TMOS casting - a hersey

[StarStuff]

Because of weeks spent recovering fromt he flu, and our computer being down I haven't kept up with all the casting post. I apologize if the following has already been covered.

1. How many of us were drawn to the original B5 series because of the actors? For many of us it was only after we became involved in the story that we began to appreciate individual actors.

2. How many of us will stay away from TMOS because of the casting? Not too many I suspect.

3. Because making money is the first object of the studio, the powers-that-be will want to increase the fan base by using some "name" actors.

4. If TMOS is a success then there can be TMOS II, III, etc. with maybe some TV spin-offs where more of the original actors can then have significant roles.

 

[A_M_Swallow]

JMS appears to have written 3 roles for guest stars. They are all suitable for filling by name actors. The fans will be happy to watch whoever is chosen. For a major opening weekend no film needs more than 3 big names, more are just an unnecessary expense.

 

[Joseph DeMartino]

I'll throw your own question back at you. How many people go to movies at all based on what actors are in them. I happen to like Tom Hanks. I think he's a terrific actor. But I wouldn't go within 20 miles of his remake of The Ladykillers because it was so obviously a dog. And what kind of "name actors" would be drawn to a "B" level SF film based on an obscure TV show? I don't see big name stars lining up to take roles even in the Star Wars movies, much less B5. (Samuel L. Jackson is a fine actor, but he's no movie star.) Name the top ten movie stars you can think of. How much SF and Fantasy do you see on their resumes after they became known? (Will Smith is the exception, and his films are increasingly Will Smith movies, whatever the genre)

Even if stars were available, WB probably wouldn't want to hire them. Yes, a star might add to your take at the box office, but he also adds to your overhead. The question is does the one amount to more than the other? If you take was starts as a $65 million movie and turn it into a $85 million picture by adding a $20 million actor, you've just upped your expenses by almost a third. Instead of needing to gross about $195 million at the box office to break even, you suddenly have to gross $255 million. Did your big star add $60 million to your box office take? 'Cause if he didn't, you just lost money on the deal. You might have done better with a cheap TV actor.

3. Because making money is the first object of the studio, the powers-that-be will want to increase the fan base by using some "name" actors.

Like Paramount added all those name actors to Star Trek: The Motion Picture and Wrath of Khan?

Any movie needs two things:

1) A good opening weekend, and good word of mouth. A actor might be able to help a picture "open" - but so can a good ad campaign, good reviews and "must see" special effects. For a film like TMoS, X-Files: Fight the Future, X-Men the Trek films or The Incredible Hulk, another thing that can help a film "open" is the hardcore "geek" audience of the original material.

2) Good word of mouth. The first people who see a film have to tell their friends and nieghbors how good it was if a film is going to stay in theaters. If it is going to become a blockbuster they have to tell their parents as well, see it themselves a second and third time, and maybe take the kids. (Blockbusters all break out of the usual "teenagers" movie demographic. Grown-ups go to see blockbusters, that's what makes them hits.) The mere presence of an actor is not going to keep it going. A good story, and characters you care about keep films playing at the local octoplex. With geek films the first weekend audience often consistes of the geeks themselves, who are rabid fans, and their dates, who aren't. If the dates like the movie as a movie it will succeed. If not, not. Because then it has appeal beyond geekdom and can reach a mainstream audience.

All the comic book movies I mentioned above passed this test - except for The Hulk. The film sucked, nobody liked it, and the non-geeks who were not interested in the FX or analyzing how it compared to the comic book told their friends to stay away and they did. With the Trek films the most accessible to non-fans (II, IV and First Contact) did best - none based on "movie star" support. But the last couple of films disappointed, got poorer word of mouth, and the series essentially fizzled. (Nobody at Paramount is talking about future films, and I didn't bother seeing the last one, even on DVD. I just don't care at this point.)

And as Andrew pointed out, there is plenty of room to add "name actors" (or at least more recognizable film actors) as new characters in this film, and make them established ones in subsequent films. There is no reason to replace the original actors in the original roles unless they are unavailable or uninterested. But one faction at WB isn't even interested in asking them, they just want them to be played by new actors.

If you accept the so-called "casting lists" as accurate (and I don't because there is no reason to think that WB would be running a "want ad" for actors in a major motion picture on cheesey web sites rather than going directly to agents and asking them which of their clients match the requirements of the roles, which is the usual method) the regular characters would effectively have supporting roles, with the focus on the new comers. Why spend big bucks on name actors for smaller roles when you can cast them in the lead roles and both save money and get those crazy SF fans off your back by keeping the TV actors in the old parts? If people rarely go to a movie just because a given actor is starring in it I think we can be pretty sure that they hardly ever go see a movie becaues a given actor has a cameo in it. So that's a theory that holds even less water than most of the other "but what if...?" questions that we still keep having to field two months after this campaign started and in spite of the obvious facts that a) JMS hasn't told us to stop and b) if we're wrong there is no reason in the world that JMS would hesitate to tell us to shut up.

