Re: the chapter by Anne Dunn on "The genres of television." The aspect of casting (or "stars") deserves a closer look. We respond to many characters because of the "semiotic baggage" they bring to their roles. That's not necessarily a bad thing. Their characters have a resonance, or layers, due to previous roles they've inhabited, So the ultra serious Asian guy in Fastforward carries with him some tiny bit of Harold in Harold and Kumar Go to White Castle. One episode had him staring down some disheveled perp, saying, "I know what a bong is." lol! If I was more screen literate (see the article you're to read in the near future), I would find that scene in that episode, copy it, and embed it right here. But sadly, I'm not, so you're stuck with my verbal description. Anyway. Do you think some actors have TOO much embedded history? Do they know it and wield it in interesting ways, or not? I'm thinking of Morgan Freeman, who is forever "Morgan Freeman" even (or especially) when he's playing Nelson Mandella (coming soon, folks, coming soon). He was on Jay Leno last night (another layer), but I swear to god the only thing that kept me paying attention was remembering that mysterious car accident he was in not too long ago (after his wife divorced him? was it in Florida?) I didn't expect the matter to be discussed on Leno; in fact, I don't think I was even conscious of that at the time, but now I know that's what kept me watching.
Somebody like Neil Patrick Harris, albeit considerably younger, is wearing/wielding his layers with considerable aplomb. (I hardly ever get to use that word, so color me happy). Doogie Howser, of course, what else? How does it work that he plays a ladies' man on How I Met Your Mother and is an openly gay actor, not to mention fabulous host of the Tony Awards, SNL, etc? And how does Dr. Horrible's Sing-Along Blog figure into the entity/brand that is NPH?
One of the reasons I like indie films is because the actors are usually transparent and I can see the character.
