Star Billing in Dad's Army

[mariska]

I have searched the forum but could not find it, so here's one of my first questions: how come in the intro of the series there is a pretty "big" mention of the 3 main characters (or I feel they are)Starring: Arthur Lowe, John Le Mesurier & Clive Dunn? Why are the others not mentioned in the intro? Sure they are presented in the closing of the series but I wonder why..were they bigger "stars" at that time?
I did notice in newer episodes of later seasons the others are mentioned like: Ian Lavender as Pte Pike etc..
Just curious.

[pault1963]

I would think that the three main stars of the show are mentioned in the opening titles as that was the way lots of TV shos began back then. Arthur Lowe, John Le Mesurier and Clive Dunn were already established TV stars. You often hear of 'billings' for films and on posters for films (and theatre shows) as something that causes arguments. Being mentioned first/at the top of the bill shows you are the star. The 'stars' often wanted their name to be first/bigger/at the top of the bill. No one wished to be at the bottom!
Actors have very big egos.

[Alan Hayes]

What Paul says is true, but additionally, it's not just about billing, it will also have been to do with those characters being seen as the most important ones by the writers and also in terms of payment, those three actors would have been on a higher wage than the rest of the platoon.

I think your question actually highlights something that is often overlooked. We tend to think of Dad's Army as an 'ensemble cast' show, and occasionally overlook that there was a pecking order.

• Arthur Lowe, John Le Mesurier and Clive Dunn were the stars.
  
  
• James Beck, John Laurie, Arnold Ridley and Ian Lavender were the regular supporting cast.
  
  
• Then there are actors like Bill Pertwee, Frank Williams, Edward Sinclair and Colin Bean, who represent the next string of the cast.
  
  
• And then there are occasional and one-off guest characters.
  
  
• Platoon back row and other non-speaking extras.
  

Billing and wages would have gone from high to low from the top to the bottom of the list.

[mariska]

Thanks for your answers, thats interesting, I had a sense this was the case since it was obvious these 3 mentioned separately must have had another "status" when the series first aired. But am I right in assuming that when the series became widely known and more famous, the supporting cast became more and more famous as well? As I said, in newer episodes the support cast is mentioned afterwards (not just the platoon marching and having their names mentioned but their name and who they played)
Also, when watching newer episodes, I see Pte Sponge having more lines than when they first started. I always found it a bit strange that the privates standing behind the main characters were more or less onlookers at the scenes but not really getting involved in the actual dialogues. Besides Sponge I don't think any private came more into the public eye?
And I would think the more famous DA became, the more increase in salary all actors had, at least that would make sense to me..

[petere]

I like the episode ”The King was in his counting House” where Pte Sponge and the the 2d section really put the foot down. Pte Sponge and the rest are sulking and refuse to guard the bank’s money as they weren’t invited to Cpt Mainwaring’s party!😊


The ”back-troops” really made a point there!

[Alan Hayes]

Nov 12, 2020 2:41:57 GMT 12 mariska said:

Thanks for your answers, thats interesting, I had a sense this was the case since it was obvious these 3 mentioned separately must have had another "status" when the series first aired. But am I right in assuming that when the series became widely known and more famous, the supporting cast became more and more famous as well? As I said, in newer episodes the support cast is mentioned afterwards (not just the platoon marching and having their names mentioned but their name and who they played)

It's also worth mentioning that the end credits were following a style adopted by producer David Croft before he made Dad's Army, i.e. 'You have been watching...' followed by the regular cast named only (no character names) and then the guest cast (named and with character names).

Dad's Army certainly brought the actors more fame, but most of them had already been successful in film, TV, radio and stage productions.

Also, when watching newer episodes, I see Pte Sponge having more lines than when they first started. I always found it a bit strange that the privates standing behind the main characters were more or less onlookers at the scenes but not really getting involved in the actual dialogues. Besides Sponge I don't think any private came more into the public eye?
And I would think the more famous DA became, the more increase in salary all actors had, at least that would make sense to me..

