Messageboard
Notes and Queries permalink
NO ACTOR PHOTO SPOILERS PLEASE
This discussion has been closed.
-
Message 1.Â
Posted by Organoleptic Icon (U11219171) on Monday, 3rd January 2011
The Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú R4 front page has a large photo of the actors that play David and Ruth.
WHY force that on my unwilling eyes?
Have you no consideration for listeners who prefer to keep their mental images?
A reply would be appreciated -
Message 2
Posted by bob larkin (U2297537) on Monday, 3rd January 2011
I totally agree.
I saw in some newspaper the other day a happy family portrait (how poignant) of Nigel and Lizzie with Freddie 'n' Lily.
Freddie 'n' Lily - totally unnecessary.
I know the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú have published photos of the actors going back to Dan. Doris, Phil and Carole way back when I was a child.
Please desist.
Nothing can possibly be gained.
Something can be lost. -
Message 3
Posted by Peggy Monahan (U2254875) on Tuesday, 4th January 2011
Actors live by being known about. Why should your wishes take precedence over them getting the sort of publicity that would be normal in all other sectors of the acting profession, in which they are usually also active?
-
Message 4
Posted by astoundingStephen (U13800533) on Tuesday, 4th January 2011
Might I suggest that anyone who is unable to comprehend the fact that, in broadcast media, the voices they hear belong to actors and presenters who have lives outside their favourite programmes, give up on all this comlpicated electrical stuff and choose to read a good book instead?
-
Message 5
Posted by Crystal kitten (U14676404) on Tuesday, 4th January 2011
Listen chaps, I know exactly what everyone looks like (Lizzie, Nigel, Ruth, David, Eddie Grundie et al) and they are NOTHING like the pictures put out by the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú. Will the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú please stop pushing these fake IDs at us? We dont want to see them.
-
Message 6
Posted by Crystal kitten (U14676404) on Tuesday, 4th January 2011
If we wanted pictures, we'd watch the telly.
-
Message 7
Posted by Organoleptic Icon (U11219171) on Wednesday, 5th January 2011
astStephen - You seem not to realise that TA is a reality show, from a real village with built in mikes all over.
Actors are only used to bridge continuity gaps in the inevitably heavy editing, or if the original sound is badly recorded.
One knows this; just as one knows that it is not really Nicole Kidman's bottom one sees in films. But chooses to ignore it.
The thing with radio is that one has to supply one's own facial image for a voice. The actual face of the actor is an unwanted intrusion. Ditto build, etc.
I know that Ruth is a solidly built, plain faced woman. NOT an attractive gamine.
I know the names of only 3 current Archers actors. Three too many. Had not heard of Graham Seed until a week ago. -
Message 8
Posted by Botticelliangel (U3219861) on Wednesday, 5th January 2011
I agree totally Organoleptic Icon.
I want to scream every time I log on - I suppose I should just stop having the R4 homepage as my home page?
I kept trying not to look and telling myself that it was nothing to do with TA, but it's too difficult.
I don't see how it helps the actors that we know what their faces look like - what difference does it make to them?
Make it go away! -
Message 9
Posted by Peggy Monahan (U2254875) on Wednesday, 5th January 2011
I don't see how it helps the actors that we know what their faces look like - what difference does it make to them? Â
Because remember they may want to get other jobs - not only is the Archers NOT a full-time job (for any of them) they might find thsemselves leaving it suddenly and unexpectedly.
I hope you're not now crying crocodile tears over Graham Seed as according to you he should now be totally unknown and not getting any jobs at all because nobody would ever have heard of him let alone thinking he might be a draw to their new production. -
Message 10
Posted by Botticelliangel (U3219861) on Thursday, 6th January 2011
Peggy, I don't understand. How does having a photo of a TA actor on the R4 homepage help them get work? Surely the skill of a good radio actor is to be able to convey images to the listener (their voice could depict a child, a mouse, an older, younger, larger, smaller person). That skill would help them get more radio jobs. I imagine that a skilled radio actor may not necessarily be a good stage or film actor, and vice versa. Presumably they get jobs depending on their CV and relevant skills (and contacts). How many TA listeners are there who would be giving employment to a TA actor if only there was a picture of him/her on the R4 home page?
