I would definitely put Meghan as a C List or even D List actress; essentially an actress who has a job but isn't making huge waves isn't being noticed by the mass amount of media outlets and 98.8% of the population wouldn't know who she was if she hadn't hit the stratosphere because of her boyfriend. It's not an insult to call Meghan C List, it's just what is.
Good grief!
I would just reply that I know of no where where the use of C or D has any real meaning. Can you point to anywhere such designations are used with a common understanding of meaning,
except perhaps to diss someone for whatever reason?
And as for the underlined, you do realize that that takes place because of aggressive PR campaigns? Meaning: big money, maybe a studio, trying to 'sell' a 'property'? It's so complicated. Has to do with power (not talent per se). Who 'plays the game'. Has everything to do with box office receipts. I could go on but well-known actors are well-known less for themselves than because they have a PR machine behind them, they are making choices, cutting deals (not always savory deals either, look at Harvey Weinstein
).
Seems like it Xenia. I'd never heard of her till she was dating Harry. She's had fairly steady work, but she' wasn't famous. Not that being "A List" means you're necessarily a great actor.. because it often has more to do with looks and determination.. and luck.. Meghan may well have been a good actress technically but she simply had not become a star... However I'm guessing she's a competent but far from brilliant actress... and she was employed which in a job like acting, is doing pretty well... But she wasn't famous....
'Famous' is relative.
Being successful is not a function of being 'famous'. Meghan's career as it stood was successful. She was, in fact, at an interesting crossroads once Suits ended.
Being an A-Lister (as is defined by public perception and PR) has everything to do with deals, and being 'one of the guys' (however that comes about, though there are the rare few who do get break-out roles early on and then have some clout but those stories are rare indeed). American actors do not come up through an acting system the way British actors do. 'Fame' and being respected in the profession are two very different things. It is the latter that reliably gets one gigs. JMO of course but I feel obliged to say.
Meghan was getting respect in the profession which is what counts and what could have been parleyed in any number of ways.
Many of the posters here didn't know about Meghan before she met Harry, but that doesn't take away from the fact, that she was an actress with over 1 million followers on instagram, had a very successful clothing line and an equally successful lifestyle blog, which brought her a really nice income. That's more than I assume either of Harry's exes have going on even after their relationships with Harry. IMHO the Meghan effect is largely happening because of her own qualities, not just because of her engagement with Harry. I don't think the same would be happening had he proposed to any other woman.
Exactly so, and that's success.
If you personally had no knowledge of her doesn't count. There are massive numbers of people who are wildly successful in their niches but for whom there is no global awareness. In fact (and I am particularly thinking of the gaming world) there are some who have global fame yet if you are not tracking in that niche you are likely clueless about them. Attend a Comic-Con to get what I mean.
Anyway, I'm not sure why some find it necessary to diminish Meghan's real accomplishment as an actor. Her connection to Harry most definitely elevated Meghan to global awareness, that she did not have as an actress. But because she did not have that global awareness via her acting (like Grace Kelly did) does not then mean she was doing poorly in her career as an actress. (In this I completely avoid assessing her acting ability).