Many different methods can be used to illustrate the difference between the adult group and the child group. One is to compare their full physical maturity ranges. Compare average male and female children to average male and female adults, the most physically mature male and female children to the most physically mature male and female adults, and the least physically mature male and female children to the least physically mature male and female adults. Laying out a comparison in this way doesn’t allow any distortion of the problem’s magnitude. The most mature children are still less mature than the least mature adults, but this kind of flawed comparison doesn’t even come close to showing the actual difference between the two groups.

Good examples of average male and female children are Orlando Bloom, Jake Gyllenhaal, Reece Witherspoon and Rachel McAdams, and good examples of average male and female adults are Nicolas Cage, Kiefer Sutherland, Diane Keaton and Jennifer Aniston. The difference between the adults and the children couldn’t be more obvious. In the celebrity comparison Orlando Bloom was seen most recently at 28, Jake Gyllenhaal at 24. Now compare them both to Nicolas Cage at the age of 22 when he made “Moonstruck” and “Raising Arizona”. Try to imagine either child playing Cage’s character in “Moonstruck”. When Cage and a 40 year old Cher began their relationship in the movie no one thought it was weird, and there’s no reason that they would. Cage was much younger than Cher, but he was clearly a fully grown man. A man who looked like he might easily be 35 years old. If Orlando or Jake had played Cage’s character the romance would have had a “robbing the cradle” feel. Everyone would have seen the relationship as strange, because everyone knows, consciously or subconsciously, that Orlando and Jake are just boys, not men. Neither child would be any more fitting playing Kiefer Sutherland’s role in “Young Guns”. Kiefer was just 21 in the movie, yet he was already a fully grown man, playing a role that required one. If a 28 year old Orlando Bloom had been cast in the movie to play the role of Kiefer’s brother, logically he should have been able to play the role of his older brother. Significantly older brother. No one would have believed it for a second. That would only make sense if Orlando was playing an older brother who had suffered some kind of horrible childhood disease. Otherwise he would have to play Kiefer’s younger brother - younger by at least three years.

The difference between the average females is just as big. The celebrity comparison has both Reese Witherspoon and Rachel McAdams as children at 28, and there’s no way that either child could have played Diane Keaton’s role in “The Godfather”. At 25, Diane was a grown woman in the movie, and she had to be to play the wife of a mafia crime boss. Reese or Rachel married to Michael Corleone would have looked odd, to say the least, and completely unbelievable. In a role like that both children would have looked a lot like little girls playing dress-up. Comparing the children to Jennifer Aniston also shows a huge contrast. In the first season of “Friends” Jennifer was 25, and if either Reese or Rachel was cast for the show in the role of Jennifer’s sister, it would have to have been in the role of the younger sister. Despite the fact that both Reese and Rachel are three years older in their most recent video evidence than Jennifer was at the time.

Some examples of the most physically mature, for the adults are Mel Gibson, Tom Sizemore, Charlize Theron and Lucy Lawless, and for the children Johnny Knoxville, Heath Ledger, Jennifer Garner and Hilary Swank. Johnny Knoxville is one of the oldest syndrome victims, and the celebrity comparison has him as a child most recently at 33. Mel Gibson was a grown man in “Mad Max” at 22, as was Tom Sizemore at 29 in “The Flight of the Intruder”, but comparing the two men to Johnny when they were also in their early 30’s is how the true maturity discrepancy is shown. Mel was 32 in “Lethal Weapon 2” and Tom was 31 in “True Romance”, and in those roles both men look like they could easily be 40, whereas at 33 Johnny would look completely ridiculous playing the role of a 40 year old. Although no one would have any trouble believing him in the role of a 19 year old high school student. It’s also funny to note that Russell Crowe, who wasn’t included in the celebrity comparison because of a lack of video evidence made before he was 30 years old, was 32 in the movie “L.A. Confidential”. Which means that if Johnny Knoxville was in the movie playing the role of Crowe’s brother, he should have been able to play his older brother. Think of how absurd that would look. Johnny would be a good fit as Crowe’s son, but would have no chance whatsoever of being believed as his older brother. The celebrity comparison has Heath Ledger most recently at 25, so he can’t be compared to Crowe, but he can be compared to Mel when he made “The Road Warrior” at 24. Once again, because it really bring physical maturity into focus, if Heath was cast for the movie in the role of Mel’s brother, which actor would play the older brother in that family?

