I vote "with" is better. Just because I remember 70's TV shows would announce the names of actors and "and" always went before a bunch of jumbled names. "with" came after but with a pause and said slowly and clearly.

I'd go with "and featuring."

And Featuring
Jrossi4r
as Hot Wacky Neighbor

A nice primer on movie credits.

Of the two, "with".

Because in thing, thing, and thing, when there's any order at all, the most important or biggest thing comes first, and the least important thing comes last. Which is why when you say what you put in the soup (an ensemble dish!), you don't say "parsley, celery, potatoes and chicken".

Which is why you call the couple that contains your friend Sue, "Sue and Bubba" while Bubba's friends call that couple "Bubba and Sue". And why people twist themselves into pretzels to say "Sue and I" - to be polite by suggesting that the other person is more important than they are.

So, I am not so much arguing that "with" is great as I am saying that last after "and" is least important.

With.

"Because in thing, thing, and thing, when there's any order at all, the most important or biggest thing comes first, and the least important thing comes last. Which is why when you say what you put in the soup (an ensemble dish!), you don't say "parsley, celery, potatoes and chicken"."

Um, it's about 10 AM there is it not? This sounds like the start of an answer that comes just before closing time...

I do worry, love.

heh.

"With" used to signify a step-down from star to co-star when I was young (back in Shakespeare's time), nowadays the last name in a list of actors with an "and" is usually just behind the first two leads, and "with" is hauled out mostly when there are more than one who need special crediting ("with X and Y"). I remember "Also Starring", but these days they don't even start the credits with "Starring". And remember when Jonathan Harris (Dr. Smith) got the "Special Guest Star" billing on "Lost in Space" for the entire run of the series?

jrossi4r makes an important distinction. Either one is better with "as" after is.

I'm going against the grain and saying "and" is better. Because "and" is lagniappe; oh, the cast is good AND you get rainbaby! With is ancillary.

So:

1 - and rainbaby as woman #3
2 - with rainbaby as woman #3
3 - and rainbaby
4 - with rainbaby

it's titillating when rainbaby lists herself like that....

And introducing
box
as grumpy eccentric

'And introducing' is great. Not only will people make a point of looking for you, they'll also think it's your first gig, and therefore not expect much.

I ADORE the word "lagniappe"! Rainbaby wins!

FWIW, I was the one championing the word "and" as "better". I was thinking of "The West Wing" where the cast was listed alphabetically, followed by "and Martin Sheen". This was only emphasized, to me, when Jimmy Smits came aboard and the cast was listed alphabetically, followd by "with Jimmy Smits AND Martin Sheen". Jimmy = teh good, Martin = teh best. Or something like that.

Wendell, Heather Locklear's the only other actor I can think of that was a "special guest star" throughout her run on a show (Melrose Place) yet was actually a regular cast member.

...hit post too soon.

The argument sprang up while watching "How I Met Your Mother". The two known names in the cast are listed like this:

with
Neil Patrick Harris
and
Alyson Hannigan

This, to me, gives more oomph to Hannigan's cred, while still making Harris look a bit taller than the other regular cast members. Since I also ADORE Harris' character on that show, and don't know Hannigan from Band Camp Girl, I felt the credits should be reversed. My friend took the opposing view.