What makes a 'big' guest

[Lizzy]

Calm down! Do you also not see that every time he makes a post, you attack it? He didn't even say anything negative, just that he doesn't feel its a bad line up- which I don't either! As he said, its personal perspective!

 

Stop being so 'unreceptive' to being nice to him for once

[DavidB]

Do you seriously think your posts are subjective in any way?!? You don't make posts that are criticising in any way (constructive or otherwise).

 

Yes, I do. On numerous occasions after events I've specifically made a topic asking for feedback and suggestions about the show. Would I do this if I was so against criticism? No. Do I agree with a lot of what is said? Obviously not, but it's a public message board and unless people wish to criticise in private - perhaps through email or whatever - then they have to expect a reply.

 

All you do is defend Showmasters blindly, even when they do occasionally stuff things up and then you annoy posters who are trying to MAKE constructive criticism or suggestions. I have no idea if your posts have anything to do with you being a moderator, a friend to Showmasters or if you're just faithful sheep who can see no wrong, but it's VERY frustrating when every suggestion or negative comment is blindly shot down by you. I KNOW I'm not the only one who thinks this, I've seen you take a lot of flack about it before. The worst bit is that YOUR posts end up being negative because you are so unreceptive to change.

 

Absolutely not. See, the key thing is that I'm perfectly able to separate the 'discussion' about opinion and the 'personal' attacking that a lot of people resort to. The above quote is a strong example of what some people feel they need to resort to, and it's sad. I don't care what 'flack' I take because in the end there are people who just make themselves look pathetic by having to resort to the kind of behaviour that schoolkids would be proud of.

 

My opinions, analysis etc are never blind - trust me on that. I'm perfectly well informed on all of these events, and whatever I say is based on a lot more truth than many people offer behind their own opinions. So many others post without a second thought about how these things really work.

 

Whether you choose to agree with me or not is your choice. However I would suggest that you quit being so personal because it's just a message board, and there's absolutely no need for it.

 

And before anyone suggests it - there is absolutely NO WAY I will ever be made to feel like I can't discuss things on here by people who wish to attack me personally. I've put up with it for years, and I will continue to do so, because in the end I'm not the one that's had to resort to insulting or anything like that. Those people come and go, but I don't really care because there are so many more people who are capable of communicating on a fair, reasonable and mature level.

 

So congratulations for again turning another topic into something completely irrelevant. If you're really that hell-bent on discussing this, then email me. But I don't really care either way. And apologies for replying to your topic - I kinda thought you asked for opinion, but I guess I got that wrong.

[chris_mk]

Calm down! Do you also not see that every time he makes a post, you attack it? He didn't even say anything negative, just that he doesn't feel its a bad line up- which I don't either! As he said, its personal perspective!

 

Stop being so 'unreceptive' to being nice to him for once

 

Hmm.. firstly, I made the first post... so that's not going on to attack him... Secondly, lets look at aspects of his first post in this thread

 

So yes, the definition of 'big' certainly is hard to exactly pin down, and I don't think we ever will.

 

SO this is a thread where I make a suggestion about quantifying the definition of a 'big' guest and his first reply is to say it's not possible.... explain to me how that is NOT negative?

 

 

 

Do you seriously think your posts are subjective in any way?!? You don't make posts that are criticising in any way (constructive or otherwise).

 

Yes, I do. On numerous occasions after events I've specifically made a topic asking for feedback and suggestions about the show. Would I do this if I was so against criticism? No. Do I agree with a lot of what is said? Obviously not, but it's a public message board and unless people wish to criticise in private - perhaps through email or whatever - then they have to expect a reply.

 

Do you understand that asking for feedback (which is going to happen anyway) is not the same as constructivly criticising Showmasters for stuff that happens?

 

All you do is defend Showmasters blindly, even when they do occasionally stuff things up and then you annoy posters who are trying to MAKE constructive criticism or suggestions. I have no idea if your posts have anything to do with you being a moderator, a friend to Showmasters or if you're just faithful sheep who can see no wrong, but it's VERY frustrating when every suggestion or negative comment is blindly shot down by you. I KNOW I'm not the only one who thinks this, I've seen you take a lot of flack about it before. The worst bit is that YOUR posts end up being negative because you are so unreceptive to change.

