?

First, an admission. Yes, I know that the characters on the screen are not the people themselves. I don't think that Seth Rogen in real life is the same as Seth Rogen on the screen. I'm saying that every single time I see Seth Rogen on the screen, I'm seeing the same character. And because the one constant amongst all of these characters is the actor himself, I call that character "Seth Rogen" as a matter of convenience.

Since I've been hanging out at the house these days, I've been watching some serious tv (my parents have UVerse and like a billion movie channels). In the course of the last 48 hours, I've watched movies like Couples Retreat, Four Christmases, Zach and Miri Make a Porno, Pineapple Express, Jennifer's Body, and more. Obviously the cream of the crop.

What do these movies have in common? Stars that don't act.

I'm not breaking any new ground here. Plenty of critics and reviews have harped, correctly so, on the unoriginality of Will Ferrell's inner-monologue-less man-child and Vince Vaughn's motormouth huckster. But I'll cast a even wider net. Yes, Seth Rogen's schtick is as played out as Lindsey Lohan is contagious. Yes, Vince Vaughn and Will Farrell have had nothing new to offer, with minor exceptions, since at least 2003 (for the former) and 2006 (for the latter). But what about some other actors? More "respected" actors? How about...I don't know...I'll go straight for the jugular- Daniel Day Lewis?

Gangs of New York was awesome, despite its blue-balling, whack-job letdown of an ending. DD-L had some primo scenes, including that fantastic eyeball-tapping monologue in the rocking chair blanketed by the flag. There Will Be Blood was awesomer. Better music. Better story. Better performances. Unrelenting tension (by the end of the movie, I was exhausted). And again, another flawless performance by DD-L, rightfully winning the Oscar.

Yeah, he acted his ass off. But where was the risk? What do you think went through Daniel Day-Lewis' head when he was gearing up for TWBB? "I know what the problem was- Bill the Butcher just wasn't intense enough! I learned how to tap my glass eyeball with the tip of a knife, and I fully embodied the xenophobic hate-mongering zeitgeist of Civil War-era New York, but I just didn't go far enough! There are depths of loathsome left to plumb!"

I mean, sometimes, watching There Will Be Blood is like sitting through Gangs of New York 2: Daniel Goes West. That's why I was pretty excited that he went and did Nine as his next movie.

Alright, Maybe not the best example. After all, he did come up with a different accent, and he did have a different moustache. And the motivations for the characters were different. I get it.

Another, better, example from the A-List of respectability: Denzel Washington. When's the last time Denzel created a memorable character that wasn't just the latest iteration of the standard-issue Denzel smile, charm, and swagger? Ok, maybe he didn't show too much swagger in The Taking of Pelham 1 2 3, but that was only because he was an office worker nerd (the glasses gave it away. Thanks Tony Scott for the subtle clue). Overall, however, Denzel Washington trots out the same performance again and again, dressed up in different costumes and set up with different backstories. But the execution is always the same.

I mean, at this point, Ice Cube takes more risks as an actor, selecting at least somewhat diverse characters as he builds out his career.

One test I've been running for the last couple of years in order to see if the role/character was good is the name check: can I remember the character's name and not just the actor who played him? If the actor makes me forget him or her, he or she has probably done a pretty good job. So far the test gives too many false negatives, but not too many false positives (and those movies named after the characters don't count! Keira Knightly does NOT get credit for Domino, another Tony Scott flick- am I sensing a trend here?).

It's easy to see how stars fall into their personal ruts. What worked in the past should work in the future. Obviously. It's the ergodic hypothesis!

Want some more actors who don't seem to actually act? Hugh Grant, Sarah Jessica Parker, Owen Wilson, Ben Stiller (not a great one- Greenberg, Zoolander, and The Royal Tenenbaums all have different performances, I think), Sam Elliot to an extent, that total hack Shia LeBeouf, Gerard Butler (isn't it pretty pathetic that his most daring performance actually IS 300?), the rest of the Apatow posse, (immediate and extended), Jesse Eisenberg (it pains me to say), Michael Cera (it does not pain me to say, although he did tap into a small capillary of ballsy venom for Youth in Revolt and a little manic energy for Scott Pilgrim, both encouraging signs), JACK BLACK, and on and on. Uggh.

Sorry for my carpet-bombing. I know there are plenty of actors grinding it out, earning the rights to their profession. It's just annoying to see the same movie over and over. It'd be cool to see some star dig into a role for the sake of the role. How awesome would it be to see Daniel Day-Lewis in some comedy sidekick role, maybe unrecognizable, maybe not, indulging the idiosyncracies of some character. Wouldn't that be fun? Fingers crossed.