There’s no hard and fast rule–you’ll see lots of variations on this. But the final name listed, if it’s set off by an “and” or a “with” or by adding a character name, is a place of honor, as it were. It’s not top billing, but it’s *emphasized *billing. It’s often a bone thrown to an actor whose fame is on the wane.
“It’s not top billing, but it’s emphasized billing”
I agreed that this is the explanation. It’s just another area for negotiation. “No, we can’t pay you THAT much, but we’ll give you an *emphasized billing *in the opening credits.” … “Okay, that’ll work.”
The most prominent spots in the credits are the very first guy, and the very last guy. So the big stars will get the first credits (maybe even above the title if they’re a really big deal.) A major star playing a supporting role will get the “with” or “with…as” credit.
But every situation is unique and while there are conventions, there are no universal rules.
You may also see this for an actor who has achieved some level of success above and beyond the others in the cast, but is not the lead. E.g. “Jason Alexander as George” in the Seinfeld credits.
I believe Star Wars does this with sir Alec Guiness, which definitely makes sense in that context.
Another custom I’m curious about is the “Introducing…”. You don’t see this anymore, but you can see it in older movies. Was it prestigious to highlight up and coming talent?
Douglas Fairbanks Jr. goes into this quite a bit in his autobiography The Salad Days; he claims to have conceived the last-billing technique for the 1937 film The Prisoner of Zenda. He was willing, of course, to take second billing under Ronald Colman, who had the title role, but didn’t want to accept being billed under Mary Astor or Raymond Massey. Plus, he wanted newcomer David Niven to get some prominence. So he asked for – and got – last billing, with an individual title card “And Douglas Fairbanks Jr.”
I think that the audience, watching the credits, was supposed to be thinking, “Hey, isn’t Fairbanks in this? Where’s his name?” and when it appeared, it was much more memorable. It was very, very effective.
That was developed as a function of the studio system, which developed actors much like baseball teams develop players these days. Since the studio signed actors to long-term contracts, they could highlight someone they particularly wanted to succeed.
Since actors don’t sign long-term contracts, there’s usually no reason to highlight a new performer.
I think the most recent episode of “House” did this for James Earl Jones, who was only doing one episode, and in fact “died” in that same episode. He’s got the career of any four actors on that show combined, so instead of just putting him in the stream of credits with the other guest stars, he got “and” at the very end. I don’t think most tv shows do “and XXXXX as YYYYY” much, do they? Where have I seen that? Is that for recurring minor roles by prominent actors, like President Bartlett was supposed to be at first for Martin Sheen?
I believe they introduced Cameron diaz this way in “The Mask” “Introducing Cameron Diaz” was prominent and last in the credits, and she didn’t have much fame to her name at that point.
Hawaii Five-0 used to do this in their opening credits:
“Kam Fong as Chin Ho… and Zulu as Kono”
It always cracked me up. Like, why bother giving them character names? The actor names were pretty much good enough already!
Also, I remember that the George Clooney version of Ocean’s Eleven ended their opening credits with “And introducing Julia Roberts.” But that had to be a joke, as she was already quite famous.