I suppose you’re right there - I was conflating Starring with Leading, which is different. He has a lot of starring roles, but only a few leading roles.

But its not like leading roles are the hallmarks of success, either. There are plenty of successful and iconic supporting/character actors out there who are absolutely successes and have raving fans. Its not a mark against his talent.

He was great in that as well. I didn’t include it because he wasn’t in the ads for the movie, and so “we” weren’t sold a seat based on his participation, but good callout.

Its less about the war and more about journalism and the limits of the human capacity for violence over time. IMO excellent film, amazing performance from Kirsten Dunst

I mean… he’s had plenty of starring roles, and his acting has won him both awards and acclaim. Requiem for a Dream, Mr. Nobody, Dallas Buyers Club, House of Gucci, The Little Things - and that’s not including his clunkers. He’s still an in-demand actor with 30 years of work behind him. Not everyone makes a career that good in Hollywood.

I think he’s an asshole. But he’s a talented asshole.

Human beings are sexually dimorphic, but most of the advantages or disadvantages are negligible or can be overcome with training, so it makes little difference. It makes even less difference in middle and high school aged children, since everyone is at (somewhat) different points developmentally anyway.

Fun fact: the studio made the movie dogshit, too. Watch the trailer for it - they filmed a bunch of scenes from the book, including the original ending, that never made it to theaters but still ended up in the trailer.