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
Ben Affleck as Tony Mendez:
Moore took Bond in a different direction that made it possible for me – and Mom P. – to watch and enjoy the over-the-topness of Bond. Brosnan was too small-screen, for Bond. Remington Steele as Bond didn’t cut it. Derek Jacobi as “Cadfael” is definitive.
Nobody, but nobody else but Keanu Reeves could’ve pulled off John Wick.
It depends on what your attachment to the source material is and how you came to it.
I came to the James Herriot books through the TV show. By then the actors’ interpretation of the characters were indelibly printed on my mind. I read the words but heard their voices.
I had watched the Rathbone Holmes films, then saw the Jeremy Brett ITV series and then I read the books. Reading Conan Doyle’s description made me embrace Brett. (Mark Camp mentioned the film version of My Fair Lady. Brett played Freddy Eynsford-Hill, Eliza’s other suitor, but he did not sing. That was dubbed.)
If you’re an avid reader and consume the source material first you probably do your own casting in your mind and then are terribly disappointed when the Hollywood stars do not align just so.
As for other comments in this thread, yeah, Kevin Costner just pretty much sucks without a baseball in his hands. In Robin Hood he should have had one in his mouth. I also hate inventions that force out-of-place characters into stories for the sake of checking all the correct political boxes, such as Morgan Freeman’s Moor character in the same film.
I love Bill Murray but watching him as Hunter S. Thompson in Where the Buffalo Roam after seeing Johnny Depp in Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas was painful.
I don’t know who should’ve been cast as Genghis Kahn in 1950’s Hollywood, but it sure shouldn’t have been John Wayne.
Ha! Yes! Or Mickey Rooney as Mr. Yunioshi.
I thought that Mortensen was physically miscast as Aragorn, though he did a good job with the role. Physically, Aragorn should look like a dark-haired Charleton Heston, or maybe Josh Brolin. Brolin’s a bit short for the role, but they could have CG’d it. Aragorn is supposed to be around 6’3″ or 6’4″ (at least).
Sean Bean was fantastic as Sharpe. And in every other role that I remember, including 006, Ned Stark, and Boromir.
Other miscastings, sticking to fantasy:
David Wenham as Faramir in Lord of the Rings. He was not tall enough, not handsome enough, and not dark-haired. It wasn’t that big a deal in the movies, because the movies downplayed both Faramir’s role and character.
Mark Addy as King Robert Baratheon in Game of Thrones. Like Aragorn, this one was hard to cast. He was supposed to be huge, like Hulk Hogan gone to seed (though dark haired).
Whoever played Renly Baratheon on Game of Thrones. He was supposed to be Robert’s clone, but not gone to fat — huge, powerful, and handsome. They turned him into an effete homosexual — literally, and note that those are separate categories (he was both effete and homosexual).
Liv Tyler as Glorfindel in Lord of the Rings. Yeah, I know, she actually played Arwen. But for some reason, Jackson substituted Arwen for the elf lord, Glorfindel, who actually rescued Frodo in the Fellowship after Frodo was stabbed on Weathertop. Glorfindel was a minor character, but always one of my favorites, with a great back story — he and a balrog slew each other in the First Age during the escape from Gondolin, if I remember my Silmarillion correctly. And yeah, he died and then came back, which is a Tolkien elf thing. And yeah, I’m probably the biggest Tolkien nerd on the planet for knowing this stuff.
The Mouth of Sauron in the Return of the King extended version was just ridiculous. He was supposed to be something close to an Aragorn clone, gone over to the evil side.
Verne Troyer’s Abraham Lincoln miniseries seemed a bit off.
I don’t know. I’d read the Holmes canon several times before the Jeremy Brett series came out. I still think he pretty much personifies Holmes.
Bad: Katharine Hepburn as Clara Schumann in Intermezzo. Sorry, horse-faced Hepburn was NOT in any way diminutive Clara.
Perfect: Everyone in the cast of Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone. Alan Rickman’s finest role as Snape, and all three kids were perfect as Harry, Ron, and Hermione. How ever did they find the Phelps twins as Fred and George Weasley? The first movie made me a Harry Potter freak, and I remain one today.
I was fine with the casting in Lord of the Rings, and the first movie made me want to read the books, which I did, and every other Tolkien I could find. He was very popular on campus in my college days in the late 1960s and early 1970s, and I think I avoided them then, just because they were so popular. I still think the sound track from the movies is some of the most beautiful movie music, and I still put it on the stereo at home if I want to relax. In my opinion, the Silmarillion is a most excellent “creation” story, along with “Narnia”.
There was a lot of skepticism about Michael Keaton being cast as Batman, but I thought it worked. (For one movie anyway)
The current Tom Clancy’s Jack Ryan stars John Krasinski, and he gave it the old college try, but I don’t think he quite pulled it off. Not enough gravitas. I kept thinking about how a younger Harrison Ford would have played it, and it would have been better with Ford.
Honestly, I liked Alec Baldwin better as Jack Ryan. As much as I love Indiana Jones and Han Solo, it really does feel like that’s the only kind of role he can play — and Jack Ryan isn’t Indy or Han.
I liked Viggo as Aragorn — and I don’t get where the “pretty boy” comments come from. The man doesn’t manage to shave until he’s crowned. And while I understand that giving him an “embracing his destiny” arc isn’t what Tolkien wrote, I think it helps in making him a more interesting character. As I mentioned elsewhere today, adaptation is an art, and strict fidelity to the book is neither necessary or sufficient for a good adaptation. (And if you don’t believe me, is any adaptation of Les Miserables hurt by not including all five Thenadier children, as just one example of the dozens of meandering side-plots in the book?)
