"No, I haven't sat down to play the games," said Walton Goggins, who plays pre-war movie star Cooper Howard and his post-war counterpart The Ghoul. "And I won't. I won't. I won't play the games. I'm not interested."

The reason is actually pretty simple: Goggins doesn't want to think of the world or the characters of Fallout as elements of a game.

"All of a sudden, I'm looking at this world from a very different perspective, and as something on a screen in which I am an avatar in. I don't believe that I'm an avatar. I believe The Ghoul exists in the world. I believe that Cooper Howard exists in the world." he said.

"The best way that I can serve this world and serve the fans of this game, I think, is to go to work every single day and believe the circumstances that I'm presented with," Goggins said.

top 96 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 107 points 11 months ago (10 children)

Makes perfect sense from the perspective of an actor.

They want their performance to come naturally and with the direction of the writers/directors.

Playing the games can make an actor subconsciously act how they think would fit the games rather than how would fit their specific character.

  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 16 points 11 months ago (6 children)

    I was going to make this it's own comment, but it fits well as a reply here.

    I don't agree with this. I don't think he needs to play them, but the argument doesn't make sense. Would he say the same if it were a movie? I'm willing to bet not. He just doesn't want to play the games, and that's fine. The bullshit excuse of "not wanting to believe the world" is stupid. If you're making a movie set in a larger cinematic universe you don't get to act noble about refusing to engage in the rest of the media. It being a video game doesn't change anything.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    I don't think he's trying to act noble. I think he's just very aware of his own acting process and how his brain works. It'd be different if he said nobody in the cast should play the games. Or maybe he doesn't think it's a great idea for the star of a video game adaptation to say he doesn't like video games.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)

    Yeah, it actually also makes sense for an actor to avoid seeing other films with that character if they're going to portray an entirelly new version of that character.

    In Method Acting character building is a lot about what are the motivations and drives of the "person" which is the character and "living truthfully (the character's life) under imaginary circunstances" and judging by how he talks about it he is indeed using Method Acting.

    As for games, they might be an even worse influence than previous films because the emotional depth of in game characters is generally zero or close to it (except in things like cutscenes were they used actors, MOCAP and a very detailed model for expressions), akin to a woden performance.

    It's valid for an actor using Method Acting not to want to be exposed to a different representation of the world their character is supposed to inhabit and of the characters in that world - Method Acting is pretty "soft and smooshy" rather than a set of iron rules and mechanisms, relying on a person's own "emotional engine" and ability to pretty much forget that they're not that "person" which is the character living those things (think of it as an actor's version of suspension of disbelief) so who knows what influences the actor might take in subconsciously which then affect their embodyment of that character, which would be a bigger concern now that they've already embodied that character (for the last season of the series) and that should not change for actor reasons rather than character reasons (i.e. the character should only change due to things that happen to the character).

    No doubt some actors would think that playing the game would make no difference, but it's valid for some to think it might.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    The character does not exist in any of the games so your argument doesn't apply.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 11 months ago*

    A somewhat different version of that world and of characters similar to the one he's acting exists in the games.

    When building a character for acting one bases oneself in the script to "fill-in the blanks" of "how would this person feel in these circumstances", based on things like the past of that person, the world around them and past events (sometimes actors using Method Action will even during rehearsal enact an important events of a character's past which are NOT on the script, just to try and get an impression of how that might have shaped that imaginary person).

    So it still makes sense that now, after he built a character based on the script's version of that world and of people like that character in it, he would avoid different versions of that world and those people.

    Mind you, he might just not be at all a gamer and this is just an excuse not to play the game. Then again he might genuinely want to avoid the negative side effects for his character building of being exposed to two different versions of the same world - it is a valid consideration for some actors. Only he knows if it's a genuine reason or just some bollocks he said to get fans of the games of his back.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 11 months ago

    And also I assume it'd take probably a few hundred hours to go through every single game which like... I don't think anyone would expect him to do ~200 hours of research for his character in White Lotus, so I don't see why this should be any different really.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 52 points 11 months ago (4 children)

    Makes sense to me. The Ghoul is an original character, and Goggins doesn't need to know a lot about the setting or source material.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    Yeah I mean, I assume he knows all the relevant details about the show from reading the scripts, and the show is probably designed so a viewer can get into it without knowing the games well, so there's really no need to know all the lore stuff from games that isn't in the show anyway.

