From: cpd@cat.pan.net   
      
   "StarkillerT"  wrote in message   
   news:runc46pdfjjt3gova4qfumneomva4k9iad@4ax.com...   
   > On Tue, 20 Jul 2010 18:40:27 -0500, "catpandaddy"    
   > wrote:   
   >   
   >>   
   >>"StarkillerT"  wrote in message   
   >>news:ep7c469mq7nsudpnelv3g4aoa5k8e1idr0@4ax.com...   
   >>> On Tue, 20 Jul 2010 13:34:57 -0600, "Joetheone"   
   >>>  wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>>"StarkillerT"  wrote in message   
   >>>>news:ib1246p2dao9koh886o9gn41ogtpf8pe2s@4ax.com...   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> It's just plain weird to see Gaius Baltar(James Callis) playing a   
   >>>>> 1940s era American scientist and speaking without the British accent.   
   >>>>> Which for me make the new episodes even more surreal than they are   
   >>>>> intended to be.   
   >>>>> Callis does play his part quite well though.  His accent just barely   
   >>>>> slips through a few times.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>It ended up being just a bad American accent, almost as bad as Bamber's.   
   >>>>Wish they would have given him the zoot suit for BSG, though. It's a   
   >>>>good   
   >>>>look for him.   
   >>>>And I think I'm going to enjoy him in this role. Looks like a good   
   >>>>season   
   >>>>for Eureka.   
   >>>>   
   >>> Indeed.  A lot of todays younger actors just look like they're wearing   
   >>> a costume when dressing for a 30s or 40s era role.   
   >>> Callis' wardrobe person did a good job of making him look like he   
   >>> belonged in that suit.   
   >>   
   >>What is it that makes the difference?  Does a real 40s suit look fake on   
   >>camera, so that they need a not-quite-authentic version which looks "on   
   >>film" to be more authentic than the real deal itself?  Like using dry ice   
   >>because real fog photographs with too smokelike an appearance to be   
   >>convincing or something like that?   
   >   
   > A lot of times it is the fit of the suit.  I've seen a few where the   
   > suits are kinda baggy as todays male actors are on average more   
   > slender than their preedecessors back then. The difference is not as   
   > much the suit itself as far as authenticity goes but how the actor   
   > wears it and how it fits.   
   > And then  there are subtle things like Callis has the more defined   
   > jawline as did a lot of folks in that era whereas a lot of todays   
   > actors have the more soft rounded off jaw and chinlines.   
   > Put 32 year old Ashton Kutcher in a suit like that and he looks like a   
   > kid wearing his dads clothes.   
      
   I follow, kind of.  So it's just that the actors back then were selected for   
   a very specific typecasting appearance?  I am almost completely certain that   
   the general population in the 40s were just as likely to have the "wrong"   
   appearance for the same style of suit, and we just don't have a general   
   memory of them, except for the actors on film.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)