Young and Young Looking Actors

[Steve]

--- In HPFGU-Movie at yahoogroups.com, GulPlum <hp at p...> wrote:
>
> ...edited....
> 
> A couple of nit-picks on Steve's rundown of (American) child stars
who did or didn't make adult careers:
> 
> Re: Wil Wheaton: His struggle to find work after ST:TNG had little 
> (or nothing) to do with his appearance, but the circumstances in 
> which he left that show as a regular. Gene Roddenberry gave him a 
> "you'll never work in this town again" line a ...edited...
> 

bboy_mn:

Not exactly; if you want to find out what really happened, why not go
to Wil Wheaton himself instead of the grape vine.

http://wilwheaton.net/faq.php

Gene Roddenberry was already dead, and if he were alive there wouldn't
have been a problem. As it was, the network bigwigs were jacking Wil
around and he got tired of it, so he went to his agent and said he
wanted out.

As far as Wesley/Wil being universally hated, I don't think so. Many
many people only watch ST:TNG because Wil Wheaton/Wesley Crusher was
on it. I was one of those people; he was my favorite character. And,
if he was so hated, why does he still have long lines waiting for his
autograph at Star Trek conventions?

I will admit, I can see why some people would hate Wesley because he
was sooooooo perfect. But then any guy who doesn't fit the All
American Highschool Jock Pretty-Boy image usually is hated. I
seriously doubt that Bill Gates of Microsoft was very popular when he
was a teen. Certainly every ham-headed jock hated him.


> 
> A small correction on Macaulay Culkin's London stage play: that play 
> wrapped some time ago, and he was in it only for a short time. 
> ...edited...
> 
> 
> --
> GulPlum AKA Richard,



bboy_mn:

Again, not exactly. True "Madame Melville' was no 'Cats', but it had 
(roughly) a run of 6 months in London and another 6 months on
Broadway. Based on my information, he play the character Carl in both
productions for the full run. Macaulay also has three new movies; one
in release ('Party Monster') and two in post production ('Saved' &
'Jerusalem'). 'Saved' has just been picked up by United Artist for
worldwide distribution. Side note; he is again playing a highschool
kid in 'Saved'. Also, he just appeared on 'Will & Grace'.

And let's not forget that Macaulay Culkin is a millionaire. According
to his father's website, Macaulay recieved $20,000,000 AFTER TAXES
which had been held in trust until he turned 18. I don't think
Macaulay is desparate for the work which is why he chose a comfortable
stage play in order to get back into acting again.

All of which is irrelevant, because the point was that in his 20's he
still looks young and can therefore play young characters; in the case
of 'Madame Melville', a 15 year old. 

My main point was that it doesn't matter how old Dan/Rupert/Emma are.
What matters is how they look. In a year, they could all look too old,
or in 10 years, they could all still look just right for their parts.

I repeat, puberty has been the career death of many young actors.

As I have said before, I think Dan/Rupert/Emma have a tremendous
advantage career-wise by being in Britain. The British are far less
likely to get stuck on actor typecasting than the US entertainment
industry. In Britain, they are looking for an actor that can do the
job, in the US, more often than not, they are looking for a formula
they can repeat. Also, the British audiences seem very willing to
accept actors in a new role. I see the same UK actors moving from TV
series to TV series, and to movies, and the audiences seem to have no
trouble accepting them in their new roles. One additional thing, it's
not a requirement for British male actors to all be drop dead gorgeous
pretty-boy Hollywood types. Again, the British are looking for actors
that can do the job, not a pretty face that they can package into a
commodity and sell. Because of these things, I think Dan and Rupert
have significant potential for future roles in TV and movies in Britain. 

Just a thought.

bboy_mn