Colin Bean's role in the series was made larger following the death of James Beck.

As for the back row performers, there was a bizarre thing in British TV back then, that it was far cheaper to employ extras and have them completely silent than if they said even a single word. If they had *any* dialogue, their pay rate would increase in line with rules agreed with the actors' union Equity, so generally they were kept 'mute' as that was cheaper for the production.

In terms of payments for the main cast increasing, BBC wages for actors were modest, certainly compared to those 'across the road' at ITV, Britain's commercial broadcaster when Dad's Army was being made. I would not expect that actors got pay rises that reflected their fame, just standard of living increases. Generally, actors were happy to be doing something that offered them regular work.

Of course, the BBC pays it's 'talent' silly money these days and you wonder why!

[mariska]

Your last part regarding "overpayment" sounds familiar..these days I wonder what so called talents or "stars" as they are called, get paid extraordinary amounts for..well for what?? Not my cup of tea.But I guess the Internet made the big chance..I sometimes think how it would have been had Dads Army been launched in the Internet era..how popular would they have become and how much of stardom had been knocking at the casts doors? (surely I know DA would be considered oldfashioned by many people these days, but figurarly speaking)
When you realize that the major part of the cast never even got to experience the mobile phones, a computer..yet it seems like yesterday when you see them on the screen.
Its obvious things were a lot different in 1968 when this all started.I suppose it kept people humble and thankful to have a job. (no clue whether there were recessions that had an influence on salaries)
On the other hand, it must have become clearer and clearer to cast and producers that this show increased popularity rapidly. I read in the Radio Times book at one certain time in the 70's they had an audience of around 17 million..surely that must have made a difference in importance and salaries or were the cast so humble they never asked for a bit more recognition seen from a financial point of view?
Or did the big fame came after the series already stopped and many castmembers had passed away?
I also wonder if the majority of the copyrights of the series, films etc go to the BBC or is there also a substantial part for relatives of the castmembers, both deceased or alive?
And that "silent performance"of the supporting actors is truely bizarre..I do hope that has changed nowadays, its ridiculous..

I am sorry for my questions but I feel this is THE place to get answers to the questions I have for a long time.

[Dave Homewood]

Nov 10, 2020 6:49:02 GMT 12 mariska said:

I did notice in newer episodes of later seasons the others are mentioned like: Ian Lavender as Pte Pike etc..

Erm, no they weren't. Not in the opening sequences, ever. It was only ever Jimmy Perry and David Croft, followed by Arthur Lowe, John Le Mesurier and Clive Dunn, from 1968 till 1977, in the opening credits.

And the full cast always got billing at the end.

[Dave Homewood]

Nov 12, 2020 4:44:16 GMT 12 Alan Hayes said:

In terms of payments for the main cast increasing, BBC wages for actors were modest, certainly compared to those 'across the road' at ITV, Britain's commercial broadcaster when Dad's Army was being made. 

It's obvious the BBC put the money in the right place, the scripts and production. ITV may have paid the actors more but generally most of their comedies at the time were nowhere near as good or polished or funny, or as a result, as long lasting. ITV was not investing in great scripts, they were basically getting the stuff the BBC rejected in a lot of cases I think.

Also the BBC were clever enough then to let shows develop and settle in, even if they had a slightly shaky start. These days Dad's Army would have been cancelled after Series One but the BBC automatically gave them a second series which was a vast improvement on the first, as the actors were settled into the roles, and the writers now had their direction and focus sorted.

It's a well known story that when they were filing the first series during a break on location Arthur Lowe got very angry when he discovered that John Le Mesurier and Clive were being paid significantly more than he was getting for the series, despite the fact he was playing what was the leading character. After his protesting the producers made sure the BBC adjusted that so he was rewarded more fairly. I often wonder if the higher wage of the other two was as a result of them holding out for a period before they accepted their parts - did the BBC up the anti to get them to sign their contracts?

