My definition of character actor is “a face you remember but a name you don’t”.
Some of my favorite character actors are (in no particular order):
Wlliam H. Macy
Kathy Bates
Will Patton
Joan Cusack
James Cromwell
Bob Balaban
Allison Janney
Alfre Woodard
CCH Pounder
Rene Auberjonois
John Hurt
I actually have a website dedicated to my favorite character actors, but I’m not sure if I’m allowed to link to it.
I’d nominate Harry Dean Stanton as THE character actor.
Each of us has something that makes us unique. Henceforth, you shall be known as the only person in the world who thinks of Jack Nicholson as a character actor.
I would define it this way:
Actors are bland enough and plastic enough to be flexible, but who need screen time to generate their characters. Dustin Hoffman, Joan Plowright, Johnny Depp, Meryl Streep, Ian McKellen, Miranda Richardson, John Tutturo, Emma Thompson, and Bob Hoskins leap to mind. Not stunningly attractive, not hideously ugly, but possessing great dexterity with their voices and faces. They can play anything, from leads to bit parts, but often roles which give them enough screen time to make the character come to life.
Movie stars are usually too handsome or beautiful to be convincing in a wide range of roles. You’d never buy Sly Stallone as a restaurant manager, or Brad Pitt as a librarian, or Denise Richards as a nuclear physicist. 
Some movie stars can act pretty well, but because of their looks they are often pushed toward certain kinds of roles so long as their looks hold out.
A Character Actor is basically a go-to guy that you get for a small filler role that needs to convey a lot of personality in only a little bit of screen time. Character actors are the kind of people who are distinct enough, in looks and voice and physique, for the audience to stereotype. They get the roles that aren’t on screen long enough for an Actor to work his magic — acting takes time, Character Acting takes a certain je ne sais quoi.
James Tolkan is a hardass. He always plays hardasses. He was the hardass principal in “Back to the Future,” he was a hardass colonel in “WarGames,” he was a hardass cop in, “Masters of the Universe,” he was a hardass in “Top Gun.” Because of his face, his build, his voice, and his baldness, you get the whole Hardass Package in the first few frames you see him, even before he starts acting. James Tolkan is the guy you get when you can’t get character actor Michael Ironside. 
Michael Ensign is the Fussy Intellectual. He played a fussy intellectual hotel manager in “Ghostbusters,” a fussy intellectual security chief in an episode of “Star Trek: The Next Generation,” and a fussy military man (alongside James Tolkan) in “WarGames.” By his looks, his fussy little mustache, and his height, he speaks volumes about what you expect his character to be. When you see James Tolkan and Michael Ensign together in the NORAD war room, you automatically think, “Somebody broke a rule and there’s gonna be trouble now,” just because of how the two look together.
Eddie Deezen is the Nerd. He has a face and a physique that just says “nerd” about him, no matter what role he plays. He’s a nerd in “Grease” and does the voice for the nerd Mandark in “Dexter’s Laboratory.” He also plays the nerd Malvin in “WarGames,” who says, “Go right through Falken’s Maze!” They could’ve had anybody play that role — what, four lines? They picked Eddie because as soon as he leaps on screen, you think “Brainiac nerd.” Plenty of bang for the buck, character-wise.
Heh. I never said he was a bad character actor. Jack always plays slightly-unhinged-guy, and I can only think of a few exceptions. Many people thought his role in The Departed was distracting because he was acting too much like Jack Nicholson, and not the character he was portraying.
The term is also a product of the old studio system when there was a more definite hierarchy of “stars” and “character actors.” That distinction between who exactly is a “star” and who is a “character actor” became increasingly blurred after the 60’s when people like Dustin Hoffman and Gene Hackman–who would’ve been likely relegated to supporting character roles during the era of the studio system–became above-the-title stars.
Hey now! I happen to be a librarian and I bear a major resemblance to Brad Pitt! We’re both blonde and white and have two legs and ankles and facial features!
In fact one of these two pictures is of me and the other is of Brad Pitt- I challenge you to tell me which is which:
1
2
But seriously folks, I’m always irked at the 24 year old hot surgeons or studly English professors or gorgeous young legal experts on shows that beg for a character actor. An example that comes to mind instantly is Diane Kruger as the archivist responsible for the Declaration of Independence in National Treasure. Any IDEA how many years and how at the top of their field an archivist would have to be to have responsibility for something like that? They’re a WHOLE lot more likely to look like this or this than this . My favorite movie about a librarian is probably Desk Set in which the head of reference for a news agency develops a strong attraction for the IBM exec she believes is out to replace humans with computers as information sources and the roles are played by Hepburn and Tracy- two people who are not only over 40 and not drop-dead gorgeous but actually seem like they really could have many years of experience in specialized fields. Today if the heroine were over 40 it would only be as a vehicle for Ashton and Demi.
Also speaking of librarians in films, another Grand Duke among character actors is Tracey Walter who played the grossed-out librarian in Philadelphia.
I’m not sure why, but I always think of Charlotte Rae when I hear the term “character actor”.
Robert DuVall is the one who comes to my mind. He was Tom Hagen in The Godfather I & II. He was Lt. Col. Bill Killgore in Apocalypse Now. He is completely believable in whatever role he plays, but didn’t have the looks to be a leading man.
