Yes, the top film stars make a lot of money, but the majority of actors are not getting those fat salaries of $10 million or more. I think the majority of actors, even well-known ones, get a million or less for a film role and for them, a TV role might be more lucrative.
Aren’t both Tina Fey and Alec Baldwin – and, at that, even Tracy Morgan – fine examples of 30 Rock not getting in the way of big-screen work? (With bonus points to Fey for her recent role opposite Steve Carell?)
Using IMDb’s ratings as a measure, at least these guys have had better “success” in TV than in movies:
Filmography by rating for Timothy Olyphant
Filmography by rating for Hugh Laurie
Filmography by rating for Simon Baker
A TV role is lucrative for an actor if the show is successful but not if it flops. In fact, starring in a flop TV show can be especially harmful to the status of a movie actress like Zooey Deschanel as opposed to a regular working actor because it guarantees you’ll be in a career limbo of doing guest shots on other TV shows and considerably smaller roles in whatever movie will cast you. Shows like “Love American Style” and “The Love Boat” used to be filled with actors like these. I can’t think of any equivalent show like that on TV right now.
Anecdote: Genevieve Bujold was cast as Captain Janeway on Star Trek: Voyager. She quit the show after a single day’s filming (and was replaced by Kate Mulgrew), allegedly unhappy with the intense production schedule and media interview requests.
It varies from performer to performer. Some love to constantly work and like being able to be based in one location. Vincent D’Onofrio is one who leaps to mind in that respect. Also, some look at the potential of syndication and getting royalty checks instead of doing a few movies and getting just a lump sum and no points. On the other hand, some like to work just a few times a year and don’t worry about being away from their family, if they even have one. Going to work for a TV production no longer has the stigma that it used to in the industry. Many series have a budget for a season the size of a major blockbuster motion picture but the commitment is longer for the actors.
Does anyone respect Martin Sheen less in the industry because he was on the West Wing? Absolutely not. The thing that matters isn’t that you are going to star on a TV show. The thing that matters is the quality of the show that you are going to be on.
She’s got an “in” to be corpse-of-the-week on Bones.
The crime procedural showsare a bit like that. It’s astounding how many people have NCIS, CSI or Criminal Minds on their CV.
“Hey, Bones, this here dead body kind of looks like you… only prettier!”
Sean Bean has a pretty good film career, and I don’t think anyone would consider Game of Thrones a step down.
Actually, I think TV is a “regular” job. Sarah Michelle Gellar was talking in EW about her newest show and she took it only after CBS agreed that she would be home for supper each night to see her family. She was also surprised because after Buffy, she expected deep movie roles. Um, what? TV is a lot deeper than a single movie will ever be. I suppose that could be me but I doubt it.
I do think the gap between TV stars and Movie Stars has lessened a lot and where you didn’t see them cross over, now they do and it’s no big deal. However, I do agree that being a Movie Star is seen as more prestigious than a TV Star.
Martin Sheen’s role in “West Wing” was a considerable step up in terms of his career. At the time he accepted it, he was reduced to taking movie roles Dennis Hopper rejected (e.g., Spawn).
[QUOTE=SciFiSam]
The crime procedural showsare a bit like that. It’s astounding how many people have NCIS, CSI or Criminal Minds on their CV.
[/QUOTE]
Don’t they basically use the same pool of actors and just recast them in different roles? That’s different then the days of “Love Boat” and “Fantasy Island” which, beyond the regular cast, was often populated by “has-beens of the week.”
I also don’t get it when Bones as a character says she’s hot. I don’t know why, but recently Emily has not looked good to me. Pretty but not hot. And recently, her voice has been turning me off both the character and actor.
Her sister, is better looking but I can’t stand her acting style. I think Tin Man was one of the few things I have seen her in that was okay, and even then I cringed at some scenes.
30 Rock poked fun at this, actually. Morgan’s character wanted off the ‘A-list’, so reappeared on the show within the show. They cut to Tom Hanks (Bosom Buddies who calls, well, just watch the clip.
I took it as poking at least some fun at former A-lister Baldwin.
They very, very rarely recast the same actor in the same show, and a lot of the same actors are in all the different crime shows, but some quite big actors take guest roles too.
By majority I assume you mean 99% The majority of actors are happy to get any job, legit or commercials or industrials, with a series that might get rerun and thus provide residuals really good.
And, as mentioned, the type of series or movie is important. John Goodman probably gets more cred for being in Treme than for being in True Lies. Big budget high prestige film work is one thing, or low budget indie work, but Jaws 17, not so much.
For really top stars, I don’t think things are very different. John Wayne refused Gunsmoke. Do you think George Clooney or Ton Hanks would go back to TV today?
This is true of movies also. If you consistently fail to open movies you are going to find the roles you get offered suffer. There are lots of other factors in TV shows, like when it is scheduled and who the creator is, so I’d guess that one or two flops isn’t that big a problem. And no one is going hungry in lead roles on TV (though it is more work) either, even if you aren’t in Friends territory in terms of pay.
Yeah, but starring in flop movie is still considered to have more cachet than starring in a flop TV series.
Getting back to Zooey Deschanel, the fact that she’s still young and has some cred as an “indie princess” makes her doing a broadcast network sitcom, at best, a horizontal career move. As Bridget Burke mentioned earlier in this thread, usually an actress who has had some success in movies won’t consider doing a TV series until they’re in their 40s because the roles offered to someone in that age range are often better than what’s being offered in film.
Christina Ricci is starring in a series about airline stewardesses. Is she an A-lister? I have no idea who is and is not.
I hope so. John Goodman wasn’t in True Lies.