Gilbert Today - Sitcoms Online Message Boards

BrandonS · 09-03-2002, 04:39 PM

I'm glad the board is back up. I hadn't realized how much I was starting to enjoy reading the messages here until the board went down and I felt like I was in withdrawal. Anyway, here is an interesting article by Stephen Talbot, who played Gilbert. Unfortunately, it sounds like he's not proud of his association with the show, but on the other hand, it's hard to tell how much he's kidding. Here it is:

http://www.salon.com/aug97/mothers/beaver970822.html

Brandon

DarleneIllyria · 09-03-2002, 08:36 PM

I've read that article before. I kind of feel sorry for the actors that can't escape that one main character that made them big to start with. It's like the minute some people step into a role, the person dies and people automatically think that the person was reborn as the character name.

I'm happy that Stephen escaped the Gilbert past. I know that must've been a difficult thing to do, because I bet if he tried to get other acting roles he was turned down for them. "We want a psychopathic killer. We don't want Gilbert from Leave it to Beaver. He wouldn't make a convincing psychopath. He's only convincing as a troublemaker and getting Beaver into trouble."

I can imagine that it pisses many actors off if they are best known for one character. It doesn't really matter how many movie or tv projects some people are in, people still trap them in this little typecasting box.

I can totally understand how people like Nancy McKeon or even Stephen refuse to go back for reunions- especially if they proved that they can do other things besides being Jo and Gilbert. However, it kind of irritates me to see people like Tina Louise that get this chip on their shoulder if you call them by their character name. Tina will forever be known as Ginger, and no matter what she does people will always remember her as Ginger Grant. What would she rather be known as, someone that didn't get that many great parts or as Ginger?

Sorry I kind of veered away from the topic here, but reading a bit of that article over again made me think of this post.

Charlie Max · 09-07-2002, 02:42 PM

I've also read that article before. It's sad how he got much bad rap because of the show. I'm glad to know he's a great documentary producer. Way to go Stephen!

frani · 09-08-2002, 12:47 AM

Actually, I was really disappointed with him when I read the article. I never really liked the Gilbert character in the first place. I had stated in an earlier post that I didn't like Larry Mondello cause he was always getting the Beav in trouble, but after seeing him in so many eps lately, I kind of changed my mind. He really came from such a dysfunctional family. He was always getting hit and hollered at. No wonder he ate so much. But Gilbert didn't have Larry's character development. He was just a whiny one dimensional creep. I truly think the Beav couldn't have lived without him. After all, Richard was always getting the Beav in trouble, but he was at least interesting.

I would tell Stephen Talbot that had it not been for "Leave it to Beaver" no one would even know he was alive.

Charlie Max · 09-08-2002, 02:09 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by frani

I would tell Stephen Talbot that had it not been for "Leave it to Beaver" no one would even know he was alive.

Well that's a very cruel thing to say to a person. You shouldn't judge a person based on the characters he or she played. Stephen Talbot, the person , was a great actor. The character that he played on LITB didn't have to do anything with his person.

Why do people always judge actors based on the characters they play on the screen? One reason could be that they play the character so well, people actually believe the actors are the characters they are playing. Another reason could be that it's just human nature for people to react like that. Anyway, it's just a shame that great actors get that kind of rap.

frani · 09-08-2002, 02:18 PM

You might have misunderstood me. I was really reacting to Stephen Talbot's feeling (according to the article) about how bad it was for him to be part of the show. I think he is really ungrateful. He further refers to baby boomers as self-absorbed, etc. I'm just surprised that he has such a negative memory of that show. I wasn't confusing him with the part he played. What I meant by saying that Gilbert was not a great character was that, in addition to Stephen Talbot's bellyaching, he should be aware that he played the most unlikable, and possibly the most unnecessary role on the show. If he "suffers" not from that, well, maybe he is the one who is self-absorbed.

tdr · 09-08-2002, 02:44 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Charlie Max
Why do people always judge actors based on the characters they play on the screen? One reason could be that they play the character so well, people actually believe the actors are the characters they are playing. Another reason could be that it's just human nature for people to react like that. Anyway, it's just a shame that great actors get that kind of rap.

I give Frani the benefit of the doubt that may not be how (s)he meant that post to be taken.