 

Absolutely not. See, the key thing is that I'm perfectly able to separate the 'discussion' about opinion and the 'personal' attacking that a lot of people resort to. The above quote is a strong example of what some people feel they need to resort to, and it's sad. I don't care what 'flack' I take because in the end there are people who just make themselves look pathetic by having to resort to the kind of behaviour that schoolkids would be proud of.

 

Yes, I accept that my words were bordering on flaming, that would be the 'frustrating' part I was referring to. Ever think that maybe you get flamed a lot because other forum users get frustrated with the corprorate line as well? I notice that you don't respond to the point about teh way you respond to those who DO bring up concerns?

 

My opinions, analysis etc are never blind - trust me on that. I'm perfectly well informed on all of these events, and whatever I say is based on a lot more truth than many people offer behind their own opinions. So many others post without a second thought about how these things really work.

 

In another thread you said that we can never know how busy an event is going to be... how is that anything BUT blind?!? If you've been to a lot of events, then you can tell if they're going to be busy or not. As for how things work, I assure you that I'm fully versed on these matters (possibly more than you, as I have more awareness that you when it comes to the weekend convention side.)

 

Whether you choose to agree with me or not is your choice. However I would suggest that you quit being so personal because it's just a message board, and there's absolutely no need for it.

 

And before anyone suggests it - there is absolutely NO WAY I will ever be made to feel like I can't discuss things on here by people who wish to attack me personally. I've put up with it for years, and I will continue to do so, because in the end I'm not the one that's had to resort to insulting or anything like that. Those people come and go, but I don't really care because there are so many more people who are capable of communicating on a fair, reasonable and mature level.

 

So congratulations for again turning another topic into something completely irrelevant. If you're really that hell-bent on discussing this, then email me. But I don't really care either way. And apologies for replying to your topic - I kinda thought you asked for opinion, but I guess I got that wrong.

 

I was asking for opinion... and the first part of your first post here was actually constructive... BEFORE it degenerated into the usual corproate line and negativity.

[Grazer]

I think big is subjective. What is a huge guest to one person may not be to another. For example, Steve Wang. To me he would be a huge guest cos he directed a movie that I love and he's been involved in loads of other movies. I may be wrong here (and I apologise if I am) but I dont think many people know who he is.

 

Do you understand that asking for feedback (which is going to happen anyway) is not the same as constructivly criticising Showmasters for stuff that happens?

One is as a result of the other. Feedback can be good and bad so saying something went badly and explaining why you think that is feedback.

[chris_mk]

I think big is subjective. What is a huge guest to one person may not be to another. For example, Steve Wang. To me he would be a huge guest cos he directed a movie that I love and he's been involved in loads of other movies. I may be wrong here (and I apologise if I am) but I dont think many people know who he is.

 

Nope, no idea!

 

What you've said is why I've tried to find a way of defining a 'big' guest.... so that when SM pre-announce one, people know what they are getting.

[Lizzy]

 

Hmm.. firstly, I made the first post... so that's not going on to attack him... Secondly, lets look at aspects of his first post in this thread

 

So yes, the definition of 'big' certainly is hard to exactly pin down, and I don't think we ever will.

 

SO this is a thread where I make a suggestion about quantifying the definition of a 'big' guest and his first reply is to say it's not possible.... explain to me how that is NOT negative?

 

Ok, I will, he said...

I don't think

 

He didn't say...

We never will

 

See the diff? Shock horror, its his personal opinion in a tread that asks for peoples opinions... what IS the world coming to?!?

 

 

 

In another thread you said that we can never know how busy an event is going to be... how is that anything BUT blind?!? If you've been to a lot of events, then you can tell if they're going to be busy or not. As for how things work, I assure you that I'm fully versed on these matters (possibly more than you, as I have more awareness that you when it comes to the weekend convention side.)

 

Gmex, Nov 2007. Malcom McDowell- as far as we knew, first time signer, big guest. James Marsters- sell out guest every time. Adrian Pasdar- Last time sell out Heroes guest. Plus many more- I forget.

