CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › Movie Miscellany › The Greatest Miscasting Mishaps In History
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Greatest Miscasting Mishaps In History - Page 3

post #101 of 145

Speaking of Cruise:

gal_vampire_tomcruise.jpg

I actually think he's a pretty great actor but his natural charisma & star power overshadowed an already well drawn character & the result was dull & campy.

 

colin-farrell-as-alexander.jpg

Boring. Boring. Boring.

post #102 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Art Decade View Post

colin-farrell-as-alexander.jpg

Boring. Boring. Boring.

 

YOU FOOL.  DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA WHAT YOU HAVE DONE???
 

 

post #103 of 145

Haha, thanks to the ignore function, I'm sure I'll never have to find out.

post #104 of 145

It's been a while since I've seen it, but I remember liking Cruise as Lestat.

post #105 of 145

The problem with Cruise as Lestat is pretty much Lestat as a character. He's paper thin in the books.

post #106 of 145

I haven't seen Interview since I was like 14, but Cruise was near-iconic in the role.  Whether he matched the print character or not, that was a long fucking way from The Greast Miscasting In History.

post #107 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Schwartz View Post

I haven't seen Interview since I was like 14, but Cruise was near-iconic in the role.  Whether he matched the print character or not, that was a long fucking way from The Great Miscasting In History.


I'll agree with that. He's certainly not Sophia Coppola bad or anything & he does a perfectly serviceable job as Lestat. My point is that his Lestat is 80% "Hey, look! It's Tom Cruise in a powdered wig! With a slight accent!" & 20% Rice's character. I haven't read the books or seen the movie in 17 years but I remember his presence just completely taking me out of the film every time he opened his mouth.

 

Stuart whats-is-face was a proper shite Lestat in QotD, so maybe I'm being a bit harsh on Cruise. Maybe.

 

post #108 of 145

Certainly Cruise is the superior screen Lestat.  But I actually think both are okay casting decisions - Cruise as the shallow plot-device in what is literally Louis's story, and Townsend as the ludicrous reworked fangirl wank character of the post-Interview stories.

post #109 of 145
For what it's worth I thought Cruise was great in VALKYRE. Not his best work or the best that could have been done with that role, but he was extremely solid and showed why he is a movie star. His work was taught and compelling, and frankly I didn't give a tinker's dam about the accent issue. I like that movie quite a bit, at least in the context of what it is.: a very well crafted, well cast thriller, but not to be mistaken for a film with anything terribly profound to say

BTW: SOPHIE SCHOLL is a wonderful movie, and could act as a more thoughtful companion piece, in case anyone wanted to embark on an 'Anti Nazi German Resistance' movie marathon

PS I'd have to agree about Lazenby as Bond. My least favorite 007 by a wide margin
post #110 of 145

Cruise was amazing as Lestat.  And the character was a little thin in Interview because it was from the point of the view of the other vamp, Louis, who thought Lestat was evil.  The character was actually well fleshed out in the other books, where he is portrayed as more sympathetic and complex.

post #111 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spike Marshall View Post
Goode is a fantastic actor, he's great in Cemetery Junction and A Single Man, but not the right man for the job. In my view.

I think Michael Fassbender would've would've been perfect for Veidt. It's a shame Snyder didn't realize it after he worked with him on 300. Fassbender has the right physicality, looks, charm, and acting chops for it. And he's half-German, which would have come in handy if he wanted to play Veidt with a German accent like Goode did!

 

post #112 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Princess Kate View Post

For my money, it's hard to beat Orlando Bloom in KINGDOM OF HEAVEN. Everything surrounding his character in that movie was a joy to behold, from the world Scott created with the sets and costumes to the story and cast, and yet there he sat in the center of it all, a black hole of charisma, a yawning maw determined to suck all the air out of the movie. Balian was a character defined by his internalization of grief, and his quiet nature, yet Bloom had nothing going on behind his blank eyes. His performance wasn't just vapid, it was dull, when what was needed was an actor who could smolder in silence, and keep the audiences attention in the midst of all that grand spectacle

I think Bale would have been the best choice, but even Paul Bettany (Scott's first pick) would have been enough to make the film a true classic

Instead it's one of the most unfortunate misfires of the Aughts, because all that brilliance is inescapably hamstrung by the fact the lead was utterly out of his league (I don't loath Bloom, he's fine as an Elf, he's just not a leading man)

Heath Ledger may have made a good Balian, though he probably would've wanted to avoid typecasting after "A Knight's Tale". :)

post #113 of 145

I get not caring for Lazenby as Bond, but to rank him below the atrocious Roger Moore and hollow Pierce Brosnan?  That, I don't get.

post #114 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by kanekofan View Post

I get not caring for Lazenby as Bond, but to rank him below the atrocious Roger Moore and hollow Pierce Brosnan?  That, I don't get.


