Harlee Buford - Supplemental Post #3

    About a week ago, the Academy announced a new Oscar category for casting. The new category will apply to films released in 2025, so the first Oscar for casting will be awarded at the 2026 Oscars. When I found out this news, I was super excited because I think it has been a long time coming. I believe that casting is a crucial part of making a successful film because although an actor may be talented or famous, it does not always mean that they are the best person for a particular role or that they even have the range for a certain role. Casting directors need to have a solid understanding of the film’s story to successfully cast roles, as well as have good instincts and the ability to spot emerging talent. Successful casting directors also know how to direct actors in an audition to see their range, flexibility, attitude, and ability to take notes. Further, another aspect of casting is making sure certain actors have chemistry, which is imperative for certain genres and stories. Also, I find that casting directors have to consider all aspects of an actor, including their type, appearance, age, etc. to see if they would make a character believable, which can be difficult to do as you have to remove your feelings from the situation and think logically. But ultimately, I find that great casting directors have the ability to see the bigger picture of a film and where an actor may or may not fit into that story. 

What do you think about this new category?


What films do you think an actor was perfectly cast for a role? What about films where an actor was horribly cast? 


Articles: 

Comments

  1. ninsFebruary 15, 2024 at 5:24 PM

    Nina Supplemental post #2– I think this is so wonderful that casting directors are getting recognition! I’ve personally been on both sides of the casting process, mostly as an actor, but I do believe casting really is crucial to a film. I think the recognition of casting as an important part of creating a good film by giving it a category at the Oscar’s is a big step forward to everyone learning more about the difference that casting can make. What’s interesting is for me, i can’t think of many films off the very top of my head where I feel like casting completely ruined the film (Perhaps that’s also because I need to watch a lot more films), but I believe part of that is since we as a film society have not shone a spotlight on casting as much, it’s more difficult to tell if the casting department was lacking versus if the writing department is lacking or the post production team rushed the project. These are things we’ve learned to look out for while watching media because it’s been placed more in the spotlight than something such as casting. I believe with the addition of this category we’ll have more conversation of “how casting did” while watching new projects.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Emma SmithFebruary 15, 2024 at 11:18 PM

    Emma Smith Supplemental post #2 --

    Hi Harlee,

    This doesn’t exactly answer the questions that you posed at the end of this post, but I think an interesting case study to look at is the trends of Marvel movie castings currently compared to the beginning of the franchise. In the beginning, I feel like they took more risks in their casting, casting relatively unknown or unproven names to be the stars in their superhero roles. I think this paid off as seen in the success and rise to fame many of the OG avengers achieved after the Infinity Saga concluded. However, more recently, Marvel has resorted to casting bigger names in their roles. Maybe it’s to attract attention to their newer television projects, which to me, aren’t succeeding what so ever, or casting popular, trending names to attach purely because the interest is there. Either way, the recent casting trend has arguably influenced the decline in quality of recent Marvel projects, and using the Marvel franchise as a case study can add another layer to analysis when it comes to understanding casting.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Diana Motta Morales- Supplemental Post #5

     As I replay the conversation the class had on Friday on icons such as Beyonce and Taylor Swift, the only people I had on my mind that made an impact on me was One Direction. Much like Taylor, One Direction had an insane amount of following that curated the image that represented them for five years. Throughout the school year a topic that is constantly being discussed is star image. Who better to analyze than the boys who turned the world upside down for many young children? One Direction started as a band consisting of 16-18 year olds who got lucky and made it big. By “lucky” I don't mean it as they didn't deserve it, but rehearing the first albums really makes you wonder if these boys weren’t pretty would they get the same treatment? Their growth, not only vocally but physically, truly impacts their interactions with their fans. Each member in the band had an image curated for them, based on looks and fan feedback. Obviously, Harry Styles and Zayn Malik were the tw...
Read more

Megan O’Brien — Core Response #2

  This week's readings thoroughly deepened my inner conversations about what determines a star and the lifespan of celebrity. With social media allowing fans to get a closer look at their favorite stars than ever before, it is no surprise that the terms of stardom have evolved with it. It has always been curious to me why people want to know every little detail about celebrities. In my opinion, that is not what a star is for. Like this weeks readings mention, star’s are spectacles that allow fans to admire the essence of who or what they want the star to be. The more fans know about the star, the more they will discover that disappoints their expectations. Dyer states, “we may read stars in a camp way, enjoying them not for any supposed inner essence revealed but for the way they jump through the hoops of social convention.(Dyer 14)” We should let stars be figments of our imagination, because discovering information on their personalities, political views, and humanistic qualities,...
Read more

Payton Ewalt, Pau Brunet-Fuertes, Devin Glenn - Realist or Naturalist Style

Image
Group 1: Realist or Naturalist Style Definition: The naturalistic acting method involves creating a character based on a realistic representation, avoiding exaggeration and artificial mannerisms. As Barry Kind defines it in his article "Articulating Stardom," "Naturalism [is] the mode of the individual, his or her utterances, behavior and appearance in everyday setting, gives a privileged access to personal and collective realities" (172). The acting blurs in an impersonation that does not articulate ideas of characterization directly related to facilitating plot signifiers. This mode of acting conflicts with some notions of stardom, as "the actor confronts problems in characterization that relate to his or her being as a general cultural object rather than a theatrical object" (King 173). As Dyer points out, the naturalistic ideas of acting in Diderot and Coquelin method, states that the actor should never lose their role and should perform by observing...
Read more