I know hardly any names of TA actors. I took it as a sign of their acting skill that I did not recognise Debbie or (the original) Hayley when I first saw them on TV. I am happy for TA actors to have as many other roles as they like, and as much publicity as they like. I have enjoyed seeing Tim Bentinck as a judge in that Stephen Fry Norfolk thing, and hearing Charles Collingworth in Just a Minute - to me that is the actors making a living and nothing to do with TA. What I object to is having pictures labelled The Archers with people in them who (naturally) bear no relation to my pictures of TA. It defeats the whole point of radio.
I assume your last paragraph is asking me my thoughts on Graham Seed's departure? I think it was an error of judgement to get rid of Nigel (a character I really liked and always enjoyed hearing) in a ratings gathering exercise, but the powers that be are likely to be pleased with the amount of publicity it has generated. I am sorry that the actor has lost his job when it sounds as though he hadn't asked to go. However I am glad that he has had the chance to raise his profile and now seems to have a very enthusiastic following. I regret Nigel's departure from TA. I think it may end up doing Graham's career quite a bit of good. -
Message 11
Posted by Sick_Amour (U14572541) on Thursday, 6th January 2011
So what about Tamsin Greig (Debbie)?
Her getting on with her career must really bum you out, what with her face getting in all the papers all the time?!
It's SO SELFISH of her to burst your bubble in such a manner. -
Message 12
Posted by Botticelliangel (U3219861) on Thursday, 6th January 2011
Sick_Amour, I don't think you read what I wrote. I mentioned Debbie particularly. I think she is a great actor. I am happy for her to have loads of publicity. I have happily watched Tamsin Greig on TV (being a visual performer.) I do not want R4 to put pictures of her up and label them Debbie. R4 is a radio station, and I make the pictures of characters for myself. The whole point of radio is that the pictures are better.
The Shula actress used to do all the children's voices. Would you have found it appropriate for there to be a picture of an adult female labelled with a young boy's name? That is what it feels like to me. -
Message 13
Posted by Sick_Amour (U14572541) on Thursday, 6th January 2011
To be honest, I only read what the first guy wrote and replied to that.
Sorry if you utterly answered my point before I made it but I have a short attention span so didn't really read all the replies too carefully.
Just wanted to respond to what the first person said! -
Message 14
Posted by Botticelliangel (U3219861) on Thursday, 6th January 2011
Oh well, Sick_Amour, thank you for apologising! I've found it interesting trying to sort out why I feel as strongly as I do. (And I know my post was too long but I felt I had to reply to comments made in response to my post.)
The odd thing is that I came to notes and queries to post exactly the same thought as Organoleptic Icon (the first guy), so s/he saved me having to do it. Mercifully the pictures seem to have moved on now. (Touch wood.) -
Message 15
Posted by Sick_Amour (U14572541) on Thursday, 6th January 2011
Mmm well it's an interesting point.
Coming from the Harry Potter generation I think I've pretty much had to cultivate an ability to differentiate between characters in my head and the actors who play them!
I can see how it's annoying but then again I myself have no problem with it. In fact, there being pictures didn't even register.
I dunno!
As I said; interesting point! -
Message 16
Posted by Organoleptic Icon (U11219171) on Thursday, 6th January 2011
Sick, love - I note that your comment was specifically in response to my OP, so will respond.
Of course actors with varied careers will get their photos in the papers - though I personally give such articles little attention.
But I only discovered that Debbie was played by Tamsin Greig when there was some mention of her being moved to Hungary in TA so she could live on by irregular appearances between films.
I would prefer still not to know, but I do, and fortunately she looks fairly close to me original image anyway.
All I ask is that the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú does not deluge us with cast photos. TA is NOT panto.
I suggest you read all the thread before any further comment please. -
Message 17
Posted by Sick_Amour (U14572541) on Thursday, 6th January 2011
Why on EARTH would you suggest that, love?!
It was your comment that interested me and made me comment in the first place!
I don't decided to read and reply to threads based on all the replies! Otherwise in some cases I'd be reading through 400+ replies!