Regards,

Joe

 

[Jan]

You know the things that struck me about JMS's 'no comment' post? That he said he'd like to comment but wasn't able to. Sounds to me like he'd have something to say *in spades* if he could. The placing struck me, too. Nobody'd even posted an "Attention: JMS" question, he just came in to one of several threads discussing the campaign, seemingly in answer to a post musing about Ashton Kutcher as a Minbari. <shudder>

Some day I hope to hear all that's been going on. I don't expect to, but I hope.

Jan

 

[Ninja_Squirrel]

1. How many of us were drawn to the original B5 series because of the actors? For many of us it was only after we became involved in the story that we began to appreciate individual actors.

2. How many of us will stay away from TMOS because of the casting? Not too many I suspect.

3. Because making money is the first object of the studio, the powers-that-be will want to increase the fan base by using some "name" actors.

4. If TMOS is a success then there can be TMOS II, III, etc. with maybe some TV spin-offs where more of the original actors can then have significant roles.

1. Okay, good point. More precisely, a correct yet irrelevant point. Even if it wasn't the original drawing point and we like the actors because we're used to them now, we're talking about *now*. Go back in a time machine to the early 1990's and we definitely wouldn't care if Andreas Katsulas played G'Kar. But this is 2005, we do know what the actors mean to Babylon 5, and *now* they are a drawing point for us. That's not something you can undo (and something the suits *shoudn't* undo)

2. I'm debating about this one. As much as it will be a travesty if it is re-cast, yes I might still go see it anyway. It would be a bit like watching a trainwreck, but I'll probably still be curious. Even if things got way worse, like maybe JMS walks, they re-cast, and the previews look bad, I may go see it almost like "research" on how bad it could turn out. Also, if the suits really do have screwy logic, boycotting the film might make them think fans have abandoned B5, and we might never see B5 in any form again. Supporting even a screwed up film might be our only chance to keep our foot in the door for a TV show, books, a better sequel, etc.

3. But will it really be an *increase* of fan base. For every new viewer they might gain because of "name" actors, they'll probably lose a long-time fan due to re-casting. If they can make the movie good enough and make it look good enough in previews and commercials--regardless of who's in it--then by keeping the original actors, they'll also keep the original fans, by default. I still can't quite understand why the suits think it's less risky to re-cast than to stay the course. It defies logic. Throw in a few stars for new roles, keep the originals actors in original characters, and you get the best of both worlds.

4. Let's say, hypothetically, we're all fruit-loops-for-brains and re-casting would not only not hurt the movie but actually help it and it is a success... That just means that future sequels and TV spinoffs would not be opportunities for original actors because the success of the first movie would be based off the re-cast actors. In other words, you start down this road, and the original actors are probably screwed permanently.

Granted, my points in 2 and 4 might be kind of contradictory. I don't want a re-cast film to be successful, but I said I might go see it anyway. I guess what I'd have to do is wait so that I don't contribute to opening weeking numbers. Also, I'd probably see it as a matinee or wait till it comes to a bargain theater so that even if I contribute a ticket number, I'm not adding too much money to the profit total. I'm only one person, but if others who would be dying of curiousity feel that have to see it no matter what, that could be their strategy too--and that would add up.

Who knows, I might actually pay for one movie and sneak into TMoS, something I've never done because I'm a play-by-the-book kind of guy. Out of principal, I might make an exception this time.

That's, of course, if it is re-cast. Maybe our efforts will work, we'll get the originals, and we'll all be "StarWars'n" in line opening day, paying full price. Here's to hoping.

 

[Jade Jaguar]

By "hersey," do you mean hershey, or heresy, or perhaps, John Hersey, author of A Bell For Adano?

 

[Ninja_Squirrel]

Or could it be hearsay?

 

[Jade Jaguar]

Definitely.

 

[LondosHair]

1. How many of us were drawn to the original B5 series because of the actors? For many of us it was only after we became involved in the story that we began to appreciate individual actors.

True. But it was also a brand-new story, unlike the situation the movie is facing. We've had years to get used to certain characters, therefore we expect to see them.

2. How many of us will stay away from TMOS because of the casting? Not too many I suspect.

I'll reluctantly allow for the re-casting of Galen, because I realize it couldn't be avoided... Peter Woodward can't play the role because he's scheduled for something else already. I will NOT allow for the re-casting of characters like Sheridan, Delenn, Garibaldi, G'Kar, Londo, etc. If they are re-cast, I will not spend my money to see, rent or buy TMoS.

3. Because making money is the first object of the studio, the powers-that-be will want to increase the fan base by using some "name" actors.