    Plus TBH the dude is a movie star, he's probably got movie star shit to do rather than putting a few hundred hours into a bunch of RPGs lol.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    I think people have gotten some unrealistic expectations from Henry Cavill. For all I know, Walton Goggins has absolutely nothing to do with the writing, so why would he care much about the source material? I can respect him for just wanting to do his job, listening to how his boss wants him to do it.

    It's the director and the writers people should expect to care about the source material, not the actors.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 11 months ago

    Actors are creative people too. Several of Harrison Ford's most iconic moments were ad libs. Famously, in Raiders of the Lost Ark he was supposed to have a whip vs sword fight during the Marian is kidnapped sequence. But he wasn't feeling well, so he pulled his pistol and shot the swordsman instead, and then they rebuilt the scene around that. Also, Han Solo's "I love you!" "I know." moment was Ford.

    "The writer writes, the director directs, the actor acts" is how you get the sludge Hollywood makes today.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 73 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    I mean, it’s not like he’s the writer lol

    Doesn’t seem like an issue to me

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 19 points 11 months ago

    Sounds like a pretty standard Method Acting way of going about it.

  • source
  • [–] 16 points 11 months ago

    Fair. It's not like his character is in them.

  • source
  • [–] 39 points 11 months ago* (1 child)

    I'm totally cool with this. He's not involved in the creative direction. He's just a damn good actor, he doesn't need to understand the whole feral, or glowing one, or whatever. Let the writers write and actors act and ffs keep the executive away from both!!!

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 110 points 11 months ago (42 children)

    Good for him. Actors who want to embrace their character and the world they are portrayed in shouldn’t feel pressured to consume the source material, whether that’s a video game series or a book, especially when the show or movie could wildly diverge from the source.

  • source
  • hideshow 42 child comments
  • [–] 114 points 11 months ago (17 children)

    Counterpoint, Henry Cavill in The Witcher. Though he left once they started diverging from the source because he knew that it would make the show subpar. And it did.

    Knowing the source material can help actors understand more nuance of their character and the world the show takes place in.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 17 child comments
  • [–] 87 points 11 months ago (3 children)

    Counter-counter: Henry Cavill was playing the Witcher, the central character in the lore. Walter Goggins is playing someone not in the original lore.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 11 months ago* (2 children)

    The word you are looking for is pointercount. Note somewhat NSFW for language.

    https://youtu.be/-sVlZ_SaKnk

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago (1 child)

    Yeah, no.

    Your only source is a video from a movie that is nearly 50 years old.

    A single usage in a video doesn't make something a word.

    The video itself doesn't even make it a compound word. No one on the video ever says those words.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 24 points 11 months ago (8 children)

    Pointercount, the lore in Fallout is grossly inconsistent which is not the case for The Witcher.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 11 months ago (7 children)

    The lore in Fallout is grossly inconsistent because of a lack of Henry Cavills working at Bethesda.

    There's still a chance to retcon stupid shit. I really, really would prefer that outcome to "eh the lore in this RPG series doesn't matter that much.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 11 months ago (3 children)

    The lore in Fallout is grossly inconsistent because of a lack of Henry Cavills working at Bethesda.

    They have had staff that knew the lore the fact is they decided to change things because it made the game more fun. For example mutants and supermutants should not be in almost any part of the wasteland as the means to create them is not universally available according to lore, yet they are in every single game because they are fun enemies to fight.

    Fallout chose fun gameplay over consistency.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)

    You can have both fun gameplay and consistency. In terms of gameplay, Super Mutants are just big, tough humanoids, nothing unique. I do like what the addition of the suicider in 4 does for gameplay, but they're bullet sponges in most of the games. Bethesda proved they can come up with a regional variant on that enemy type in Point Lookout with the Swampfolk.

    As for the Super Mutants themselves, they have at least half-assed an excuse every time they appear in the games, with 76's Super Mutants kinda fitting pretty well. The more they do it, the less valuable FEV is, but the Super Mutants are really the least of my problems with the lore. However, their constant reuse indicates a desire to establish series icons that they can use to market the game instead of good mechanics (look guys BoS again!). Above all, it really indicates a lack of creativity to me. They absolutely did not have to make a choice between their game being fun and their game having well-thought-out lore.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago (1 child)

    Super mutabts were literally made. They shouldn't be in most games because of this and they absolutely should not be in 76.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

    Yeah, that's why they fit more in 76. They were created by pre-War experimentation inspired by real life government experiments and are localized to one area.