Psh, next you’re going to tell me that my unabridged, 32 part miniseries of The Count of Monte Cristo is a pipe dream.
As for perfect casting: everyone in the Adams Family movie except for Christopher Lloyd. Not that he’s bad as Uncle Fester, but because you see him and think “That’s Christopher Lloyd.” Morticia, on the other hand? Angelica Huston was born to play Morticia Adams.
Tim Curry is one of those who’s never really had a miscast role. You need an evil cardinal, a demon, a mad scientist, captain of pirates, a faux-Russian dictator, or sweet transvestite from transsexual Transylvania? He’s your man, er … actor. (Apparently, his mom was just happy he was wearing clothes, as his last role before Rocky Horror was as the lead in Equus, which requires full nudity at one point.)
In “The Color of Magic,” Jeremy Irons nails the role of the Patrician of Ankh-Mopork.
John Bradly is perfect as Samwell Tarly in “Game of Thrones,” as is Diana Rigg as Olenna Tyrell.
Honestly, I think one of the independent studios (Amazon/Netflix/HBO/Starz) could do Les Miserables as a three or five year actual series, if they wanted. Start with Waterloo for M. Thenadier rescuing Marius’s father and with Jean Valjean in prison … show the seduction of Fantine … the struggles of Valjean as M. Madelaine in becoming mayor …
There’s dozens of hours of material that doesn’t make it into adaptations.
Sean Bean IS Richard Sharpe. Read all the books several times; Sean is Sharpe, Daragh O’Malley is Harper. And OMG is Postlethwaite ever Hakeswill.
When I saw your title, and Sharpe’s picture,I came here ready to fight.
Second best of all time is Jack Aubrey as Russell Crowe.
The best casting, sticking to fantasy and scifi, in order:
Iain Glen looks altogether different than the Ser Jorah described in the books, but his appearance is not essential to the character, and he does such a great job in the role that, like Bean as Sharpe, it just doesn’t matter.
I always find Tim Curry a little too spicy, Jeremy Irons a bit rusty, but Diana Rigg is always a-Peel-ing.
Ok, for that you can vote me off the island.
Agree on all counts. But the lack of “weathering” is probably what bugs me the most.
Oh, there’s another one. Timothy Dalton as Heathcliff in the 1970 remake of Wuthering Heights. Actually, that was just an awful movie all-round.
I would have reversed the casting for the movie version of “Les Miserables”. I could not believe Jackman as the man of exceptional strength and stolid decency that Valjean was supposed to be – but as the burning-eyed, obsessive Javert, Jackman would have been great. Crowe I could have believed as Valjean for his physicality, but perhaps Valjean’s tenderer moments would have been beyond him. I found his portrayal of Javert distractingly flat.
The part that bothered me most about Les Mis on film was the surreal, cartoonish representation of Fantine and the rest of the characters in the demi-monde, including the Thenardiers. Why was adult Eponine running around in her underwear the whole time? (Corset, shift and petticoat?) Why present the bourgeois characters and the student revolutionaries in realistic fashion, yet turn the “Miserables” into a zombie circus? Les Mis is about nothing if not about recognizing the humanity of the unfortunate. If the Thenardiers looked like everyone else, their menace would be even greater. Some of these things appear to be carry-overs from stage productions, but some, like the zombie circus, are unique to the film version.
Peter Sellers as Inspector Clouseau perfect. Steve Martin as Clouseau. WRONG ON SO MANY LEVELS.
Its ironic they Jean Reno as his sidekick in the movie. He would have been a much better Clouseau. In fact if Steve Martin had any sense he would have reversed the roles.
Tom Selleck as Magnum PI. John Hillerman as Jonathan Quayle Higgins the 3rd. The new series. DOA.
I’m with @amyschley. I can’t concur.
Viggo has been quite menacing in other film, and if Jackson had allowed it I think we would have seen a seriously lethal Aragorn.
When they finally gave him his sword in the film, they made the thing so monstrously and obscenely large he literally could not even get it out of the sheath properly. In the appendices on the extended edition, Viggos explains that he had to work to be able to appear to draw it.
And they have Elrond/Hugo Weaving give it to him, like he’s a boy of 15 or something.
Book Aragorn declares his broken sword, the symbol of his shattered kingship, be remade when he leaves Rivendell because he is going to war to reclaim his kingdom.
Viggo could totally have pulled it off.
Also, Viggo was totally grubby the whole time except when they have him prancing about in velvet or lying on boudoir couches in Rivendell. Remember Bree?
Your mention of Hugo Weaving put me in mind of another movie, perhaps (IMHO) one of the most perfectly cast films ever. No one, either of the four, or two-legged, variety put a foot wrong from beginning to end. (Weaving was the voice of Rex):
That is one of the perfect films. Absolutely beautiful.
I have a worse one: “Emma get you for that.”
Best lines in the movie.
Yeah, but:
1) No Bomadil means no rescue from the barrow wights.
2) No barrow wights means Tom Bombadil doesn’t toss them various weapons from the barrow contents, meaning that Merry’s dagger ends up being supplied by Aragorn on Weathertop, apparently at random.
3) But that wasn’t a random blade. It had specifically been ensorcelled to be a bane to the Witch-king of Angmar.
4) So, when Merry sticks the Lord of the Nazgûl (née the Witch-king) in the back of his knee at the Battle of the Pelennor Fields, it not only distracts him into missing Éowyn, it keeps him distracted while Éowyn stabs him in the face, destroying him.
Not that I’m a LOTR nerd or anything…