Can't believe no one's mentioned the new Barbara . . .

[FlyOnMelfisWall]

I was a tad bummed, honestly, because I hate discontinuity in casting in a series. It was okay between the pilot and episode 2 because they were filmed a year apart and nobody thought the thing would actually get made into a series anyway.

But the old Barbara had appeared enough that I just identified her face and persona with the role.

I wonder why the change? It seems unlikely that for such a small part the original actress would be unavailable, unless something had happened to her. Or unless the role is about to really expand and she (the original actress) has too many conflicts with other work.

</p>

[West Re animator]

I really hated that too. And Bacala's daughter is different. I mean I didn't mind when Father Phil changed way back when but it's really distracting, I hate it. There's really no excuse for that, I mean why recast Barbara for that small scene, why not just mention that she couldn't make it or something. I just don't see the point of it.

</p>

[harmony2k66]

Bobby's daughter, and now a new Barbara? Pussy's wife was bad enough, and don't get me started with Father Phil or Irinia? Granted those two were a little more admissible because of the length of time between the Pilot, and 46 Long, or the rest of Season One for that matter. I hope they don't continue with this, this show is so great at continuity in all ways, and I loved how bit players would alwways pop up as the same people. I hope that these are the only recasts. What's next? A new Angie Bonpassiro?????????

</p>

[Rightfielder21]

I noticed that the first second I saw it, and mentioned it in the chat right after the show.... That i my one pet peeve...

They also changed Christopher's mother between seasons too...

</p>

[eruptus]

They shouldn't have shown her at all. Regular viewers will get confused now that we have enough new characters already. BTW, I heard a rumour that there'll be a new guy playing Dr. Fried too. What's the point of recasting him?

</p>

[wimbimi]

I am so glad others feel the same about shows changing actors like this. I thought I was being anal. I don't think the show was consistent at all with the new and old Barbara. The old Barb I don't think would have called down Uncle Jr like that. Also, I always felt that the old Barbara was very detached from her dysfunctional mob family and never would have shown for a Sunday dinner without a good reason (ie, wedding or death).

Maybe there is a very good reason, but I still hate it. That's why those Nat Lapoons Vacation movies never sat well with me -all those changes with the kids!

</p>

[jgants]

Shows don't generally want to recast parts for supporting roles, but it's just part of the industry. Only the main characters (in the opening credits) and guest stars are under any sort of contract to the show. All the other supporting roles are generally filled by "day players", actors hired and paid by the day. Shows can't afford to have every character actor on the payroll just in case they might be used again in a future episode. Similarly, the actors have to eat, so they fill their schedules with more permanent work whenever they can. Since the writers don't know who will be available when the show is filmed, some characters have to be recast when they go to film. This is a very common practice for all TV shows - you'll notice that supporting characters often change actors or just mysteriously disappear from the show. It's unfortunate, but remember - you're supposed to be focused on the character, not the actor. Shakespeare got away with using men for women's roles - this is much less obtrusive.

</p>

[FlyOnMelfisWall]

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>It's unfortunate, but remember - you're supposed to be focused on the character, not the actor. Shakespeare got away with using men for women's roles - this is much less obtrusive. <hr></blockquote>

Ah, but then Shakespeare never had to worry about 50 plus installments of a play taking place over 5 years, being recorded on film, and relentlessly rewatched and analyzed ad nauseum by obsessive fans like myself.:-)

I know it happens from time to time, and I understand the business concerns that come into play. But it's still jarring and something that should be avoided if there is ANY viable alternative because it takes away from the alter-reality, the ability of the audience to believe in the authenticity of the fictional world. Once the actor has become established in the role through enough meaningful screen time, there simply is no way to divorce the actor's visual and vocal physiognamy, his/her persona, from the character itself. And that is, afterall, why James Gandolfini's contract dispute last year put the entire production at risk and why Livia was never recast. Obviously at some point, the actor and character merge into the same being for purposes of the production.

The old Barbara had been onscreen enough for me to gain some real appreciation for her persona and to be really SHOCKED at her recast. The first couple of times I watched the dinner scene, I literally couldn't think about anything else from the moment the new Barbara enters the room, and I suspect I'll always have that little mental footnote from now on when I see that ep.

</p>

[Salvatore]

They kept Tom the same....who cares about Tom...I always remember in Season 3 Episode "proshai Livushka" when everyone is saying bad stuff about Livia and tom says"here, here"...Tony immediatly looks at him

</p>

[vietzta]

old barbara sure was a milf but this one is YUCK

</p>

[Dirk McQuigley]

I liked the old Barbara - it's funny how they tried to match her looks with the new one.
But at least the character's still around. After last season, I was afraid she was going to become the "Chuck Cunningham" of The Sopranos.

</p>Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub132.ezboard.com/bsopranolandforum.showUserPublicProfile?gid=dirkmc quigley>Dirk McQuigley</A> at: 3/23/04 10:09 am

[rustyirish]

when did these two switch??, im ashamed i cant think of it immeditaely.

</p>

[Rightfielder21]

Just this season....

</p>