This is already becoming an old argument for this point, but I'll say it again: If Paramount had done that with Star Trek, do you really think we'd now have a library of 4 subsequent series and ten movies?

4. If TMOS is a success then there can be TMOS II, III, etc. with maybe some TV spin-offs where more of the original actors can then have significant roles.

If the original actors are replaced for the movies, why would they be brought back for more TV in their previous roles?

I said it once before: if they re-cast original character roles, this movie WILL bomb. There are too many B5 fans who have stuck by this show through thick and thin to get spit on like this. The majority of the fanbase will take a big steamy on this movie if WB decides that money or notoriety is more important than pleasing their fan base, and I will be one of them.

 

[Flounder]

1. How many of us were drawn to the original B5 series because of the actors? For many of us it was only after we became involved in the story that we began to appreciate individual actors.

Exactly. So why in the world do some people think that "big names" will bring in more people. Perhaps it'll bring in a few of their rabid fans, but it won't be enough to run down the box office. Let's take Michael Jackson, for example. If he got a leading role in TMoS, the rabid "he's innocent whatever people say"-fans will come watch it. But regular people could care less. In Jacko's case they might even stay away.

Now, I do agree that "star" names can sometimes generate interest. For example, I never would have heard about "Open House", the real estate musical, hadn't it been for Jerry Doyle appearing in it. And action stars draw people. My sister's school had a Steven Seagal fan club that would watch all his movies.
But this star draw is rather inconsequential for moderately big or big budget sci-fi/fantasy movies like Lord of the Rings, Babylon 5 or Evangelion. It just has to be good, and they have to advertise a bit.

 

[Chris Springob]

I agree with pretty much everything you said in your post Joe, except 1) that I don't think The Hulk sucked, though of course I acknowledge that my opinion on that is irrelevant to the topic at hand, since word of mouth depends on the collective opinion of the total audience, not my own personal opinion, and 2) that I'm not sure about your suggestion that big name stars tend to avoid SF&F movies. I can think of plenty of examples just within the last few years. Tom Cruise in Minority Report. Mel Gibson in Signs. Jim Carrey in Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind. Heck, Bruce Willis has been in more SF&F movies in the last 10 years than I can count. These may not be SF of the spaceships and aliens variety, but they're all most certainly SF. I agree that space operas may, to a certain extent, be viewed as the ugly stepchild of Hollywood (and I certainly agree with your overall point that there's absolutely no chance that we're going to see any of the aforementioned actors in TMoS). But I wouldn't say that was true of all SF&F.

 

[b4bob]

I'm coming out of lurk mode here, so forgive me if much of this has been discussed already. but Joe, I gotta ask you a few questions.

Joe, do I understand you correctly. Is it your contention that WB wants to both (A) make a B5 feature film in which most--if not all--of the original B5 characters are reduced to small, cameo roles, and (B) re-cast those reduced, classic B5 characters with "name" actors?

 

[Joseph DeMartino]

Is it your contention that WB wants to both (A) make a B5 feature film in which most--if not all--of the original B5 characters are reduced to small, cameo roles, and (B) re-cast those reduced, classic B5 characters with "name" actors?

In a word, "No". That is not my contention.

My information is as follows:

Some people at WB who are involved in the production of The Memory of Shadows do not want any of the TV actors to reprise their roles in the feature film. That as a matter of policy. They don't want to offer the roles to those actors. They don't want them involved. They want to fill such roles with experienced, not necessarily "name", film actors. The film people are taking the position that these hicks from TV-ville (JMS and company) may know B5 but they don't know the movie biz and they should let experienced movie people make these decisions.

That's all I know. I don't know how many new characters will be in the film, how many old characters or which ones are currently schedule to appear. I don't know anything about which other actors WB might be considering. I don't know the balance of prominence of any of the old characters or new character or any combination thereof. I don't know any details of the plot.

AND NEITHER DOES ANYBODY ELSE WHO IS NOT DIRECTLY INVOLVED IN THE PRODUCTION OF THE FILM

There's a lot of second-through-sixth hand "information" floating around the 'net, like character descriptions, sketchy information on the plot, claims that there won't be any original characters in the movie, claims that any that are in it will only be cameos, none of which, as far as I can tell, have been verified by anyone in a position to know.

Regards,

Joe

 

[KoshN]

My information is as follows:

Some people at WB who are involved in the production of The Memory of Shadows do not want any of the TV actors to reprise their roles in the feature film. That as a matter of policy. They don't want to offer the roles to those actors. They don't want them involved. They want to fill such roles with experienced, not necessarily "name", film actors. The film people are taking the position that these hicks from TV-ville (JMS and company) may know B5 but they don't know the movie biz and they should let experienced movie people make these decisions.