    It's not watertight but again, it is probably their best excuse of the 3 they've given.

    While I largely agree with you, I thought you said the lore is inconsistent so it doesn't matter?

    EDIT: Oh, wait. I kinda see what you're saying now. My point is that the all the Super Mutants are, gameplay-wise, are big, tough guys. You can write a big, tough enemy class into your game a million different ways, which they did more creatively in Point Lookout. It wasn't a choice between inconsistent lore and fun, they're just lazy.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    You generally need a single person with the vision to maintain consistency throughout the whole series, and as far as I know that was not the case with Falout the games.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

    Absolutely. They switched out creators almost every game. But I would still say that even with the differences between 1, 2, and NV the series still splits pretty cohesively into the West Coast series that tries to build upon the history of its world and the East Coast series that tries to create a freshly-fucked apocalypse with every outing.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 11 months ago

    Yeah, people shouldn't be allowed to be involved with things that they don't care about enough to know all that came before. Whether it's a movie, a book, a game, a tv series, it should always be done by people who genuinely care and are fans of it.

    The difference is like night and day when everyone cares. The Lord of the Rings is probably one of the best examples. The vast majority of people on that knew the source material well, and that let them work towards the same vision, each contributing in their own way. The things that were changed were never because nobody gave a shit. I don't agree with all of them, but I can't say they did them without consideration.

    When everyone cares, that's when something amazing is made.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 16 points 11 months ago (3 children)

    Sure, but if everyone later complains that the show was too different from the source material, they'll look back to things like this.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

    It doesn't really matter for Fallout either, it's pretty basic at its core. It's not like he needs some deep understanding of the factions to play a character here. It's just a post-apocalyptic world, where his character happens to have no hair or nose. It's always been a sandbox, which lends itself well to a show.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] [S] -13 points 11 months ago (17 children)

    Why bother slapping a name on the show if you don't want it to have anything to do with the game?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 17 child comments
  • [–] 27 points 11 months ago (3 children)

    That is the furthest thing from what he said. You’re looking for a reason to be upset.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [+] [S] -15 points 11 months ago (2 children)
  • [–] 6 points 11 months ago (11 children)

    Counterpoint:

    Art is interpretive by its nature, and each person has their vision for how it should appear. That said, why would you want to watch something that is a 1:1 of something you’ve already consumed? It’s okay, and often encouraged to stray from the source material.

    Even the creator of Fallout acknowledges this.

    For example — for better or worse — comics exemplify this idea with the many iterations of their superheroes. e.g. Superman originally couldn’t fly. Some are better than others, but in the end we (the fans) get a more rich and diverse world for our imaginations.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [+] [S] -6 points 11 months ago* (10 children)

    why would you want to watch something that is a 1:1 of something you’ve already consumed?

    Well...

    1. I haven't. One is a TV show and one is a game, obviously.
    2. It doesn't have to be 1:1. The words that were used were "wildly diverge from the source". How can you understand any of the lore without playing it? Would you act in a movie based on a book and intentionally sequester yourself from the book?
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    Help me out: who said, “wildly diverge from the source”? (Quotes were yours)

    Also, actors act based on the script they’re given and through the artistic direction of the director. They do it all the time; it’s their job.

    But, you imply a good point (that I sort of touched on): not everyone likes it. And, I’ll further that sentiment by saying: not everyone has to like it.

    You obviously don’t like it. And that’s okay.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 11 months ago (5 children)

    I suspect the actor can read and relied on that.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [+] [S] -8 points 11 months ago (4 children)
  • [–] 9 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    The script of the show, it usually has all of their lines in it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] [S] -1 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    The script doesn't contain nearly enough information to get an accurate view of who the character is that they're portraying or what the fictional universe is like. That's why a good actor will research the lore.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 24 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

    He'd be perfect for the writer's room

    EDIT: Jokes aside, I respect his decision as an actor, but I also don't have faith in the direction they're giving him. Fans want him to play the games because they don't have faith, either, and they'd like someone on set pushing for something closer in tone to the West Coast games than the East Coast games. He's easily the best part of the show.

  • source
  • [–] 12 points 11 months ago

    Considering none of the characters in the game played the game either, I don't see the controversy.