I expected it to be a LOT busier than it was. And so did DeeBee (We do talk away from here). So no, you can never tell- how can you ALWAYS tell? There will always be an exception. Never say never.

[chris_mk]

 

Hmm.. firstly, I made the first post... so that's not going on to attack him... Secondly, lets look at aspects of his first post in this thread

 

So yes, the definition of 'big' certainly is hard to exactly pin down, and I don't think we ever will.

 

SO this is a thread where I make a suggestion about quantifying the definition of a 'big' guest and his first reply is to say it's not possible.... explain to me how that is NOT negative?

 

Ok, I will, he said...

I don't think

 

He didn't say...

We never will

 

See the diff? Shock horror, its his personal opinion in a tread that asks for peoples opinions... what IS the world coming to?!?

 

You can't just chop words out of a sentence... that's called 'taking it out of context'... 'I don't think we ever will' IS a negative sentence.... it's his opinion that is negative...

 

 

In another thread you said that we can never know how busy an event is going to be... how is that anything BUT blind?!? If you've been to a lot of events, then you can tell if they're going to be busy or not. As for how things work, I assure you that I'm fully versed on these matters (possibly more than you, as I have more awareness that you when it comes to the weekend convention side.)

 

Gmex, Nov 2007. Malcom McDowell- as far as we knew, first time signer, big guest. James Marsters- sell out guest every time. Adrian Pasdar- Last time sell out Heroes guest. Plus many more- I forget.

I expected it to be a LOT busier than it was. And so did DeeBee (We do talk away from here). So no, you can never tell- how can you ALWAYS tell? There will always be an exception. Never say never.

 

I knew it wasn't going to be busy. I arrived at 8.45, bought an early bird ticket on the door and was done by about 11.30 (which was nice, as I'd only got a parking ticket to about midday, in anticipation of it being quiet.) I run a stall at Showmasters events and didn't bother with Manchester because I knew (or at last strongly suspected - rightly as it happened) that it would be quiet.

 

Whilst I will concede that occasionally you DO get caught out, as a businessman, it's my job to anticipate trends and levels of business.

[Grazer]

I think big is subjective. What is a huge guest to one person may not be to another. For example, Steve Wang. To me he would be a huge guest cos he directed a movie that I love and he's been involved in loads of other movies. I may be wrong here (and I apologise if I am) but I dont think many people know who he is.

 

Nope, no idea!

 

What you've said is why I've tried to find a way of defining a 'big' guest.... so that when SM pre-announce one, people know what they are getting.

The vast majority of guests that SM announce are going to be huge to someone including Showmasters themselves (they are fans too) You cant put a definition on big in this context in my opinion. I know what you're saying and I'm not being negative, but I dont feel you can come up with a definition that encompass every criteria and please everyone. Its all about opinions

[chris_mk]

I think big is subjective. What is a huge guest to one person may not be to another. For example, Steve Wang. To me he would be a huge guest cos he directed a movie that I love and he's been involved in loads of other movies. I may be wrong here (and I apologise if I am) but I dont think many people know who he is.

 

Nope, no idea!

 

What you've said is why I've tried to find a way of defining a 'big' guest.... so that when SM pre-announce one, people know what they are getting.

The vast majority of guests that SM announce are going to be huge to someone including Showmasters themselves (they are fans too) You cant put a definition on big in this context in my opinion. I know what you're saying and I'm not being negative, but I dont feel you can come up with a definition that encompass every criteria and please everyone. Its all about opinions

 

Nothing will ever please everyone... I'm just looking to try and find a way to stop all the bickering that happens EVERY TIME Showmasters makes a pre-announcement.

[Grazer]

I think big is subjective. What is a huge guest to one person may not be to another. For example, Steve Wang. To me he would be a huge guest cos he directed a movie that I love and he's been involved in loads of other movies. I may be wrong here (and I apologise if I am) but I dont think many people know who he is.

 

Nope, no idea!

 

What you've said is why I've tried to find a way of defining a 'big' guest.... so that when SM pre-announce one, people know what they are getting.