But there is a lot of merit in what you are saying. "Typecasting" has virtually destroyed many opportunites for actors because producers are convinced that if they hired them to play a very different kind of part, all viewers would notice is something like "Gilbert doesn't play that part like Gilbert." That is terrible. From LITB Stephen Talbot is the outstanding example of one who escaped that and realized he would probably be hurting his career as a filmmaker if he agreed to play Gilbert again. The actors really caught in this were Jerry Mathers and Ken Osmond. Their 'Beaver' and 'Eddie' personas are what people notice, not their abilities as actors. Osmond commented on this, saying something like 'when I went to read for a part, all the casting director could see was 'Eddie Haskell.'' So, unable to get acting roles, he became a police officer for several years. Jerry Mathers may be smart in the opposite direction from Stephen Talbot. He knows he is typecast as Beaver, so he has made the best of it; in the New LITB and making appearances for fans who love 'The Beaver,' not necessarily Jerry Mathers. I remember he said in his book that that some date (was it the year 2000?) he was going to put away his alter ego... but did he? and can he?

On the other hand, some actors do relish the character by which they are known, taking it further than Mathers. Buddy Ebsen has a website from which he sells 'folk art' paintings about "Uncle Jed Country." Clayton Moore, until almost his death, made appearances in his Lone Ranger mask.

Another unique case of typecasting and making the best of it is also from the Beverly Hillbillies with Max Baer, Jr. He said in E! that "I was born Max Baer, Jr-- I will die Jethroe Bodine." But he went through years of meetings and negotiations to get the rights to the Beverly Hillbillies name to build his huge casino, 'Jethroe's Beverly Hillbillies Casino.' Unfortunately (for him, at least) what was almost a done deal in Reno fell through with the owners of an adjacent mall, so he is still looking for the right deal to proceed, saying if he can't do it his way, it's not going to be done.

DarleneIllyria · 09-08-2002, 03:03 PM

I read Burgess Meredith's book a few weeks ago. Burgess was real close friends with Carroll O' Connor. He talks about how Carroll was a bit depressed after the AITF and ABP ended, and people could only see him as Archie Bunker.

Andy Griffith was also typecast as Andy Taylor for awhile too. People refused to put him in tv and movies because 'Andy Taylor just wasn't right for this particular role'.

Kind of sad both these men had to experience typecasting, but at least they broke out of the mold- and proved to people that they can do totally different roles outside of Archie Bunker and Andy Taylor.

vedastone · 09-09-2002, 11:22 AM

Some very interesting discussion of a great piece by "Gilbert"....
I do think that Talbot was quite tongue-in-cheek with most of what he said in the Salon article. He's quite humorous in fact. But he was serious enough back in the 80s to refuse the role of the adult Gilbert, and that's a shame - it would have been fun to see how that weasel matured.

Typecasting can be a problem, but on the other hand, I have to think of a story I heard about the late Werner Klemperer, who won two Emmys as Col. Klink on Hogan's Heroes: a fan met him and started to sympathize with him about being typecast. Klemperer said that he had been fortunate enough to land an important role in a successful sitcom, something that the vast majority of actors only dream about, and that was far more significant than any concern about being subsequently typecast. A nice honest statement from a humble man, I would say.

09-03-2002, 04:39 PM	#1
BrandonS Member Forum Fanatic Join Date: Aug 18, 2002 Posts: 8,824	Gilbert Today I'm glad the board is back up. I hadn't realized how much I was starting to enjoy reading the messages here until the board went down and I felt like I was in withdrawal. Anyway, here is an interesting article by Stephen Talbot, who played Gilbert. Unfortunately, it sounds like he's not proud of his association with the show, but on the other hand, it's hard to tell how much he's kidding. Here it is: http://www.salon.com/aug97/mothers/beaver970822.html Brandon