  • source
  • [–] 12 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    It’s not like his character has a special meta understanding of the fallout games or universe

    He’s acting the character like he’s a professional actor because he is and a good one too

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [+] 20 points 11 months ago (2 children)
  • [–] 4 points 11 months ago

    I didn't even think it was that click baity. My initial knee jerk reaction was "ok, cool. It's not like they are making a new Vegas show. It's a new storyline with cameos."

    But then I see op responding in the comments, and it's clear I am not the target audience for this article despite being a huge fan of both the show and game.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 13 points 11 months ago

    Walton Goggins apparently

  • source
  • [–] 16 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    If he is dedicated to the world and his character, that's sufficient. Hes a fantastic actor. buuuut...

    I would suspect that him playing the games would not make him "think of the world or the characters of Fallout as elements of a game." but I'm not Walter Goggins. Realistically, hes just not into video games with major story campaigns and doesn't understand they're just a different form of story telling media. He's thinking of video games as exclusively as an avenue of competition, mastery, or challenge.

    So I think hes wrong, but I don't know that it matters that materially.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    My mind's eye flashes to something like The Master and I'm bummed that's considered "gamey" by great actors. Not that I expect actors to go fucking play Fallout 1 with a Small Gun Crit/Speech build and go collect the Brotherhood's data and confront the Master in a battle of words... but if someone would like to show Goggins on their phone that kind of thing is in the games, that the games themselves strived very hard to make living, colorful worlds, I think it certainly wouldn't hurt the show. Hell if someone wants to show that scene to anyone currently at Bethesda I think it could positively impact the next game.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 6 points 11 months ago

    Spot on. People in this thread are incorrectly assuming that we want him to play them for "the lore" and not so he can see the tone of some of the performances.

    But I do respect the actor wanting to take notes only from the director, it's just I don't trust this particular show's direction.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] 15 points 11 months ago (2 children)
  • [–] 3 points 11 months ago

    How does he have that much natural hair and still look bald?

  • source
  • [–] 9 points 11 months ago (3 children)

    I see what he's saying, but none of this is that serious. Just do your job and act, dude. I don't care if you play Fallout, play Hello Kitty Island Adventure, or play Pogs. Make the show good.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 11 months ago

    That’s likely the PR answer. For all we know, he doesn’t give a shit about the source material and he’s just doing a job he’s being paid to do. And there’s nothing wrong with that. As long as he plays the character as it was written and he does it well, I don’t see any issue.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 11 months ago

    Is he saying “this is a fallout game you don’t get to play”? Instead of making this into a game, it became a tv show?

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 11 months ago

    Disturbing yet intriguing that his face looks like an anthropomorphic Jason mask.

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    Not even just to see if the games are fun? Like, he doesn't need to take inspiration for his character from it, but if he is interested in playing video games for fun outside of relating to his acting roles, why not give them a shot?

    If he said "I just have no intetest in playing video games" I'd have no follow-up questions about it.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 6 points 11 months ago

    Maybe he plays other games for fun, it doesn't say.

    But it sounds like he's choosing not to play these ones because it would affect how his perspective on (and he feels about) the setting, which may affect the quality of his work.

    The games aren't without charm but coming from the series first? It'd feel like those mobile gacha game ads. You think there are such interesting complex characters in a politically nuanced setting that tackles some tough themes about how people survive... after all, you're acting one of them.

    ...and then you play the game where 90% of it is getting number pop-ups from shooting nameless raiders, and strangers yelling ring-a-ding-ding as you pass by.

    I love FONV, but I think he made the right call. Even if he enjoyed the gameplay, it would change how to did his job.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 11 months ago

    Lets be real, if he did play them it would be fallout 3 and 4 and MAYBE NV. The Bethesda games have awful stories presented awfully. He is not missing much context there.

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 11 months ago

    I disagree with this approach. People are shaped by the world they live in, and so too would characters. Short of an isekai or total insanity, it doesn't make sense for someone to be disconnected from their reality.

    It would be like playing an Earthling Star Trek character in Starfleet, while having no idea about Klingons, Vulcans, or Wolf 359.

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago (1 child)

    Good. Other than the first two, they’re awful.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 0 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    the way he says it, it just comes off as ignorant and condescending.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    So this actor won’t connect with 99.9 percent of the shows fans? This actor refuses to research his role? Thinks he knows better than the successful franchise that the show is based on? Or is he really saying “get fucked nerds, I’m a Hollywood actor and so much better than you or this role”

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›