Just an observation. Light-irises - i.e. blue/ grey/ green eyes seem to work best on screen (movies and TV) when it comes to acting.
Here, we need to distinguish 'actors' and stars. 'Actors' are those who are well-known for their ability to act, versus those who are known primarily for their star-quality, for their screen 'magnetism'.
Stars can have any coloured eyes - but it seems to me that light-irises are certainly helpful when in comes to acting; probably for the simple reason that they are more expressive of emotion, and of a wide range of emotions - and that is much of what close-up screen acting is about.
Of course there are exceptions: i.e. excellent screen actors with dark-eyes (e.g. John Hurt, perhaps the best of his generation?); but considering that blue eyes are always in a minority, often a small minority, in the nations that dominate TV and movies - it is striking how many actors have light irises.
I have often read that blue eyes (or green) are said to be especially attractive, but I simply do not think this is true. Even if it is somewhat true; it only applies to a minority of intensely blue eyes, and it is a weak contributor to being regarded as attractive - other (facial, skin, and bodily) factors are much more important.
My conclusion is that there are many aspects to being a good actor, of which eye colour is only one; but that light-irises are an advantage due to emotional expressivity. And this is the major reason why blue-eyes (especially) are 'over-represented' on-screen.
Declaration: I have blue (albeit greyish) eyes, which I inherit from my Charlton Northumbrian ancestry, which is either Angle or Norse in origin. Northumberland has the highest prevalence of blue eyes in England. My eyes are certainly expressive, and I used to be a decent actor - and lecturer - but nobody has ever praised them for being especially attractive.