Read on Twitter
I think a lot about when films use personal photos of the starring actors, taken when they were younger, to represent a younger version of the character, especially when the photos are from when they were kids.
Is this something that gets put into the contract when they get signed for the film? Does the quality of the personal photos belonging to the actor factor into casting for the role?
Do actors keep a mental log of childhood photos that could be used for such a purpose and ration them out, deciding if a current production is worthy of using up one of their supply?
When the photo was being taken the actor wasn’t acting the role of the character they went on to play. Knowing this takes me out of the story somewhat.
Sometimes, if the actor has been in the business long enough, the photo is of a younger them in a previous acting role and this is doubly not a representation of the character they go on to play. It’s two removes away.
Does the parent, or whoever took the photo, get some kind of credit for their photography?
I’ve been spending a lot of time by myself recently.
I actually really enjoyed it in Danny Collins when they took old photos of Pacino to make the character’s album covers, made me smile and feel warm inside
