Yeah, I know the " Sons of Liberty" were the children , grand-children, etc. of British people but couldn't they find a bunch of American actors to play Americans? I'm sick and tired of British actors taking all the acting jobs. It's not like we don't have actors here.
[deleted]
Wrong, Brit actors if anything get paid more for their acting talent, at least from the salary data available online they look to be getting the better deal.
I choose to believe what my religion programs me to believe.
We weren't American, we were British nuff said.
shareThe real British didn't consider the colonists to be British.
sharefact or fiction link please
shareOh yes, they did, that's why they wouldn't fire on their own people and it took a rebel to fire first at the crossing, killing a young officer. At least that's what history taught us.
I choose to believe what my religion programs me to believe.
As far as I can see, MANY of the actors in this film are American. There are a few exceptions, but it's also a fairly well billed cast. Ben Barnes and Marton Csokas, while not from the states, have done a pretty good job so far in the show. But hey! Lol. Everyone is a critic.
shareActually it sounds like everyone is a whiner.
shareIt's likely that the Americans back then looked less "melting pot" than. Americans do today so it is probably more historically accurate.
sharePerhaps in New England, yes. But the middle colonies were extremely diverse with Swedes and huguenots in DE, Dutch in NY and NJ, and various German populations in PA. So America was really always a haven for immigrants.
http://www.fictionpress.com/s/3042433/1/The-Blackstall-Curve
its was 80% british at the time of the war
45% supported the rebels
20% supported the king
and 35% just wanted to stay out of it <--- and this included most of the 20% none brits
Really? I thought it was more 90% loyal to 10% rebel till the Boston 'massacre' propaganda hit the papers.
I choose to believe what my religion programs me to believe.
British actors have nationalized healthcare so it is cheaper to hire them to work.
shareWait... That's your concern after watching this trash show? How about the disregard for historical accuracy if u have a bone to pick?
shareYou do realize that there was no such thing as the United States of America back when this takes place and that they where all British citizens? You sound very stupid saying something like that. They were British colonists, not Americans.
share
That's such a simplistic and small minded viewpoint.
Acting is a global industry, with global talent.
Why stop with country of origin? Go the whole 9 yards and only allow actors to play characters from whatever State they were born! Same difference. Many different accents out there, and it's part of the actors' tool kit to get as many under their belt as feasibly possible.
You'd have to strip Daniel Day Lewis of his 3 Oscars if we went by your flimsy theory. None of those parts involved using his natural accent, if you consider where he was born. Meryl Streep made a brilliant Margaret Thatcher. Cate Blanchett has made a career sounding different in a variety of roles!
I've seen plenty of so called 'natives' fail miserably because the characterisation isn't there! And that's the bottom line. Casting people are looking for the actor to nail character! An actor may have all the vowel sounds he or she needs in place, but what good is that if they're missing the essence of the part?!