Welcome to The Waltons Forum. This forum is for fans of the classic 1970s television show, The Waltons.Please read the Forum Rules before posting.***NEW*** Click here for links to the 2014 Waltons Reunion Photos.An exciting new documentary which celebrates the life of Earl Hamner, creator of The Waltons, is being filmed. Click the link or the image below to find out how WE can help:
Sometimes I think the Walton children were too old and close in age when the series began and maybe younger actors should have been cast. Richard Thomas was already in his 20s and John Walmsley was already 16 when the show began. Judy Norton and Eric Scott were the same age, 14. And Mary Beth was just three years younger than that. This meant most of the kids were already teenagers (or so) when the series began and they weren't really "children" anymore. And pushed them into adulthood within a couple of seasons. Yet they are always referred to as "the children" even into middle seasons. In Spencers Mountain the kids were much much younger.
Not taking away any thing from the actors who played the Walton kids...just wondering if anyone else has ever thoughts about this.
As has been said before by me and others the reason the Waltons lasted was that there was a difference in the children's ages. Leave it to Beaver lasted only 6 years because there were only two of them and toward the end they couldn't have Wally in college and Beaver still in high school. Same with the Brady's---they couldnt have Greg and Marcia in college with Jan and Peter in high school and Bobby and Cindy finishing elementary school....
No i dont think the younger actors real ages mattered all that much. The portrayal was what counted, and I think they each carried across the age they were playing correctly from start to finish. Some actors are so lucky they can play ages much older than they are and much younger, thats real talent I guess.
I think it was a fairly good ensemble. Not perfect, but good - British TV would have done far worse.
I'm sure there are acting moments from them all we could cringe at, but some of those sort of moments are inevitable with any group of young actors. Perhaps, some of the kids were better when younger than older? Certainly I think that is true for Kami Cotler and Judy Norton who were both more convincing in the early days.
Certainly the producers seemed to be happy as they could have recast any or all of them after "The Homecoming".
Even though I didn't know Zeb personally, it hurt my heart to lose him...and it also hurt to see Elizabeth grow up. Maybe because it was the end of an era... a dream? I just hate it when good things come to an end.
The grass withers, the flower fades, but the word of our God will stand forever. Isaiah 40:8
I understand the point, but part of being an actor is playing characters of various ages. It's done all the time. John Boy was already a late teenager, 2 years of high school before going off to college, so not much to expect regarding changes in his physical appearances. All the younger children had their growth spurt during the filming of the show, so they actually pulled off growing children very well.
One thing Olivia did was punish the children by making them read and/or memorize Bible verses. Wouldn't the children grow up thinking that reading the Bible is a punishment to be avoided? Just wondering.