The vast majority of guests that SM announce are going to be huge to someone including Showmasters themselves (they are fans too) You cant put a definition on big in this context in my opinion. I know what you're saying and I'm not being negative, but I dont feel you can come up with a definition that encompass every criteria and please everyone. Its all about opinions

 

Nothing will ever please everyone... I'm just looking to try and find a way to stop all the bickering that happens EVERY TIME Showmasters makes a pre-announcement.

Think you've started a bigger one

[chris_mk]

I think big is subjective. What is a huge guest to one person may not be to another. For example, Steve Wang. To me he would be a huge guest cos he directed a movie that I love and he's been involved in loads of other movies. I may be wrong here (and I apologise if I am) but I dont think many people know who he is.

 

Nope, no idea!

 

What you've said is why I've tried to find a way of defining a 'big' guest.... so that when SM pre-announce one, people know what they are getting.

The vast majority of guests that SM announce are going to be huge to someone including Showmasters themselves (they are fans too) You cant put a definition on big in this context in my opinion. I know what you're saying and I'm not being negative, but I dont feel you can come up with a definition that encompass every criteria and please everyone. Its all about opinions

 

Nothing will ever please everyone... I'm just looking to try and find a way to stop all the bickering that happens EVERY TIME Showmasters makes a pre-announcement.

Think you've started a bigger one

 

At least it's a DIFFERENT argument!!

[nicky]

For example, Steve Wang. To me he would be a huge guest cos he directed a movie that I love and he's been involved in loads of other movies. I may be wrong here (and I apologise if I am) but I dont think many people know who he is.

Do you mean the guy that directed Dark Guyver and Drive with Mark Decascos (sic), Brittany Murphy and that Kareem whatshisname?

[collector-man]

At least it's a DIFFERENT argument!!

No, it's not? It's still about who's big or not? Edited April 28, 2008 by collector-man

[theentsrgoingtowar]

big guests are different in everyones own opinion!!!!! many people would class John Hurt as a big star becasue he has done alot of famous films!!! Some people may find someone like Toyah Wilcox a big star, it is just everyones own opinion to weather they r a big star or not.

[Charmer]

Personally I think 'big' just means they "should" be more popular and well known to a wider range of people that come to the event, rather than just Star Trek, Heroes, Buffy fans etc etc.

[nicky]

Who's big I thought was who was more famous.

[bobd_uk]

Who's big I thought was who was more famous.

 

Again, that's a subjective opinion. Someone I consider to be massive may not be your cup of tea and vice versa!

[POTATOES]

So yes, the definition of 'big' certainly is hard to exactly pin down, and I don't think we ever will.

 

SO this is a thread where I make a suggestion about quantifying the definition of a 'big' guest and his first reply is to say it's not possible.... explain to me how that is NOT negative?

 

 

 

It's interesting how different people can read things differently. When I started reading this topic and Davids (full) reply I actually thought it seemed like you were both on the same wavelength.

You both had the same opinion that it is various factors taken in to account that would quantify someone being classed big.

 

The points he developed didn't declare those factors as wrong but showed that maybe it wouldnt work so well on some people as it does others.

 

If anything it seemed (to me) like he agreed with you more than he opposed you.

[chris_mk]

Who's big I thought was who was more famous.

 

Not wholly sure what you mean, but perhaps that's another criteria to add:

 

6 - Recognisability of name/face

[nicky]

Yes, Chrismk, that's exactly what I meant. Not who has more fans or who is more popular but who has most people (gen public included) heard of?

[mousybrown]

I agree with that above definition. For me its not whether or not ive seen their work and am a fan, its who ive heard of that i class as a bigger guest (whether or not i end up meeting them).

[Grazer]

For example, Steve Wang. To me he would be a huge guest cos he directed a movie that I love and he's been involved in loads of other movies. I may be wrong here (and I apologise if I am) but I dont think many people know who he is.

Do you mean the guy that directed Dark Guyver and Drive with Mark Decascos (sic), Brittany Murphy and that Kareem whatshisname?

That is the very same Steve Wang I love Drive in particular, very funny and the action is awesome

[MikeDonovan]

I take your point Chris, nonetheless I think John Hurt is without a doubt one of the biggest stars SM has ever drawn. I will be first in the queue (at least, after I've met Karen Allen again!)