How could these "people at WB who are involved in the production of The Memory of Shadows" be so monumentally stupid? Shouldn't natural selection have taken them out by now?

 

[Joseph DeMartino]

Always bet on stupidity.

Joe

 

[Marshal]

Has there been in news in the last few weeks I have been trying to follow this as best I can. But it seem that there has been no News aside from the Fans stuff on TMoS. Could someone if it would not be to much trouble bring me up to speed.

 

[Za_Ha_Dum]

Always bet on stupidity

Well, Joe, this time I must disagree. I would bet on pride .

Those stupid (almost pre-historical brains) executives from feature film are insane because of their pride. They do not want to ADMIT that JMS and all the TV actors can make the job done quite well. Those stupids think they know better then the fans, who can be the BEST marketing campaign for the movie TMoS. Let me review many things we said:

1) FINANTIAL POINT OF VIEW

Tv actors will represent a lower budget then well known features actors. Therefore, using B5 TV series actors will be LESS RISK.

2) BLOCKBUSTER

As said before, we (fans) can be the best advertisers for TMoS. As said, our friends and family will be motivated by our enthusiasm as long as we see TV actors, INCREASING possibility of sucess.

3) PREVIOUS EXPERIENCES

Those stupid guys have seen experiences such as:

Star Trek, Lord of the Ring, Harry Potter and Star Wars (old trilogy), Back to the future

All mentioned movies did not have movie stars, and some of them even used TV actors for the main roles, and still were blockbusters......

Therefore, Joe, I can only think that the decision makers of WB for TMoS project must be Insects using a human being outfit (Kind of Man in Black aliens).....

Regards,

Cadu
Zahadum

 

[Les_Greenhalgh]

Some people at WB who are involved in the production of The Memory of Shadows do not want any of the TV actors to reprise their roles in the feature film. That as a matter of policy. They don't want to offer the roles to those actors. They don't want them involved. They want to fill such roles with experienced, not necessarily "name", film actors. The film people are taking the position that these hicks from TV-ville (JMS and company) may know B5 but they don't know the movie biz and they should let experienced movie people make these decisions.

I'm frankly amazed that it has got to this point before WB has decided that it only wants film actors. Surely this is something that would have been covered, at least in principle, in the earlier stages of TMOS' production, especially as in B5's early days I believe WB proposed a B5 film to JMS without the original cast, which JMS promptly shot down. You would have thought the issue of re-casting would have been covered by WB + JMS much earlier.

kind regards,

 

[Za_Ha_Dum]

You would have thought the issue of re-casting would have been covered by WB + JMS much earlier.

I guess JMS did not know. Or they simply lied to JMS (as they did for the matter related to the Cruzade DVD extras). I suspect that JMS did not want this situation. As we have learnt, he promised to the TV cast that they would be in a feature film if someday this project would come along.

Regards,

CADU

 

[Joseph DeMartino]

...especially as in B5's early days I believe WB proposed a B5 film to JMS without the original cast, which JMS promptly shot down.

I must say that while I've heard this rumor, I have only heard it since the current casting controversy. Did I miss a meeting, or a memo or something?

As far as I can recall the only time serious consideration was given to a B5 feature film was in mid-1998 when productino on Crusade was ramping up, B5 had just signed off and the Del Rey trilogies were about to be published. WB was then very high on the franchise possibilities of the series, and TNT was still talking about an additional TV movie or two a year. By early 1999 Crusade was dead, Sierra's PC game had been cancelled and the entire B5 universe began a downward slide that wouldn't stop until the Rangers pilot started shooting in 2001. (And some would argue that, despite getting made, Rangers didn't really represent an uptick for the franchise. ) So WB, having paid JMS to write a treatment for a feature film, pulled the plug. I don't remember anything about casting being an issue.

But that doesn't mean there wasn't something along these lines in the really early days of the show (before I discovered it.) Can anyone else verify this? Anyone remember this being reported at the time it was supposed to have happened? I'm really curious.

And no, the casting business would not necessarily have been carved in stone at an earlier point in the deal-making. First JMS had to sell WB on the concept (or they he). Then they had to agree on a story, several drafts of a script. A director had to be secured, and he would want input on the script (and the casting, so that process couldn't even begin until he was in place.) Shooting locations had to be selected and production facilities (and crew) booked. A shooting schedule had to be decided on. All that had to happen before the casting process started because they had to be able to tell the actors, "We need you to shoot for 8 weeks outside of London plus 1 week for location stuff in New Zealand, starting on April 9th" or whatever.

Now it may be that JMS just assumed that they'd approach the original cast, or they may have strongly implied that they would, stringing him along until it was almost too late and then dropping the bombshell on him. (Something like the way Warner Home Video cut his commentary and "forgot" to send him the final tape to approve so he learned about it only after the DVDs were in stores.)

Regards,

Joe