Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Miscast? Or Not?
A thread from earlier today by member @simontemplar got me thinking about movies and television, and why and how casting decisions are made. Often for money, I suppose. And vanity. And to score political points.
Although ST’s thread about the latest Jack Reacher movie was about its deficiencies of plot, my comment on it was more about its deficiencies in casting, and how inapt I thought it was that Tom Cruise (5’7″) should play Jack Reacher (6’5″). This put me in mind of other spectacularly bad casting decisions, and which one might just be the worst ever? Cruise as Reacher is certainly in the top three, IMHO. But I’d also nominate Kevin Costner’s turn as Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves (or as pretty much anything else, really). Bad as he is in POT, that movie does have some redeeming qualities (a lovely one at the very end, anyway) and Alan Rickman’s performance as the Sheriff of Nottingham is wondrous.
Then there are those casting decisions which cause consternation to begin with, but which end up being so sublimely “right” that we cannot imagine any other actor in the role. I remember an interview with Bernard Cornwell, author of the “Sharpe” series, in which he expressed his initial unhappiness with Sean Bean’s being cast in the role for the ITV serializations of his novels. Sharpe, you see, was clearly described in Cornwell’s first few books (which I do love) as having very dark, even black, hair; Sean Bean’s hair is of a decidedly blonder shade.
Then, Cornwell watched the first Sharpe episode on television.
“After that,” he said, “I never mentioned the color of Richard Sharpe’s hair again.”
What casting decisions resonate with you, for good, or for ill?
PS: I’ve always had mixed feelings about Viggo Mortensen as Aragorn. Is it just me?
Published in Entertainment
The problem with Viggo wasn’t the casting, it was the script that emasculates him so.
Aragorn has spent decades getting ready to be king. He doesn’t fear being king! It is his entire reason for being!
Ken Branagh’s absurdist moustache/facial hair for Poirot in Murder on the Orient Express recently was almost so over the top it ruined the movie, but the rest of it was so fabulous and funny that I forgave him.
So much of this is so subjective; I did some acting in college; according to one of my friends, about half the people in the theater department thought that I was far too plain to ever play the pretty girl, but the other half thought that I was far too pretty to ever be cast as a plain girl. This worked for me as an actress, because depending on who the director was, I was considered for and cast in all kinds of different roles, but no matter what kind of role I was cast in, there were always those who felt strongly that I had been miscast. According to my informant friend, debates would take place in the green room about whether I was pretty or not, and they were heated-of course, none of this ever happened when I was around :)
Maybe for this reason, I generally stay away from opinions about casting :)
I’ve always loved Sean Bean from Black Beauty.
I have never warmed to him in that role. It’s not just the script, it’s the way he carries himself, and it’s how “pretty” he is compared to how weathered Aragorn should look.
I can’t imagine anyone but Viggo Mortensen in Hildago, one of my favorites. I’m with you on Costner – a snoozer…. Russell Crowe as Gladiator was perfect. The movies that are out today don’t require much acting unfortunately.
I would say that Paul Bettany is physically miscast as Dr. Maturin in Master and Commander, but he so absorbed the eccentricities and awkwardness of the doctor that he made the role his own, like Bean did with Sharpe.
Bettany / Maturin was exactly who came to my mind as well! Yes, he owned it.
I’ve always pictured Aragorn as someone like, well, Sean Bean. I think Viggo did fine with the material he was given, though. I agree they wimped him up a bit, largely to get Liv Tyler more screen time, IIRC.
The actor was great as Aragorn. He looked a lot like I though Aragorn should look and he obvioulsy cared deeply about Aragorn and gave it his well. I think Mortensen was a fine choice.
All the trouble with the Lord of the Rings movies come form the deficiency in the script writers knowledge of basic Christian theology and philosophy. Again and again you see them just fall apart in face of a simple Tolkien plot point that makes perfect sense but they just can’t grasp what is going on. They messed up Aragorn because of that but not as badly as they mistreated Frodo and Faramir who they screwed up so badly that if their was a Tolkien prison they should be put in it. The actors can’t save a character completely from bad writing and fundamental misunderstandings.
Recently, I’d say a bad one was 74-year old Ben Kingsley playing Adolph Eichmann @ 54 with flashbacks to ~38.
How about an actor so perfect in a Broadway role that no-one else can easily be imagined playing it on film?: Rex Harrison in “My Fair Lady”.