 

1 - Box Office/TV ratings - How successful a career they've had. To get a 10 out of 10, they would have to of had a long career with a lot of sucess (Thinking along the lines of Shatner and Carrie Fisher). Someone can score highly if they are the star of a popular TV show (So David Anders might get a 7 for starring in ALias and Heroes)

By this yardstick, Ian Beale out of Eastenders would be one of the biggest stars who has ever attended an SM event.

 

Shatner hasn't had a long and successful career, any more than Fisher has - their most famous roles have defined them both, and left them scrabbling for work outside of the franchises that made them famous. Calling either of them "successful actors" is a stretch too far (lets face it, they're great and all, but calling them actors is a bit of a stretch itself). John Hurt is by far a bigger star than either of them - the only time that might not have been true is during the mid to late 1980s. Think of it this way - if you were a Hollywood director, making a $100m picture, who would you hire for a key role? Carrie Fisher? William Shatner?

 

Or John Hurt?

 

2 - Relevancy - How recently has someone appeared in film/on TV. Again, David would score highly here, as Heroes is current, where as Carrie Fisher has been working behind the scenes for many eyars now and would score lower

"Relevant" does not mean "recent". And as Showmasters will be well aware, us Gen-Xers have much deeper pockets.

 

3 - Fan base - Some stars have been in shows like Buffy or Star Trek, or film franchises like HP or Star Wars which have huge fan bases. Other guests have appeared in good films, but without such a passionate, dedictaed, large fanbase (such as perhaps John Hurt in Hellboy)

3 BAFTAs, 2 Oscar nominations. High profile roles in two huge franchises - Alien, and Indiana Jones. a 55 year career spanning some hugely iconic lead roles ("The Elephant Man", "1984"). I think John Hurt has nothing to prove to Sarah Michelle Gellar.

 

4 - Rarity - some guests do lots of events, some are rare signers. This score will change over time, as guests either continue to do rare appearances, or start doing every other event. Whilst a low score means they are common on the convention scene (such as James Masters), this isn't necessarily a bad thing - I LIKE that James makes himself accesable to fans! That said, a rare guiest (scoring a 9 or 10) is likely to be considered a big guest.

Ladies and Gentlemen, I give you - John Hurt.

 

5 - Friend of Fans - we all know some guests who don;t just show up and sign... the guests who go the extra mile for the fans and leave you coming away with a big smile (in my personal experience, guests like Christine Rose and George Takei score very highly, because they both make time to make sure you have a good experience meeting them.) Whilst I don;t like to ever bitch about guests, on the other end of the scale, is The Shatner. Obviously, this is the most subjective of the criteria, based on general opinions having met a guest.

 

Apparently John Hurt is a really friendly bloke. We'll see.

[Lizzy]

So yes, the definition of 'big' certainly is hard to exactly pin down, and I don't think we ever will.

 

SO this is a thread where I make a suggestion about quantifying the definition of a 'big' guest and his first reply is to say it's not possible.... explain to me how that is NOT negative?

 

 

 

It's interesting how different people can read things differently. When I started reading this topic and Davids (full) reply I actually thought it seemed like you were both on the same wavelength.

You both had the same opinion that it is various factors taken in to account that would quantify someone being classed big.

 

The points he developed didn't declare those factors as wrong but showed that maybe it wouldnt work so well on some people as it does others.

 

If anything it seemed (to me) like he agreed with you more than he opposed you.

 

exactly, thats how i took it!

[chris_mk]

I take your point Chris, nonetheless I think John Hurt is without a doubt one of the biggest stars SM has ever drawn. I will be first in the queue (at least, after I've met Karen Allen again!)

 

I agree (pretty sure I averaged him an 8, which is a VERY good score)

 

1 - Box Office/TV ratings - How successful a career they've had. To get a 10 out of 10, they would have to of had a long career with a lot of sucess (Thinking along the lines of Shatner and Carrie Fisher). Someone can score highly if they are the star of a popular TV show (So David Anders might get a 7 for starring in ALias and Heroes)

By this yardstick, Ian Beale out of Eastenders would be one of the biggest stars who has ever attended an SM event.