09-03-2002, 08:36 PM	#2
DarleneIllyria Gone Forum Star Join Date: Oct 15, 2000 Posts: 19,086	Typecasting I've read that article before. I kind of feel sorry for the actors that can't escape that one main character that made them big to start with. It's like the minute some people step into a role, the person dies and people automatically think that the person was reborn as the character name. I'm happy that Stephen escaped the Gilbert past. I know that must've been a difficult thing to do, because I bet if he tried to get other acting roles he was turned down for them. "We want a psychopathic killer. We don't want Gilbert from Leave it to Beaver. He wouldn't make a convincing psychopath. He's only convincing as a troublemaker and getting Beaver into trouble." I can imagine that it pisses many actors off if they are best known for one character. It doesn't really matter how many movie or tv projects some people are in, people still trap them in this little typecasting box. I can totally understand how people like Nancy McKeon or even Stephen refuse to go back for reunions- especially if they proved that they can do other things besides being Jo and Gilbert. However, it kind of irritates me to see people like Tina Louise that get this chip on their shoulder if you call them by their character name. Tina will forever be known as Ginger, and no matter what she does people will always remember her as Ginger Grant. What would she rather be known as, someone that didn't get that many great parts or as Ginger? Sorry I kind of veered away from the topic here, but reading a bit of that article over again made me think of this post.

09-07-2002, 02:42 PM	#3
Charlie Max Say it with Music Frequent Poster Join Date: Jul 07, 2002 Location: In the Northwest Mountains Posts: 263	I've also read that article before. It's sad how he got much bad rap because of the show. I'm glad to know he's a great documentary producer. Way to go Stephen!
	__________________ "Music is the art of thinking with sounds." ~Jules Combarieu~

09-08-2002, 03:03 PM	#8
DarleneIllyria Gone Forum Star Join Date: Oct 15, 2000 Posts: 19,086	Kind of related to typecasting I read Burgess Meredith's book a few weeks ago. Burgess was real close friends with Carroll O' Connor. He talks about how Carroll was a bit depressed after the AITF and ABP ended, and people could only see him as Archie Bunker. Andy Griffith was also typecast as Andy Taylor for awhile too. People refused to put him in tv and movies because 'Andy Taylor just wasn't right for this particular role'. Kind of sad both these men had to experience typecasting, but at least they broke out of the mold- and proved to people that they can do totally different roles outside of Archie Bunker and Andy Taylor.

09-08-2002, 12:47 AM	#4
frani Member Frequent Poster Join Date: Jul 09, 2002 Location: New York City Posts: 445	Actually, I was really disappointed with him when I read the article. I never really liked the Gilbert character in the first place. I had stated in an earlier post that I didn't like Larry Mondello cause he was always getting the Beav in trouble, but after seeing him in so many eps lately, I kind of changed my mind. He really came from such a dysfunctional family. He was always getting hit and hollered at. No wonder he ate so much. But Gilbert didn't have Larry's character development. He was just a whiny one dimensional creep. I truly think the Beav couldn't have lived without him. After all, Richard was always getting the Beav in trouble, but he was at least interesting. I would tell Stephen Talbot that had it not been for "Leave it to Beaver" no one would even know he was alive.

09-08-2002, 02:18 PM	#6
frani Member Frequent Poster Join Date: Jul 09, 2002 Location: New York City Posts: 445	You might have misunderstood me. I was really reacting to Stephen Talbot's feeling (according to the article) about how bad it was for him to be part of the show. I think he is really ungrateful. He further refers to baby boomers as self-absorbed, etc. I'm just surprised that he has such a negative memory of that show. I wasn't confusing him with the part he played. What I meant by saying that Gilbert was not a great character was that, in addition to Stephen Talbot's bellyaching, he should be aware that he played the most unlikable, and possibly the most unnecessary role on the show. If he "suffers" not from that, well, maybe he is the one who is self-absorbed.

09-09-2002, 11:22 AM	#9
vedastone Member Frequent Poster Join Date: Aug 05, 2002 Posts: 120	Some very interesting discussion of a great piece by "Gilbert".... I do think that Talbot was quite tongue-in-cheek with most of what he said in the Salon article. He's quite humorous in fact. But he was serious enough back in the 80s to refuse the role of the adult Gilbert, and that's a shame - it would have been fun to see how that weasel matured. Typecasting can be a problem, but on the other hand, I have to think of a story I heard about the late Werner Klemperer, who won two Emmys as Col. Klink on Hogan's Heroes: a fan met him and started to sympathize with him about being typecast. Klemperer said that he had been fortunate enough to land an important role in a successful sitcom, something that the vast majority of actors only dream about, and that was far more significant than any concern about being subsequently typecast. A nice honest statement from a humble man, I would say.