Unknowns versus Big-named stars

Sven-El

Sven-El

Well-known member
I've read complaints by some that it is a bad thing that the filmakers have chosen unknown ( or virtually unknown) actors and actresses to portray the characters in Narnia. Personally I think this is one of the things the filkmakers have done well at. Would any one have prefered to have say Dakota Fanning over Georgie Henley as Lucy? How about Brad Pitt over Liam Neeson as the voice of Aslan?

I think one of the benefits of unknowns is that they can sink more into the character role so you see the character. Also certain actors just have a level of excess baggage to them, and not just other roles but things like their political views , or personal life ( say the April Fools Day joke of Lyndsey Lohan as R's daughter ).

Other times a a larger name can draw away from the main characters. A bigger name gets bigger billign. In Richard Donner's first Superman film, Christopher Reeve's Superman got third billing after the big names of Marlon Brando and Gene Hackman. Jack Nicholson and Arnold Shwarzenegger got higher billing over Michael Keaton and George Clooney in Batman and Batman&Robin. Imagine if Nicole Kidman played Galadriel in LOTR or if she played Jadis in Narnia. She is a big enough name that her name would have had to go before the title "Lord of the Rings" or "The Chronicles of Narnia". ( much as it did on Golden Compass.)


A franchise like Narnia is a team. It's kind of like what Coach Herb Brooks told the 1980 Men's Olympic Hockey Team. "The name on the front is much more important than the name on the back." Narnia is the name on the front the actors are on the back .

However, a big advantage to a big named star is that they have a name that can draw in crowds.

What about the rest of you? Would you have prefered huge, A-list names in Narnia? Or do you like the fact they chose unknown performers for the roles. What are the advantages and disadvantages to both?
 
Last edited:
I don't like the thought of big-named stars in the films because it makes it harder for me to see them as the character. Like the brad pitt vs. liam neeson. If Brad pitt voiced Aslan, I would not be able to concentrate on Aslan speaking. Because all I'd be hearing is brad pitt.
 
I'd rather have more unknown people playing roles in Narnia. More than likely they're be more down to earth and normal as the characters should be. Its easier to relate to people too.:)
 
Besides, big actors were unknowns once. Give some fresh blood their big break.
 
I think unknown actors are better, for they give it more excitement, because you'll want to know more about them, you'd want to see the movie just to see whose playing who, at least thats how i feel.
 
I think that unknown actors are perfect for book to movie adaptations as they sink their teeth into the role more. Especially if they're a series.
For "superficial movies", then the actors are needed to help with the advertisement.

If someone is perfect for the part, then they need to be cast.
In Narnia there are lots of fresh faces which take their roles to heart and are perfect, but you can't forget (for example) what an incredible interpretation Brad Pitt and Cate Blanchett gave in Benjamin Button.
 
"Other times a a larger name can draw away from the main characters. A bigger name gets bigger billign."

I hate that, too Sven. In "My Girl", Anna Chlumsky, who played the main title character, was given fourth billing on the opening credits behind Macaulay Culkin, Dan Ackroyd, and Jamie Lee Curtis.

In fact, it seems that children, even when they are given main character roles, rarely are given top billing unless they are famous already. When other famous people are already a part of the project, the lesser-known actors who are the actual stars, especially the children, are shoved aside.

I would not be upset if they got a known actor if they actually fit into the role so long as they keep the name listing relative to how much screen time the character has in the movie.

That said, the other problem with famous actors is the recognition factor. It may be distracting to think about another role the actor played while watching them in the current movie.

MrBob
 
EXACTLY!!! I'm right there with you! I loved Georgie and Will as Lucy and Peter...and they haven't done anything except Narnia have they??????? Maybe little stuff. The casting director whose name escapes me did an AWESOME job- PIPPA HALL I think was her name?- of finding the right cast! :D
 
Last edited:
WEll as for my own personal opinion, I think there are plenty of unknown stars out there who have great potential to become well-known. I don't see a problem with having at least one big name in the movies. Did anybody really know the actors of Lord of the Rings very well? I know I certainly didn't! Yet after Fellowship was released, they became household names. They were also chosen to be in LotR, not because of their names or their fame, but because of how well they portrayed their characters (whether the fans agreed with how those characters were changed or not.) I really think the casting members made the right call in going with mostly unknown actors and actresses, but I wouldn't call Liam Neeson a small name. He's fairly (sp?) well known in Hollywood. ;)
 
Aravis Kenobi said:
WEll as for my own personal opinion, I think there are plenty of unknown stars out there who have great potential to become well-known. I don't see a problem with having at least one big name in the movies. Did anybody really know the actors of Lord of the Rings very well? I know I certainly didn't! Yet after Fellowship was released, they became household names. They were also chosen to be in LotR, not because of their names or their fame, but because of how well they portrayed their characters (whether the fans agreed with how those characters were changed or not.) I really think the casting members made the right call in going with mostly unknown actors and actresses, but I wouldn't call Liam Neeson a small name. He's fairly (sp?) well known in Hollywood. ;)
Click to expand...

True, but while he's certainly well known ( Acadamy Award nomination for Schindler's List any one? Star Wars? Batman Begins? Grammy award for best Spoken word album for "Polar Express?" ) he isn't the kind of name who when people hear "a movie starring Liam Neeson" they don't go, "OOo, I got to go see it because of him!" That was more what I was getting at with him, especailly in the Pitt comparisons. Not to knock Mr. Neeson of coruse, he's one of my favorite actors, and I like how well he stays below the radar in terms of media coverage.
 
Last edited:
I don't know...I'm sure there are several people who would see a film because Liam was in it. I kinda want to see Kingdom of Heaven simply because he's in it, but after his part I would quit on the film.
 
Aravis Kenobi said:
I don't know...I'm sure there are several people who would see a film because Liam was in it. I kinda want to see Kingdom of Heaven simply because he's in it, but after his part I would quit on the film.
Click to expand...

True. I wanted to see Taken for that reason too, as said he's one of my favorite actors.
 
The only reason I can think of that people would want big name stars is so that the movies get more publicity and more people want to watch them. Personally, I think the actors that were chosen fit the image I had of the characters perfectly (except Edmund and Caspian being blonde).
I also agree that if they had chosen big name stars to play the parts then it would have taken away from the characters.
 
Back
Top