What a RIDICULOUS thing to have said!
I suggest you don't hand out any further suggestions to me PLEASE. -
Message 18
Posted by Organoleptic Icon (U11219171) on Thursday, 6th January 2011
Hi SA - our posts crossed.
For those Archers characters for whom you do not know the appearance of the actor, do you not form a mental image of the character's general looks and build?
I certainly do, but once I see their actual image I cannot maintain my mental one unconflicted.
As I type this I am thinking of the plain stocky Ruth in my head, nothing like the petite pretty one I saw a picture of. Still don't know or want to know her name.
Anyway, as SATTC falls off the roof it will all die back.
Cheers -
Message 19
Posted by Peggy Monahan (U2254875) on Friday, 7th January 2011
Peggy, I don't understand. How does having a photo of a TA actor on the R4 homepage help them get work?Â
Because well-known popular actors are a draw to other productions. Therefore are cast by producers.
There are also undoubtedly millions of listeners who LIKE to know who the Archers' actors are, and even what they look like.
So why should your preferences predominate?
No I'm not asking your thoughts on Nigel/GS's departure. I'm pointing out that if he WASN'T already well-known he wouldn't have already had another job to go to. -
Message 20
Posted by Peggy Monahan (U2254875) on Friday, 7th January 2011
As I type this I am thinking of the plain stocky Ruth in my head, nothing like the petite pretty one I saw a picture of.Â
Your picture doesn't correspond with the picture the radio gives which is that she's "tiny". Wedding day remark by Jill. -
Message 21
Posted by Mustafa Grumble (U8596785) on Friday, 7th January 2011
Ruth's wedding was about 20 years ago. Tempus fugit.
She remains short, however in /my/ mind she is a broad, dumpy, plain & frowsy woman, and nothing I have heard since has required that I repain my picture.
I find it truly frustrating that to check a detail about a character one is forced to look at the pictures of the actors & actresses playing the parts.
For heaven's sake, it's *radio*: we paint our own pictures in our imagination. "My" Jenny is nothing like my wife's Jenny, ditto every character in TA, even Lillian.
The default setting should be that the actors & actresses have their photographs obscured, to be revealed only if one wants to see them. After all, it is easy enough to find them elsewhere on the internet if one /really/ wants to see what they look like! -
Message 22
Posted by Peggy Monahan (U2254875) on Friday, 7th January 2011
The default setting should be that the actors & actresses have their photographs obscured, to be revealed only if one wants to see them. After all, it is easy enough to find them elsewhere on the internet if one /really/ wants to see what they look like!Â
You are talking about the Who's Who section in ML. As it is specifically for Archers' fans then I have no problem wth this quirk being accommodated. In the same way as there is a special section on here for spoilers, including what is posted in the RT or other parts of the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú site.
But the OP was talking about the Radio 4 Home Page. -
Message 23
Posted by Botticelliangel (U3219861) on Friday, 7th January 2011
"Because well-known popular actors are a draw to other productions. Therefore are cast by producers."
Yes. How does having the picture on the R4 home page contribute to that? The actors weren't even named.
Obviously I don't know much about casting actors, (perhaps you do and can answer this point) but I assumed (as I said) that it was on the basis of relevant skills. I would not cast a TA actor as the next James Bond however many times his/her photo had appeared anywhere unless I was convinced their acting skills were good enough in film settings. I have very rarely seen 'X who plays Y in TA' used as a draw to any event - they did mention Tim Bentinck's role when he reviewed the papers on the Sunday morning programme (on R4).
Radio is liberating. A human can play an animal, a blind actor can play a sighted person and vice versa. Old, young, large, small, level of activity or disability can all be portrayed by the voice. I think when the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú sink to posing actors in a field they have lost the point of radio. They would not have done this when Shula voiced all the children, it would have looked silly.
About this Board
Welcome to the Archers Messageboard.
or  to take part in a discussion.
The message board is currently closed for posting.
This messageboard is now closed.
This messageboard is .
Find out more about this board's
Search this Board
Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú iD
Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú navigation
Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú links
Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú © 2014 The Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.
This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.