 

Shatner hasn't had a long and successful career, any more than Fisher has - their most famous roles have defined them both, and left them scrabbling for work outside of the franchises that made them famous. Calling either of them "successful actors" is a stretch too far (lets face it, they're great and all, but calling them actors is a bit of a stretch itself). John Hurt is by far a bigger star than either of them - the only time that might not have been true is during the mid to late 1980s. Think of it this way - if you were a Hollywood director, making a $100m picture, who would you hire for a key role? Carrie Fisher? William Shatner?

 

Or John Hurt?

 

Yes, the guy who plays Ian Beale would score highly in one or two of the criteria, but would be let down by the others. Star Trek is STILL shown on TV and has been shown across the globe... The Shatner can still get decent advertising deals on the back of it (not to mention Boston Legal which is/was a very succesful TV show recently). Carrie Fisher (aside from being a highly acclaimed author) has starred in three of the biggest grossing films of all time. I can't see how you could say they haven't had long careers (Star Wars is STILL shown every Christmas!) John Hurt has had a longer career, for sure... but has never had that MEGA hit or been quite as iconic. As for who the casting director would hire... well I guess it would depend on teh role... if it was the mother/grandmother of some starlet, I'd probably choose Fisher over Hurt!

 

2 - Relevancy - How recently has someone appeared in film/on TV. Again, David would score highly here, as Heroes is current, where as Carrie Fisher has been working behind the scenes for many eyars now and would score lower

"Relevant" does not mean "recent". And as Showmasters will be well aware, us Gen-Xers have much deeper pockets.

 

Perhaps relevance is not the right word... in this instance, I meant it to mean 'recent'.

 

3 - Fan base - Some stars have been in shows like Buffy or Star Trek, or film franchises like HP or Star Wars which have huge fan bases. Other guests have appeared in good films, but without such a passionate, dedictaed, large fanbase (such as perhaps John Hurt in Hellboy)

3 BAFTAs, 2 Oscar nominations. High profile roles in two huge franchises - Alien, and Indiana Jones. a 55 year career spanning some hugely iconic lead roles ("The Elephant Man", "1984"). I think John Hurt has nothing to prove to Sarah Michelle Gellar.

 

Fan Base has nothing to do with awards. Buffy fans WILL come out in their droves to meet Buffy guests (as evidenced by James Masters being back again and will no doubt be busy). Hellboy, Elephant Man, 1984, etc do NOT have large fan bases who turn out in the same figures. Even the Alien franchise cannot come vlose to Whedonverse/Star Wars/Harry Potter.

 

4 - Rarity - some guests do lots of events, some are rare signers. This score will change over time, as guests either continue to do rare appearances, or start doing every other event. Whilst a low score means they are common on the convention scene (such as James Masters), this isn't necessarily a bad thing - I LIKE that James makes himself accesable to fans! That said, a rare guiest (scoring a 9 or 10) is likely to be considered a big guest.

Ladies and Gentlemen, I give you - John Hurt.

 

Mate, seriously.. go back and read where I posted a score for John Hurt!!

 

5 - Friend of Fans - we all know some guests who don;t just show up and sign... the guests who go the extra mile for the fans and leave you coming away with a big smile (in my personal experience, guests like Christine Rose and George Takei score very highly, because they both make time to make sure you have a good experience meeting them.) Whilst I don;t like to ever bitch about guests, on the other end of the scale, is The Shatner. Obviously, this is the most subjective of the criteria, based on general opinions having met a guest.

 

Apparently John Hurt is a really friendly bloke. We'll see.

 

In the post I made, I did give John Hurt a score for this category, because I've heard from a few people already that he's quite fan friendly :) This criteria is laregely based on experience and word of mouth.

 

If anything it seemed (to me) like he agreed with you more than he opposed you.

 

I didn't say he opposed me, I said I found it negative.

 

At the end, his conclusion is 'oh well, nothing will work', which I find negative when compared to 'ok, lets look at where this might be incorrect and lets fix it.'

Edited April 28, 2008 by chris_mk