red snow Posted July 21, 2011 Share Posted July 21, 2011 Some people here have a warped idea of what a 'big name' is. I've seen no evidence to indicate that Purefoy is a 'big name'. Lucy Lawless, John Hannah, Joesph Fiennes, are not big names. Hell, Sean Bean, as someone above mentioned, is frequently referred to as 'the guy from Lord of the Rings, the one who dies". Momoa, Dinklage, Mark Addy, are also not big names. They're respectable actors, yes, but not 'big names'. Hell, I don't even think Momoa would have cost them that much- he hasn't done much. He's popular in certain genres, but that doesn't equal expensive. When they cast Bruce Willis as Craster and Jason Statham as Mace Tyrell, then we might have some 'big names'.All the people I listed have "genre appeal". Lucy Lawless isn't exactly great but she was in a long running and successful fantasy show. John Hannah was in the Mummy films. Momoa was in Stargate Atlantis. Fiennes Flashforward and camelot. Sean Bean, pretty much any film featuring a sword and the character's death (with Purefoy quickly becoming the guy who picks up the slack. GOT is a fantasy regardles of how they dress it up and that's why it makes sense to appeal to all types of fantasy/sci-fi fans - especially in the more mainstream shows/films. Just look at some of the casting threads and you can guarantee that the majority of suggestions usually pick actors from other genre shows (because we're all a bit lazy at heart and like something familiar). There will be people who checked out GOT because it had the "barbarian guy from stargate" or "the terminator's mum" in it and of course Sean Bean will have pulled in viewers too. In a way this is more important in a first season as you can "hook" the audience but unless you are A)confident in the story or B) willing to have diminishing returns then it's always worth throwing in a genre name every now and then even as just a guest star. I think option A is a sensible option here but they still need to market the hell out of the DVD boxset and even consider a complete re-run of season 1, prior to launching season 2. This show is going to be like "lost" in the sense that you need to be in on it from the start if you want to have a clue what is going on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TMWNN Posted July 21, 2011 Share Posted July 21, 2011 I wouldn't be surprised if Bean cost the series around 10% or more of its per-episode first season budget.I read somewhere that Bean was paid $500,000 per episode. Given 10 episodes and a $50-60 million season budget, 10% is about right.He did a great job, but now his role is done I think it'd be more advisable to go for really good but lesser-known actors and channel the funds to other areas where it is really needed.Agreed. Bean was a marketing first-stage booster rocket for a new show based on a relatively obscure series of fantasy books. In July 2011, with a critically and commercially successful first season, four million (!) copies of the first four books sold since January, and the fifth book the best-selling book of the year, HBO can now spend less on a big star and more on production.Edit: Not to imply that Sean Bean is very well known in the US (as opposed to the UK); he is not. Genre fans often confuse "famous among us" as "famous among most people," and this thread is just one of many, many examples of that. Bean is well known among American genre fans, however, because he played Boromir, and certainly marketing to them was important when building an audience. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Which Tyler Posted July 21, 2011 Share Posted July 21, 2011 If you're casting a big name, you need to look at what sort of fans they'd bring to the table, and whether they'd stay after the name has gone (no genuine big name would want to commit to more than 1 season - ALA Bean), or would already be watching.Given this, Bean was the absolutely perfect name to start the series with. There is probably not one single Sean Bean fan out there who wouldn't like the premise of GoT (but many who wouldn't have heard of it without him); so he brings in a large fan base, the vast majority of whom would stay once he's gone.The likes of Purefoy would also bring in a (far smaller) fan base who'd stay - but most of them would already be pulled in by Sean Bean, (Purefoy fans are probably a subset of Bean fans) and would already be watching.If they hired someone massive like a Tom Cruise, or a Brad Pitt; they'd bring an equally massive following - but would they really be the target audience for this show? would they really keep watching once their star has left? ie. would HBO get value-for-money from them?Given that they also want British Equity actors wherever they can; they'd need to think about what fan base would be brought in by such and such an actor; I'd suggest that the main cross-overs would be shows like Rome and Spartacus, maybe a bit more for the Stargate crowd; so someone like Purefoy or Hannah would be good calls and probably worth it, someone like Carlyle would help, but not necessarily be value-for-money. A Hugh Grant or Hugh Laurie would be completely pointless for this show. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jellydonut Posted July 21, 2011 Share Posted July 21, 2011 Why? Everyone who likes good TV likes this show. My parents who are great House fans love GOT. Most of my friends who enjoy HBO and AMC shows also like this show. Look past genre. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Mountain That Glides Posted July 21, 2011 Share Posted July 21, 2011 I disagree on the Hugh Laurie thing...if they got him as Craster, I think my life would be completely. ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flou Posted July 24, 2011 Share Posted July 24, 2011 All the people I listed have "genre appeal". Lucy Lawless isn't exactly great but she was in a long running and successful fantasy show. John Hannah was in the Mummy films. Momoa was in Stargate Atlantis. Fiennes Flashforward and camelot. Sean Bean, pretty much any film featuring a sword and the character's death (with Purefoy quickly becoming the guy who picks up the slack. GOT is a fantasy regardles of how they dress it up and that's why it makes sense to appeal to all types of fantasy/sci-fi fans - especially in the more mainstream shows/films. Just look at some of the casting threads and you can guarantee that the majority of suggestions usually pick actors from other genre shows (because we're all a bit lazy at heart and like something familiar). There will be people who checked out GOT because it had the "barbarian guy from stargate" or "the terminator's mum" in it and of course Sean Bean will have pulled in viewers too. In a way this is more important in a first season as you can "hook" the audience but unless you are A)confident in the story or B) willing to have diminishing returns then it's always worth throwing in a genre name every now and then even as just a guest star. I think option A is a sensible option here but they still need to market the hell out of the DVD boxset and even consider a complete re-run of season 1, prior to launching season 2. This show is going to be like "lost" in the sense that you need to be in on it from the start if you want to have a clue what is going on.Yes they have "genre appeal". But I don't think they need any genre "stars" at this point. They have launched the series succesfully. From now on word of mouth will do so much more than casting someone like Lucy Lawless. Quality actors (at a reasonable price) that fit the roles perfectly and are willing to commit to their roles for multiple seasons is what they need. Someone like Fiennes won't be cheap (even though two of his last shows have failed). They have to be conservative with their casting budget, since there's just so many roles to fill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_Oberyn_ Posted July 24, 2011 Share Posted July 24, 2011 A Hugh Grant or Hugh Laurie would be completely pointless for this show.I disagree, unlike Grant, Laurie is not a one trick pony. Grant just stuttered his way through a few movies, that's not even acting. Hugh Laurie is been in House far too long so he might seem the same to the US viewers , but the guy can act any given role and he can bring a big fan base to the series. What would be great too see though would be Daniel Day-Lewis in a relatively short role. E.g Quorin Halfhand or Oberyn Martell. He would also be perfect to play Victarion but that's not going to happen :P. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Snow Posted July 24, 2011 Share Posted July 24, 2011 Nobodies are more important to me then big screen actors, it keeps it more authentic IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manhole Eunuchsbane Posted July 24, 2011 Share Posted July 24, 2011 If the show is good, it will make it's own big names.Nobody knew who Jon Hamm was before Mad Men, or Gandolfini before the Sopranos. Concur. If the series remains as well written and acted as Season One, it wont require big names. I think you could make the argument that Dinklage is bigger than he's ever been. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cadiva Posted July 24, 2011 Share Posted July 24, 2011 I don't think it needs big names after the success of season one. I think the casting of Sean Bean was to capitalise on the fact most people (outside of the UK) would know him from the LotR film trilogy and to provide some buzz before it started. There's a hell of a lot of very well known British (and Irish) actors in the cast which could be relied upon to draw in viewers from outside of the US as most of them have appeared either in films or in large scale TV productions which have been sold off to other countries.But, with the success of season one, I don't think they need to generate as big a buzz. HBO's gaining a reputation for producing top quality big budget TV serials now and the link up with Sky Atlantic is going to give them the viewers outside of the US as well.I think you may still see the odd cameo "big name" star though for the shorter roles with perhaps only one or two episodes to appear in and that's no bad thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manhole Eunuchsbane Posted July 24, 2011 Share Posted July 24, 2011 I think you may still see the odd cameo "big name" star though for the shorter roles with perhaps only one or two episodes to appear in and that's no bad thing. Absolutely. Big name cameos are always fun. Hugh Laurie would kill as Dolorous Edd. Not a cameo, I know, but one can dream. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadMage Posted July 25, 2011 Share Posted July 25, 2011 Cressen is probably too big a role to really count as a cameo, depending on how much of the prologue they choose to film. A true cameo would be if the nameless septon seated next to Cressen was played by GRRM.The septon would be at best a "featured extra".Yes, indeed. I was using an example, because in comparison, Cressen is a cameo over Jaqen.Cressen is indeed a cameo. His death will likely play out the first couple of minutes to introduce Mel and Stannis and then we won't see either of them until episode 2. If they were to feature him a decent amount of time in the episode, say 20 minutes, he'd be listed as featured guest star. Can someone please provide any proof between Big Names and success in television? Seems to me there's a very checkered correlation.Charlie Sheen is winning; both in life and this argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Davos Posted July 25, 2011 Share Posted July 25, 2011 Concur. If the series remains as well written and acted as Season One, it wont require big names. I think you could make the argument that Dinklage is bigger than he's ever been.I see what you did there! :thumbsup: I agree with you, prior to watching the series I knew Dinklage as the guy from Elf. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.