BBC movie series recommendations please :) (SPOILERS for TSTAMD)

[dumbledore11214]

> Magpie:
> I think it's a combination of things. One of which, regarding looks, is that the aesthetic of British TV is definitely kind of character actors where as US TV and movies often really do go for looks first. 

Alla:

Well yes and I am saying that I like the aesthetic based on character actors better than aesthetic that goes for the looks first. Not that I have anything against watching a cute guy or girl on TV mind you, just think that when police station looks like modelling agency it is sort of silly. Sure, I saw cute guys in uniform, I am just doubting that police station or ANY work place consists ONLY of beatiful people. Sigh.

Magpie:
I mean, it's not like there aren't mediocre or basically bad British actors--I remember one time reading about a UK actress who made it big in the US and she basically came here because she would have more of a chance because she was a knockout, which didn't really fit the aesthetic of UK productions at the time. She wasn't a good actress, either. 
>

Alla:

I am sure there are plenty of bad British actors of course. I am just saying that percentage wise, based on what I see on TV, I saw significantly less bad british actors, you know?

Magpie:
> Maybe also there's a lot more productions in the US? So a group of good actors would be mixed into a larger pool?

Alla:

This totally makes sense to me.

Magpie:
 I have read that people assume that training in England=more skilled. But the same is also true for NYC. An acting coach once mentioned that to me, that New York is the US's "talent town"--plenty of good actors getting solid theater training. I remember when I was a kid there were actually a lot of good people on soaps who did the show during the day and then did theater at night. Now soaps have become more focused on young, beautiful people.

Alla:

See I am out of touch with this stereotype as I said - that training in England means more skilled, I am just describing my opinion based on what I see on TV ( or DVD for that matter).

But agreed that soaps are focused on young and beatiful now, almost do not watch them, but catch on Soapnet sometimes when switching channels. I should say young, beatiful with wooden expressions too. I remember thinking when somebody was playing a sad scene, that when you are playing sad scene, your facial expression should sort of reflect that.

Magpie:
> I think the "star" thing is probably also a big thing. A movie star is different from a great actor, though they can crossover and be both. But stardom also encourages people to play to their types rather than be chameleons who play different types of roles. Unless somebody's stardom is based on really being a great actor and crossing that line. But again you've got the actors known for being skilled mixed into a wider pool maybe.


Alla:

OH YES. With this I totally agree that stardom encourages playing types and does not equal great actors necessarily. Now I do not feel qualified to form an opinion as to american stars v british stars ( did not watch nearly enough british big screen movies for that), but I would certainly say that american talented stars get mixed into wider pool of ... not.

For example I am not sure why Kianu Reeves ever became famous if the acting talent is any indication.

I know Robert De Niro can play a type, I am not sure what else can he play, etc, etc.

When I saw Richard Chamberlain on Broadway in the Sound of Music several years ago, I was so so so dissapointed.


However, when I see Kevin Spacey, I think he is extremely talented for example and I like that he plays different types. And I was so smitten with him in the "Moon for misbigotten(sp?)" on Broadway.