Someone but Claude Rains as Captain Renault in “Casablanca”? I’m shocked. Shocked.
Gregory Peck in “To Kill A Mockingbird”.
Or does the actor or actress define, rather than fit, the casting? We can be more sure of the directionality when the work defining the role precedes the movie version. Basil Rathbone as Sherlock Holmes might be an example.
We are helped in making the call when we see a second casting selection. Robert Preston certainly was “The Music Man”, but seeing Matthew Broderick try his hand at the role emphasized the brilliance of the earlier hiring.
Your comment on an actor being cast badly as “pretty much anything else, really” is another category. I never saw Robert Redford fit any role any way but very badly.
I could go on forever but shan’t.
I was not a fan of Pierce Brosnan as Bond. Sean Bean (who played 006 in Goldeneye) would have been better.
Oh, yeah.
There is a part in the movie where the Sheriff threatens to cut out Robin’s heart with a spoon. There was a temporary lull in the dialog and music where some lady in the audience wondered aloud (and I mean loud) “Why a spoon?”
A little while later:
A funny enough line in any case, but with that setup the rest of the audience dissolved for about five minutes.
Russell Crowe as “Lucky Jack” Aubrey was perfect casting.
The Maturin role was poorly transferred from the O’Brian novels. Stephen was a decidedly dark figure, as well as a stone-cold killer, not an early nineteenth century version of “Bones” McCoy.
You don’t think he overdid it just a little?
There was a movie entitled Revolution, about the American Revolution. Some great twerp decided that Al Pacino would make a perfect colonial. Even if there hadn’t been plot holes that you could hide a battalion in, it just didn’t work. I kept waiting for Pacino to level his musket and bark out “Say hello to my little friend.”
Hmm, I think he can look plenty weathered and grim, see Eastern Promises or The Road.
It was a strange sight in some scenes though, the Company of the Ring traipsing about the countryside in perfectly clean clothing. Maybe the wardrobe needed to be more authentic?
I’m just glad they didn’t include Tom Bombadil, that character would be a tough needle to thread.
Richard Widmark as Tommy Udo in “Kiss of Death.”
Orson Welles as Harry Lime in “The Third Man.”
Marlon Brando as Emiliano Zapata in “Viva Zapata!”
Anthony Quinn as Mountain Rivera in “Requiem for a Heavyweight.”
Jack Palance as Wilson in “Shane.”
James Caan as Frank in “Thief.”
To quote another perfect bit of casting, Captain America as portrayed by Chris Evans, “I can do this all day.”
The casting has changed recently but the premise is the deranged liberal mind personified:
I thought Pierce was way better than Timothy Dalton – but other than the original Sean C., Daniel Craig has been great in this role. I like that he’s not so perfect, a little scruffy around the edges. Is a new Bond film coming?
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/27/movies/danny-boyle-to-direct-new-james-bond-film.html
Alden Ehrenreich as Han Solo in Solo: A Star Wars Story.
I never liked William Sylvester as Dr. Heywood Floyd in 2001.
Is that Natalie Portman?
Dalton was let down by the filmmakers. Hokey special effects and writing from the 1970s were not going to cut it in the late 1980s.
The Joe Don Baker character and the Wayne Newton character, not to mention sharks, were schlock.
Dalton had a toughness that Moore and Brosnan lacked.
On the left, I meant.
Me neither!
Agree totally about Costner as Robin Hood. His neck was too soft. It was weird.
Lee Child, author of the Reacher series, was okay with the casting, so I dropped my objections. (He also said, IIRC, that pretty much everyone in Hollywood is short.) I can’t think of anyone who would fit the role. Maybe Nick Nolte in his prime, but I can’t think of a current actor.
As far as someone who fits a role perfectly is concerned, David Suchet is THE embodiment of Hercule Poirot. (ETA: Kenneth Branagh was ridiculous, by comparison, in Murder on the Orient Express.)
I thought Viggo Mortensen was simply awesome as Everett Hith in 2008’s Appaloosa. Ed Harris’ Virgil Cole was spot on, despite the differences in physicality between actor and character.
As they’re sprawled in the dust, all kinds of shot up:
Everett Hitch: That was quick.
Virgil Cole: Yeah, everybody could shoot.
Marvels X-Men franchise would have never taken off were Wolverine not casted correctly. Hugh Jackman nailed it.