The examples given as two of the most physically mature female adults, Charlize Theron and Lucy Lawless, define womanhood. Charlize was only 20 years old in “2 Days in the Valley”, and although she looked young, she didn’t look childish. She had already finished the process of physical maturation, and she had a grown woman’s face to prove it. Except for some extremely minor skin differences, she looks the very same in her most recent video evidence at 29. Lucy Lawless didn’t become famous as young as Charlize, but was a perfect example of a woman when she was first seen at 27 in “Xena - Warrior Princess”. Now compare the two adults to the two children. Jennifer Garner is a big girl, but even at the age of 33, when she was last seen in the celebrity comparison, she has the face of a child. She never went through the final stage of physical development. Hilary Swank, most recently confirmed to still be a child at 31, is even a little further from adulthood than Jennifer. The two are both more physically mature than most of the other female children, but comparing them to women like Charlize and Lucy really puts their lack of an adult level of physical maturity into perspective. A third female also belonging in the most mature adult group is Julia Roberts, and using her as an example gives us another comparison that really shows the adult/child maturity difference. In the movie "Pretty Woman" Julia was 22 years old, and her co-star Richard Gere was 40, yet the relationship between the two doesn't feel strange. Sure at the time Julia was just over half Richard's age, but nonetheless they didn't seem like an odd couple, because they were both without question 100% fully grown adults, on the very same level from a physical maturity standpoint. Imagine a 40 year old Richard Gere, or any other 40 year old actor for that matter, dating Hilary Swank or Jennifer Garner in a movie. Everyone, on some core, instinctive level, would see the relationship as weird. Even those people who if asked would classify Hilary and Jennifer as women would still feel that the girl was too young for the 40 year old actor. Despite the two actresses both being in their 30's in their most recent video evidence. Seeing a child actress in a relationship with an adult actor would force people to recognize the child's true level of physical maturity.

The examples chosen as some of the least physically mature, from the adult group are Matthew Broderick, Mark Hamill, Winona Ryder and Kate Beckinsale, and from the child group Tobey Maguire, Elijah Wood, Natalie Portman and Christina Ricci. The least physically mature children are an interesting bunch of physical specimens. Not one famous person who was born before 1966 looked even remotely like them. Only those suffering from some kind of a medical condition weren’t significantly more physically mature. Compare Tobey Maguire and Elijah Wood to Matthew Broderick and Mark Hamill. Matthew is without question at the low end of the maturity spectrum for adults, but at 26 in “Glory” he does, just barely, qualify as a man. At that age he could possibly have played the role of an older-looking 19 year old high school student, but Tobey Maguire at 28, the age he was in “Spiderman 2”, could have convincingly played the role of a student in his second or even his first year of high school. The maturity difference between Mark Hamill and Elijah Wood is just as great. Mark is even less mature than Matthew, probably the least mature male adult in the entire celebrity comparison, but Elijah is also less mature than Tobey. Mark was just barely able to play the role of a young man in “Star Wars” at 25, but he did pull it off. Elijah at 23, when he was last seen in the celebrity comparison, would be a comical Luke Skywalker. Elijah is a much better fit playing the role of a little mythical creature than he is playing the role of an adult human.

The situation with the least physically mature females is the same. Neither Winona Ryder or Kate Beckinsale qualify as an adult by much, but they’re both at a very different level of physical maturity from children like Natalie Portman and Christina Ricci. At 24 both girls, even by today’s standard, are underdeveloped. There’s no precedent in the history of cinema for 24 year old females born before 1972 who are anywhere near that lacking in physical maturity. A third great example of a female who belongs in the least mature children catagory is found on the musicians' side of the celebrity comparison - Lady Sovereign. Bringing the ironically named Lady Sovereign into the equation is useful because of the fact that she is the least physically mature female celebrity in the entire comparison. Nearly 21 years old in her most recent video evidence, the girl honestly looks 13. The absolute definition of a syndrome victim. No matter how hard you look, you will never find a female celebrity, in the celebrity comparison or outside of the celebrity comparison, born before 1972 who at 20 years old looks like the same species as Lady Sovereign. Not one person even close to as physically immature. If you can't see the remarkable lack of physical maturity in Lady Sovereign, then you simply have no ability whatsoever to recognize the level of physical maturity in human beings.

In addition to comparing the full physical maturity ranges, there are other interesting comparisons that can be made which really highlight the difference between the adults and the children. One is to take a look at Superman. There have been three movie and TV portrayals of Superman made by actors in the celebrity comparison, all of which are very well known. One was made by an adult, Christopher Reeve, and two were made by children, Tom Welling and Brandon Routh. Christopher Reeve was just 25 when he appeared in “Superman”, and there’s no questioning that at the time he was a fully grown man. In fact, he was clearly more physically mature than almost all of the adult males in the celebrity comparison. In Tom Welling’s last sighting as Superman in season 5 of “Smallville” he was 28, and inarguably still a child. If a million people were shown one minute of “Superman”, then one minute of the most recent episode of “Smallville”, every single person would point to Reeve as being the older of the two. It’s not even close. Even more telling is a comparison between Reeve and Brandon Routh. In the movie “Superman Returns” Brandon was 26, and although he’s more physically mature than every other actor in the celebrity comparison who was born after 1976, it’s obvious that he’s still a child. Very close to qualifying as an adult, but not close enough. That Routh is more mature than all of the other actors his age is what makes his comparison to Reeve so significant. The role of Superman requires an actor who is above average in terms of physical maturity - the more physically mature the better. Though the people who did the casting for “Superman Returns” must have not only wanted an actor who was extremely physically mature, but who was also young. Two qualities that are almost never found in the same person anymore. So even after looking at what was in all likelihood a huge amount of potential candidates they still couldn’t find even one young actor to play the role of Superman who was physically mature enough to qualify as a man. The child for life syndrome can make casting for a movie a tough job.