[petere]

You would also think that it would be very difficult to keep the salaries secret on a filming set like that? Maybe it was different back then but I remember from my different workplaces that pay rates are discussed a lot among the workforce. Not that I have ever worked in showbiz of course.😊

[Alan Hayes]

The last thing people discuss in the British workplace is their salaries. There's always been a shroud of secrecy around that, historically. "It's just not done to discuss money."

As for John Le Mesurier and Clive Dunn being employed on a higher rate, at a guess, John Le Mesurier was quite well established in feature films and there was a distinct snobbery about the status that afforded an actor. Clive Dunn was also well established, but mainly in TV comedy. Quite why Arthur Lowe wouldn't at least have been on his pay level is confusing, though!

One possibility is that John and Clive had better agents!

[Alan Hayes]

Nov 13, 2020 8:11:48 GMT 12 Dave Homewood said:

It's obvious the BBC put the money in the right place, the scripts and production. ITV may have paid the actors more but generally most of their comedies at the time were nowhere near as good or polished or funny, or as a result, as long lasting. ITV was not investing in great scripts, they were basically getting the stuff the BBC rejected in a lot of cases I think.

Some ITV sitcoms were very popular and some are very good (the early series of Doctor in the House and Doctor at Large; Shelley; The New Statesman,;Whoops Apocalypse; Hot Metal). Oddly enough, the ones that remain more popular today, like On the Buses, Bless this House and George and Mildred, I never really liked. And in the case of On the Buses, actively dislike for the way women were depicted/treated in it.

But I do agree that in general ITV sitcoms are inferior to the BBC's. However, their drama was often better or at least as good (Callan, Public Eye, Upstairs Downstairs, Armchair Theatre, the ITC film series such as The Prisoner, Randall and Hopkirk (Deceased), The Persuaders).

Also the BBC were clever enough then to let shows develop and settle in, even if they had a slightly shaky start. These days Dad's Army would have been cancelled after Series One but the BBC automatically gave them a second series which was a vast improvement on the first, as the actors were settled into the roles, and the writers now had their direction and focus sorted.

I wonder if it's a bit of a myth about Dad's Army being given time to bed in - I've been looking into the reaction in the press to the early series and the response was very positive for the most part, as were the ratings, which rose from 7m to 9m over the course of Series 1.

[Dave Homewood]

Agreed that the Doctor series was good, they had a massive pool of writers on that one and interestingly many of them had been BBC writers too so knew their craft I guess.

I liked George And Mildred as a kid. I can still enjoy it on the odd occasion.

I've never found On The Buses funny nor appealing at all. I'd lump it in with Love Thy Neighbour and a few others as trash.

One ITV I do like is Get Some In, because it's funny and very accurate to the Air Force experience.

I agree regarding dramas though. ITV have made some if the best. Aug Weidersehn, Pet is a favourite. Also Danger UXB was brilliant. Thames and LWT did some very fine dramas. Lots of great one offs from both ITV and BBC back in the 1980s and 90s. We used to see them here in the Montana Sunday Theatre anthology. Britain does not seem to do good work like that now.

[Alan Hayes]

Must admit when I watched Get Some In recently, I did enjoy it.

[mariska]

Thank you so much for your extended answers! Gives me more insight on how this used to operate..I just am left with that 1 question: for instance, I bought a Dads Army DVD box, ofcourse its a BBC product but will it also benefit the family of the already deceased castmembers? With the interest in the show still on, I can imagine royalties will still be coming in after all those years. Just being curious, nothing more 

[Alan Hayes]

Yes, the DVD releases and television repeats should benefit those cast members still living and the estates of those who have sadly left us.

[mariska]

Nov 17, 2020 11:05:30 GMT 12 Alan Hayes said:

Yes, the DVD releases and television repeats should benefit those cast members still living and the estates of those who have sadly left us.

It's nice to know that when purchasing a DVD or any other related merchandise(?) it will benefit also the estates.