Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Kindred Winecoff's avatar

Fun post, but wrong measure. You correctly note that eigenvector centrality is a measure of "network importance, which considers both direct connections and the influence of second and third-order connections. A higher score means an actor is more central to our casting network."

In other words, it captures not only how well-connected someone is, but how well-connected those connections are. Samuel L Jackson is not *only* well-connected, he's well-connected to other well-connected people (like Bruce Willis, with whom he appears in multiple movies). That's why he ranks so highly.

That's not what the Bacon Number is about, the *quality* of connections isn't where the emphasis is placed, the "reach" is what we're after. Bacon didn't say he "worked with only the important people in Hollywood, and the important people those people worked with". He said he worked with everyone: and "everyone" includes people with both high and low eigenvector centrality. Working with people with low eigenvector centrality (e.g., the cast of Tremors) gives him further network reach than someone like Meryl Streep, who does not appear in these kinds of pictures.

The Bacon Number is a fun application of the Erdos Number that was applied to scientific collaboration networks. Erdos did not emphasize second-order influence, just overall connectivity, so I'd recommend using a measure that emphasizes network paths rather than overall influence. Closeness coefficient might be a good one, or even basic betweenness centrality. For a true test of the "small worldiness" of Hollywood you could calculate the shortest paths for every node to every other node, then see how many of those paths include Kevin Bacon.

(PS, the sum of *my* Erdos and Bacon numbers is less than 10, that's pretty low!)

Expand full comment
David Wilson's avatar

Couple of thoughts on this analysis.

Whether Kevin Bacon is the best actor for this game today, is kind of moot, since it was conceived in the mid-90s, well before the era of enormous ensemble-cast action flicks and movie universes, both of which significantly increase the connectedness, especially of A-listers. It would be a challenge, I think, to find someone as good as Kev for this game in, say, 1999.

Also, you have to remember that in the early days we were playing this game without access to IMDB, or even Google. The point is not just to find the connecting films, they actually have to be ones that are memorable. And the actor has to be well known enough to casual movie fans as well. "Six Degrees of Richard Jenkins, no, you know him, the dead guy from Six Feet Under" is not a great party game, haha. Kevin Bacon is also well-known enough and recognisable enough that you can easily spot him in a bit part early in his career, or a later cameo.

Another factor that is important in the game is interconnectedness between different universes of actors. There are certain actors that are important nodes in connecting between different movie eras, or studios, or genres, or geographical markets. A memorable challenge was someone claiming it would be impossible to connect Reg Varney, British star of comedies such as "Mutiny on the Buses" to Bacon, correspondence on the subject which has fortuitously been preserved by New Scientist. https://www.newscientist.com/letter/mg15921439-500-ubiquitous-varney/

George Cole, probably relatively unknown outside of the UK, proves to be a key connector from 90s era Hollywood A-Listers to the 60s UK comedy scene via a co-credit with Julia Roberts. Then you have people like Roddy McDowall, who as a child actor in the 30s and 40s was working with actors from the silent era and was still appearing in support and cameo roles through the 1990s.

I think a more complete analysis would need to weight these kind of 'long distance' links higher than ones which link actors and films that are more similar in terms of where they start and end.

That's another point about Bacon actually, he was clearly not snobbish at all as he would appear in films in a such a wide range of genres compared to most actors, so he'd end up working with horror, comedy, romcom and 'serious drama' actors who were relatively unlikely to cross paths with each other.

Expand full comment
22 more comments...

No posts