DVDFILE.COM Forum - View Single Post

rixrex · 08-22-2007, 06:17 PM

Typecasting will always exist for these reasons:

The public likes the appearance, persona and charisma of certain actors when they play their typecast characters.

Some typecast talent actually bring publicity and money to the production because they are cast to type, especially those as described above.

Typecasting lessens the burden on production crew to develop secondary characters thoroughly as the talent is able to handle it without needing loads of direction. Sometimes they even have a wardrobe ready to go.

Many times "casting against type" does not work, though occassionally it does, but not many studios would like to take that risk.

The biggest percent of active talent in film and TV productions have a certain type that they can play easily and prefer to play as well, as they like to work and earn money regularly like anybody else

Leading men and ladies even as such still tend to have a "type" of character they play, but their roles are usually more in depth and the typecasting is much less evident. They also have much more opportunity to play against type, but even with such powerful positions, it is risky and not always accepted by the public, so the money-holders are not eager to let go of the production cash.

Interestingly, most leading actors and actresses would love the chance to play a well-developed villainous role, as they get to expand their performances in these type roles and find such much more interesting. Most fans don't care a lot to see their favorite actors turn to do a villainous role, but sometimes it's successful. I am thinking about Henry Fonda in Once Upon a Time in the West, doing a superb turn as a villain, but I don't recall if the public accepted it at the time.

Then there are the very few who can tackle any type of role and be successful regardless, Robert DeNiro for example.

I always think of fine actors like Vincent Price when it comes to typecasting. He was typecast obviously, but had a range beyond the material in which he appeared. He would create a deeper and stronger character than the films required. I always though it interesting that he seemed less strong when he did not have his moustache. Talk about typecast by appearance.

08-22-2007, 06:17 PM	#6 (permalink)
rixrex Actor Join Date: Jul 2007	Typecasting will always exist for these reasons: The public likes the appearance, persona and charisma of certain actors when they play their typecast characters. Some typecast talent actually bring publicity and money to the production because they are cast to type, especially those as described above. Typecasting lessens the burden on production crew to develop secondary characters thoroughly as the talent is able to handle it without needing loads of direction. Sometimes they even have a wardrobe ready to go. Many times "casting against type" does not work, though occassionally it does, but not many studios would like to take that risk. The biggest percent of active talent in film and TV productions have a certain type that they can play easily and prefer to play as well, as they like to work and earn money regularly like anybody else Leading men and ladies even as such still tend to have a "type" of character they play, but their roles are usually more in depth and the typecasting is much less evident. They also have much more opportunity to play against type, but even with such powerful positions, it is risky and not always accepted by the public, so the money-holders are not eager to let go of the production cash. Interestingly, most leading actors and actresses would love the chance to play a well-developed villainous role, as they get to expand their performances in these type roles and find such much more interesting. Most fans don't care a lot to see their favorite actors turn to do a villainous role, but sometimes it's successful. I am thinking about Henry Fonda in Once Upon a Time in the West, doing a superb turn as a villain, but I don't recall if the public accepted it at the time. Then there are the very few who can tackle any type of role and be successful regardless, Robert DeNiro for example. I always think of fine actors like Vincent Price when it comes to typecasting. He was typecast obviously, but had a range beyond the material in which he appeared. He would create a deeper and stronger character than the films required. I always though it interesting that he seemed less strong when he did not have his moustache. Talk about typecast by appearance.