Hollywood Babble On & On #668: The British Are Coming! The British Are Coming!

Welcome to the show folks...

Here are 2 stories about Jolly Old England, and my thoughts on them:

SUPERMAN: TRUTH, JUSTICE & THE AMERICAN WAY WITH A BRITISH ACCENT

In case you're living in a cave and I'm your only source of news, you sorry bastard, British actor Henry Cavill has been cast as the new Superman to be directed by Zach Snyder and produced/mentored by Christopher Nolan.

Now some are upset about a Brit being cast as America's greatest superhero, who happens to be an alien co-created by a Canadian. Especially with British actors playing Batman (Christian Bale) and Spider-Man (Andrew Garfield). However, I know why these actors were cast, even if the people who cast them don't.

1. BRITISH ACTORS KNOW THEIR PLACE: I've written about this before, but I'll reiterate my point so you or I don't have to go hunting for the post I did last year. You see British actors are taught to believe that acting is a profession, and that fame and success can only come through hard work, talent, and versatility. That means taking not only many roles, but many different roles in many different kinds of projects. It's not much of a stretch to see a British actor star in a big hit movie that wins all kinds of international awards and then go do a guest spot on a TV sitcom back in England.

Too many American actors act, pardon the phrasing, like their job is some sort of sacred calling that puts them above everyone else, and that fame and success is an entitlement that comes from building an image that must be maintained at all costs. If they become successful then going off to do a smaller project, like a TV guest spot, becomes less about doing interesting work, and more about using said project to promote and maintain said image.

Not all American actors, and not all British actors fit my broad generalizations, but enough do to justify my smug know-it-all statements.

2. BRITISH ACTORS CAN PLAY MACHO: This wasn't always the case. America used to export the highest standard of rough and tumble manliness. Nowadays, try to find a Hollywood actor under 50 who looks like they can win a fight and you'll probably wind up with a very short list and, Angelina Jolie would be at the top of it.

Now some critics say that this is caused by the metro-sexualization of Hollywood leading men because of the influence of gay culture, but I disagree. Gay actors in the past like Rock Hudson, could play macho manly characters without a problem, and today, there are some openly gay actors who can play macho way better than many of Hollywood's leading hetero actors.

I believe that the low testosterone levels among the younger Hollywood heroes stems from Hollywood's obsession with youth, or what I call "Juvenile Dementia." Too many of today's stars are more boyish than manly. They don't look like they could make a vital life and death decision in the face of chaos and evil, they don't even look like they can grow a decent beard. This makes far too many Hollywood actors too boyish even for the relatively boyish role of Peter Parker.

I guess I can sum it up by saying that too many of Hollywood's young actors seem un-serious, more fitting to playing petulant whiny self-absorbed navel gazers or boorish immature frat-boy slacker hybrids than real heroes.

The question one has to ask when casting an action hero type is: Will this man back me up in a brawl, or will he scream "NOT THE FACE!" run away, and hit on my girlfriend while I'm getting my ass kicked?

Now look through a list of current Hollywood heroes, and check off those who would give you the right answer to that question and you'll be shocked at how few you'll find.

FOX SEARCHLIGHT SHINES ON BRITISH INDIES

Fox Searchlight the pseudo-indie division of the 20th Century Fox/News Corp empire has joined up with indie financier Ingenious to finance and distribute British independent films.

Now this bodes well for British film on several levels. Fox Searchlight was run differently than the other faux-indies run by the major studios, and that's why it's still around and most of the others have been shuttered. The others were created pretty much for one purpose, to get awards and indie street cred for the studio, the people who run it, and their close friends.

Fox Searchlight's purpose was run to buy and release independent films that had a chance of making a profit, even a small one. So while the other companies may have dominated awards season more than Searchlight, Searchlight stayed in business.

This deal shows that Fox Searchlight sees profit potential in British independent films. They aren't buried under an over-priced star system, and those accents can make anything look respectable. Now similar deals between American studios and British producers have fallen through in the past, usually over choice of project.

British filmmakers should see this as a challenge to be overcome strategically, rather than as a call to man the artistic barricades. The key to overcoming this problem is trust.

Now in Hollywood the only use of the word trust is to describe the funds that support vacuous heiresses, but it is something these British filmmakers can do.

First you make some films with some commercial appeal. They don't have to be mini-versions of big Hollywood studio blockbusters, but fill that huge mid-range gap in drama, and genre films that the big studios and the other indies are ignoring.

If they are made within budget, and then make money then you can earn trust as a reliable filmmaker who isn't wild and crazy with their money. Once you reach a certain level, you can slip in more daring work, if you do it cheaply. If it loses money, then it's no biggie, because they know and trust you to do quality work at a reasonable cost.

I call the Clint Eastwood strategy, he's been making his own films, his own way for almost 40 yrs, and so can you.