Brad Pitt made the jump from character actor to leading man based on his looks. Remember him in True Romance? 12 Monkeys? Kalifornia? Supporting role as a scruffy stoner or a psycho, but they both required an intensity and talent that you don’t get from leads.
Have you ever heard a person discribe someone by saying, “He’s a real character.”?
To a certain extent, that could be the requirement for a character actor portrayal.
I made a tolerably good living as a character actor (mostly on stage, a few movies, a couple of TV shows) until I settled down. I am relatively short, do accents well, enjoy creating unique characters, can make an outfit unkempt by merely putting it on and don’t have to be the center of attention for an entire production, but you do notice me.
In my 15 years plus on the professional stage, I played the “leading man” twice. I found it rather, I don’t know, droll, confining, maybe. In almost none of the character roles did I find that (a couple of them I did not like the character, but I did not find them either droll or confining). On long runs, I might even change the nationality of the character for a performance or two to keep it fresh for me and the actors around me.
In those 15 years, I was seldom out of work because directors knew I could be depended on for a solid, craftsman-like, entertaining job.
I should point out that a number of plays have “character” leads. Look at The Producers, Fiddler on the Roof and Inheirit the Wind to name just three.
Alyson Hannigan is a leading star? The only top movie billing she’s ever had was “Date Movie,” which wasn’t exactly a blockbuster.
I read an article about Rock Hudson once, where around 1970 he complained that movie stars had been replaced by “the uglies,” that people like Dustin Hoffman were being offered as leading men, while old-school stars like himself, Gordon MacRae and Tab Hunter were increasingly being marginalized. So in that sense, the line between “character actor” and “leading man” has been blurred.
BMax writes:
> Brad Pitt made the jump from character actor to leading man based on his looks.
Pitt has spent most of his career moving back and forth from leading roles to supporting roles. He may be the clearest case of someone who could do just leading roles but prefers to take whatever role interests him most at the time, regardless of the size of the role. This is another reason why the term character actor is so vague.
I blame the studio system. 
That’s the weird thing about “character actors,” though. While it’s entirely possible that someone might be handsome and charismatic and intelligent and a nuclear physicist, when we movie-goers see one on screen, we think no way! She’s a nuclear physicist? Pull the other one! because we’ve been trained by the movies to think it can’t happen.
So a “character actor” is basically someone who’s typecast?
No one has mentioned the GREATEST character actor of all time. You couldn’t watch a western or gangster film at one point without seeing this guy. Who am I talking about?
Sometimes, but not always. Typecasting is one way that people become character actors, but it’s not the only way. Others become character actors because of a certain physical trait (like Ironsides’ with his shiny bald head and muscular physique - he just LOOKS like a badass - would you cast him as a mathematician?) or a distinctive voice (you think James Earl Jones will ever get cast as the sniveling stool pigeon? Of course not, he’s got to play powerful men because he’s got a powerful voice!) or because they’re not pretty enough, tall enough or skinny enough or buff enough for leading roles.
Remember that moviemaking is about using a common vocabulary and symbols that your audience will quickly accept and understand. You only have 98 minutes to tell an interesting story, and spending 13 of that establishing that The Drill Instructor is a hardass means you lose time to develop your presumably more interesting main character. Better to just cast Ironsides and skip that part. We know he’s a badass, we accept that at first glance without any tedious exposition about it and we can get on with the story. If you cast Eddie Deezen as The Drill Instructor, you’re going to have to do a lot of explaining if your soldiers are intimidated by him - what on earth did he do in the past to earn such respect? It would be distracting if you didn’t explain it. It would have to be addressed, and as such would change to movie from one about your soldier to one about The Drill Instructor.
WhyNot is pretty much right on the money. Character actors are an economical way to establish a colorful character without wasting precious screen time on character-building moments. This is because we, the audience, stereotype them based on their looks, physique, and voice.
Character-building moment: In Jurassic Park as the helicopter is coming in for a rough landing, Dr. Grant fumbles with the seat belts and comes up with two like connectors — he can’t buckle the belt. This shows he isn’t at home with technology. Instead, he ties them in a knot. This shows he’s resourceful.
But these things take time for any actor to achieve, screen time that may be cut later if the film runs long. Character actors are cast because they can achieve a tremendous amount of personality without investing a lot of screen time in setup moments like the above.
They’re used in two major ways. One, for a small but essential character such as a drill sergeant, office nerd, haughty princess, or whatever. Two, for a character that has no personality in the script but needs some interest — suddenly that isn’t just a barista filling out an order for coffee, that’s a sullen teenager with a nose ring. Instant character, just add stereotype.
I wouldn’t call it the same thing as typecasting, though. Character actors, I think, are based on looks; typecasting is based on reputation.
38 posts and no Wayne Knight?
Right, and then in Jurassic Park you cast Newman from Seinfeld as the traitor, because the second you see Newman (note that I have no idea what this actor’s name is without looking it up, but everyone knows who I mean) you know he’s a sleazy cowardly disgusting annoying slimy traitorous dweeb. He doesn’t have to do ANYTHING to establish his character, you just look at him and you know what his character is.
So the guy who plays Newman is a character actor, and he plays basically the same character in everything he’s in, whether he’s an annoying friend, annoying neighbor, annoying bureacrat, annoying hot dog vendor, or annoying industrial spy.