Roger Moore is my second least favorite Bond, but I love Brosnan. My Bond list:

Craig/Connery (in that order, but it's nearly a tie)

Brosnan

Dalton



Roger Moore


Lazenby

EDIT: Art Decade: Farrell was not 'boring': alexanderlion-1.png


Devin Faraci said it was an Oscar worthy performance in his review, FYI
post #115 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeb View Post

Does Will Smith belong for Wild Wild West? I mean, it's mostly a case of the whole thing being misbegotten in the first place, but I wonder if a better movie might have emerged if they hadn't been making "A Will Smith Blockbuster."


Interesting point, especially now when he's dropped out of DJANGO. Will Smith the actor is great in I AM LEGEND. But it could be argued that Will Smith the phenomenon is the reason that film isn't very good.

post #116 of 145

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mangy View Post

I haven't seen the entire movie, but I've seen enough clips to know that casting John Travolta and Lily Tomlin as lovers in Moment By Moment was a bad idea:


I unfortunately have seen that movie (a few years ago) and yeah, it was a pretty poor motion picture and Tomlin came across as being like Travolta's mom, which made their falling in love relationship really creepy and disturbing.

 

To state a rather obvious choice, Denise Richards as a "brainy scientist" in The World Is Not Enough. Sure, her role wasn't the worst problem with that movie, but still appalling to cast her as that sort of character.

post #117 of 145

I haven't seen it, but I'm pretty sure there's a movie where Gary Oldman plays a dwarf.

post #118 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Evi View Post

I haven't seen it, but I'm pretty sure there's a movie where Gary Oldman plays a dwarf.



Yeah, "TipToes"...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ukRdEVthmWM 

post #119 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Art Decade View Post

Speaking of Cruise:

gal_vampire_tomcruise.jpg

I actually think he's a pretty great actor but his natural charisma & star power overshadowed an already well drawn character & the result was dull & campy.

 

colin-farrell-as-alexander.jpg

Boring. Boring. Boring.

Is that a wig or dye job on Farrell? Either way it looks awful.
 

 

post #120 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cameron Hughes View Post



Is that a wig or dye job on Farrell? Either way it looks awful.
 

 


Cameron have you seen ALEXANDER? If not, then trust me: he has the most amazing hair in that movie. Some is a wig, some is his own natural hair for the scenes with younger Alexander, but his hair is incredible throughout the film. My favorite look is when he gets to India and it's all long and greasy, showing his increasing distance from Greek culture, and his increasingly single minded fixation on his war to the ends of the earth. It also is evocative of Herakles and the lions mane

e2ec94b3.jpg
"Come then! Where are your daggers?!" (Farrell's line from the moment of this screen cap)
post #121 of 145

There's a parallel universe where Daniel Day-Lewis said 'yes' to playing Lestat - and it's no doubt glorious.

post #122 of 145

Not to be pedantic, but I don't think always-bad actors like Sophia Coppolla or Orlando Bloom qualify as ever being miscast. The idea (I've always thought) of seeing 'miscast' has been to put a good actor into a role where they're not suited, and thus ineffective.

 

To wit...

 

mis·cast  (mibreve.gifs-kabreve.gifstprime.gif)

tr.v. mis·cast, mis·cast·ing, mis·casts
1. To cast in an unsuitable role.
2. To cast (a role, play, or film) inappropriately.

 

post #123 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by chon View Post

Not to be pedantic, but I don't think always-bad actors like Sophia Coppolla or Orlando Bloom qualify as ever being miscast. The idea (I've always thought) of seeing 'miscast' has been to put a good actor into a role where they're not suited, and thus ineffective.

 

To wit...

 

mis·cast  (mibreve.gifs-kabreve.gifstprime.gif)

tr.v. mis·cast, mis·cast·ing, mis·casts
1. To cast in an unsuitable role.
2. To cast (a role, play, or film) inappropriately.

 


Orlando Bloom can work when hr is cast well, as in, not cast as a leading man. See: LOTR
post #124 of 145
Resurrection time!

The thread title is maybe a bit too extreme for this, but anyway. Watched Ivan Reitman's Draft Day last night and started thinking about movie stars. In DD, Kevin Costner is very convincing as the GM of a major league football team. But I have no idea how old his character is supposed to be. He's struggling with his daddy issues and trying to cope with his girlfriend's pregnancy... while being played by a 60 year old man? He also takes nagging from his mom (Ellen Burstyn), and I think Frank Langella's character calls him "son" or "sonny".

Also, Prince of Thieves was already mentioned in this thread, where Kevin doesn't even bother to appear British. And even though Kevin's a handsome and fit guy, he doesn't really look anything like a professional Bodyguard. Is this an essential part of being a movie star? The ability to pick a completely wrong character, but just plowing through the disbelief and owning the shit out of it?
post #125 of 145

Lost City of Z has lots of things to recommend it, but Charlie Hunnam nearly kills that movie dead. 

post #126 of 145
Recently watched Pet Sematary for Halloween and I mentioned in the October Movie Challenge Thread how miscast Dale Midkiff is. He nearly brings the movie to a stop in some scenes.

Possibly William Hurt coming off of Broadcast News or Christopher Reeve trying to break from his Superman role could have brought the dramatic chops.
post #127 of 145

I'll agree on the Dale Midkiff slam.  He's terrible in it.  Everyone else is solid to great (especially Gwynne) and makes the film very watchable.

post #128 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Call Me Roy View Post

Recently watched Pet Sematary for Halloween and I mentioned in the October Movie Challenge Thread how miscast Dale Midkiff is. He nearly brings the movie to a stop in some scenes.

