General Hospital - MESSAGE BOARDS

Okay we all know recasting is a risky task a show has to make especially if the original actor was popular. My question is if a show has to recast should they cast someone that is similar to the original actor?

Two roles in particular have been recast several times; Lucky & Carly, where each of the people look and sound different. Jonathan Jackson was short & skinny and had a baby face, Jacob had blond hair, a little more buff and sounded nothing like JJ and now Greg Vaughan is the adult Lucky and looks nothing like JJ & JY.

All 4 Carly's look and sound different with Sarah Brown being a more bombshell rough Carly, Tamara as the more elegant Carly with a softer side, Jennifer was a Tam's knock-off, Laura doesn't resemble SB, TB, and JB at all. Luckily all 4 Carly's were good actresses but JB wasn't given enough time to prove herself. I can't quite say the same for each Lucky since JY was a little rough as Lucky and GV is a decent actor and JJ was the best of the 3.

Now back to the main topic, Should a recast look and sound like the actor before them?

GREAT TOPIC!!

I don't think they HAVE to look alike, as recasts are a part of soaps, BUT it's when they change a characters personality COMPLETELY (as they did with Lucky) that makes the recast horrible. I miss the loving, unselfish, fun, caring, giving and did I mention, unselfish Lucky. This Lucky isn't even Lucky but an imposter. I am still hoping that Lucky is being held somewhere by Helena. This is one character that shouldn't have been recast.

As with Carly, yes they did cast this character well and didn't change the character too much so it worked

When they changed the AJ character, I thought "wow, he shrunk" but the actor was so good and the character was still pretty well the same so it as well worked.

When they recast Nikolas, I actually enjoyed the "new" Nikolas better because the actor gave him a little more of a fun side BUT they didn't change the character TOO much so it worked.

In the end, it all comes down to how they change the character when they change the actor, not necessarily how the new actor looks.

Excellent topic.

Recasts will always be compared to the original actor. Whoever the recast happens to be the bottom line is what they bring to the table. Whether or not they resemble or even sound like the original, they will always be compared with the original actor.

For instance if/when SB leaves I would have a terrible time accepting a recast. There will never be another Steve Burton. He's the original Jason Morgan.

It's got to be difficult for a recast to step into a role vacated by a very popular actor. IMO LW has done an excellent job. She's my favorite Carly.

I do believe that there are some characters that should not be recast. The character should either die or ride off into the sunset. LOL

if a soap recasts, it is usually b/c the original actor helped make the character so popular that they don't want to get rid of them (lucky, emily, carly). I always favor the original b/c they were responsible for creating the things i loves about them. the follow up usually gets compared and falls short. sorry.

Recasts don't really bother me.

I think that the recasts that work the best is whenever a character has plastic surgery. Those recasts are usually accepted better. Like Janet on AMC, Todd on OLTL, and Jerry on GH.

I think the key to a good recast is that the new actor can bring some aspect of the previous actor's portrayal to the role. The character shouldn't have a new personality over night. My issue with BW as AJ was that they switched actors in the middle of a big s/l and suddenly AJ was inches shorter, a brunette and didn't give off that spoiled rich boy attitude which was key to the character for me.

I could never see anyone else as Brenda, but if they did recast her the actress would have to be a brunette who smoldered sexuality with anything near her w/o seeming like a tramp.

I never was an Emily fan, I found AT played her too whiny (everything was a drama and those on drug scenes still make me cringe), and found NL’s portrayal easier to take, but the character was too boring and serene then. She at least seemed the right age to be with Nik, AT always seemed too young.

I liked JY as Lucky, but they gave him that stupid mind control s/l that kept his portrayal very stiff for me. He looked like an older JJ might if he had been gone for 3 years instead of a few months. I was not a GV fan when he was on Charmed and find I have the same issues with him as Lucky. He always plays the character to the morose. Dan on Charmed was like Darren on Bewitched would have been if he grumbled and moped instead of grumbling and forging on.

I think GV could be a great Lucky if he gave a lighter, less gloomy take on the character and if they'd stop writing him as a moron most of the time.