08-17-2005, 12:20 AM
.
Yes, I agree. Besides, I don't think most top priced (US) actors can act better than no-names anyway. :lol: No loss there. They can (and should) hire classically-trained actors on the cheap, preferably Brits, IMO.
Hollywood ignores anyone who knows a scintilla about historical Rome :?
BTW, I look forward to reading your Conan book soon. :wink: [/quote]
I agree about hiring British actors. Everyone knows that upper crust Romans spoke with a British accent!
Quote:No-name actors are a good sign. Bankable stars mean that the majority of the budget went to hiring one or two people and then buying a ton of insurance for them
Yes, I agree. Besides, I don't think most top priced (US) actors can act better than no-names anyway. :lol: No loss there. They can (and should) hire classically-trained actors on the cheap, preferably Brits, IMO.
Quote:Hollywood keeps ignoring me.
Hollywood ignores anyone who knows a scintilla about historical Rome :?
BTW, I look forward to reading your Conan book soon. :wink: [/quote]
I agree about hiring British actors. Everyone knows that upper crust Romans spoke with a British accent!