Possibly William Hurt coming off of Broadcast News or Christopher Reeve trying to break from his Superman role could have brought the dramatic chops.

 

Hurt was also the best possible choice for BONFIRE OF THE VANITIES that went to Hanks. Reeve would have been great, too. 

post #129 of 145
I need to see more of Hurts films. Broadcast News floors me every time I watch it. Recently watched Eyewitness with him and Sigourney Weaver and that wasn’t bad. He is great in his small scene in A History of Violence.
post #130 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Call Me Roy View Post

I need to see more of Hurts films. Broadcast News floors me every time I watch it. Recently watched Eyewitness with him and Sigourney Weaver and that wasn’t bad. He is great in his small scene in A History of Violence.

 

He's great in ALTERED STATES and THE ACCIDENTAL TOURIST.  KISS OF THE SPIDER WOMAN is amazing.  I also really enjoyed THE DOCTOR.

 

The one to see is BODY HEAT, though.  Now THAT is a movie.

post #131 of 145
Altered States, TAT and KOTSW are all movies I have had on a list of 80’s Must Watch that I’ve yet to get around to.
post #132 of 145

Hard pass on Body Heat. Longtime poster Andre Dellamorte said it "knows the words but not the song." 

post #133 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Call Me Roy View Post

Altered States, TAT and KOTSW are all movies I have had on a list of 80’s Must Watch that I’ve yet to get around to.

 

THE ACCIDENTAL TOURIST also features an amazing performance by Geena Davis.  As to KOTSW, you're gonna get some career best work out of Raul Julia as well.

 

But BODY HEAT is the one to see.  Oh yes.  Kathleen Turner in that one...wow.

post #134 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boone Daniels View Post
 

Hard pass on Body Heat. Longtime poster Andre Dellamorte said it "knows the words but not the song." 

 

Well shit, I guess I'm wrong again then.  Fuck me with a red hot poker for liking a movie that Andre didn't.

post #135 of 145

Hey, there is a lot to enjoy about BODY HEAT. I'm just not a fan overall. 

post #136 of 145

What in the name of everlasting fuck does 'knows the words but not the song' even mean?  Good God is that pretentious.

 

If you're not a fan, fine...I can accept that.  Nobody's going to agree on everything, but hitting me with 'knows the words but not the song' is pure talking out of your ass.

post #137 of 145

It basically means that it hits all the appropriate film noir beats/tropes, but (for me) it's missing something emotionally or fundamentally that makes it feel like a true noir. It's always felt like a really good cover song that never quite gets there in terms of becoming its own thing. 

post #138 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boone Daniels View Post
 

It basically means that it hits all the appropriate film noir beats/tropes, but (for me) it's missing something emotionally or fundamentally that makes it feel like a true noir. It's always felt like a really good cover song that never quite gets there in terms of becoming its own thing. 

 

OK, now that's a valid opinion.  I respectfully disagree with it, but I can respect it.  For me, the film works like gangbusters.  Sure, the main characters are typical noir archetypes, but there's enough edge to them and they're so well acted that they feel fresh to me.  It helps that Hurt and Turner have amazing chemistry and truly own the movie in much the same manner that Bogart and Bacall would own a movie.

post #139 of 145
I like that phrase. I'm going to awkwardly force it into conversation today.
post #140 of 145

Also, Ted Danson is delightful, like a lost Goldblum brother, in Body Heat. 

post #141 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boone Daniels View Post
 

Also, Ted Danson is delightful, like a lost Goldblum brother, in Body Heat. 

 

Funny you should say that as Goldblum was originally offered that part.

Also of note, Christopher Reeve was originally offered the William Hurt part but turned it down.

post #142 of 145

Another thing about BODY HEAT: it's filled with a lot of fantastic lines.  Hurt's pick-up lines (and his flirtatious exchanges with Turner) are a riot of sleeze.

 

Also, the John Barry score is pretty great.

post #143 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boone Daniels View Post
 

 

Hurt was also the best possible choice for BONFIRE OF THE VANITIES that went to Hanks. Reeve would have been great, too. 

De Palma's original choices of Lithgow as McCoy and John Cleese as Fallow are pretty hard to beat.

post #144 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Virtanen View Post
 Is this an essential part of being a movie star? The ability to pick a completely wrong character, but just plowing through the disbelief and owning the shit out of it?

I think you're on to something there. It would at least partially explain something like John Wayne in ​The Conqueror.​ And, speaking of Robin Hood, in an example of near-miscasting, James Cagney was supposedly the first choice for the 1938 version.

post #145 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pither View Post
 

And, speaking of Robin Hood, in an example of near-miscasting, James Cagney was supposedly the first choice for the 1938 version.

 

Wait, what? That's something I'd really like to see. I'm imaging Harvey Keitel in The Last Temptation -level brilliance.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Movie Miscellany
CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › Movie Miscellany › The Greatest Miscasting Mishaps In History