How Would You Cast a Beatles Biopic?

Cafe Society
1

This is actually something I’ve been thinking about for a while. I had ideas for all the members, but I forgot most of them.
So this is what I have:

John Lennon: Joseph Gordon-Levitt
He looks enough like Lennon, he’s about the right age, and he can act.

Paul McCartney: I’ll skip this one for now.

George Harrison: I guess his son might work, but I don’t know if he can act. I think someone like a younger Christian Bale would be good, someone who could act dark and brooding.

Ringo Starr: I think this one should go to someone with a natural charisma, like a comedian. This might be way out there, but what about Simon Pegg?

George Martin: I’m not sure if their ages are right, but someone like Brian Eno or John Cale would be great.

What about some of the other people that might make an appearance?
I think it would be great if Cate Blanchett appeared as Bob Dylan.

2

Ian Hart made a good Lennon in two films, right? One besides Backbeat? Too old now, I suppose and JGL is a fine actor.

3

I’d Have Peter Serafinowicz play them all

4

I’ll bet Daniel Radcliffe could pull off a John Lennon. If height isn’t a problem.

5

:confused:

[hijack]
How did you get the link to start the video at the relevant part rather than starting at the beginning?

[/hijack]

6

One problem is that because we think of the Beatles as artistic giants, we forget how young they were.

And yet, being sophisticated Beatles fans we think all young actors are cotton candy Disney-machine kewpie dolls. So anyone who’s a realistic match age-wise faces the likelihood of getting laughed at by us hard cynical Dopers.

Yes, some of us are kinder than others and may recognize the it is possible for a young actor to be talented. Still, young actors, just on the simple fact that they haven’t been around very long, haven’t had the opportunity to prove any real gravitas.

Thus, “How dare they cast that smug-faced upstart as my Saint the great John Lennon!”

When they broke up none of them were yet 30.
Wanna do Hamburg? George Harrison was 17!!!

The OP suggests 30 year old Levitt, 32 year old Harrison, and 40 year old Pegg.
Tricky thing for me is that, although there are plenty early-20-something actors out there, I just don’t happen to know who they are. Keep in mind that a Major Studio would want bankable Stars for a Beatles movie.
I could get with Tim R. Mortiss’s suggestion of Radcliffe for Lennon.

I’ve seen all of exactly one Zac Efron movie in my life (17 Again) but, you know what, I actually thought he was pretty good. The movie was definitely on the light side of the entertainment spectrum, but he had some scenes where he as an actor had to show the character having conflicting emotions and motivations going on behind his eyes.

So, yeah, I’ll do it. I’ll nominate Zac Efron! Could be a good Harrison.
Am I right that he sings? It would be great to cast actors that are actually musical.

Oh, how about Star Trek / Terminator’s Anton Yelchin as McCartney?

7

Well, it’s not unusual for actors to play characters much younger than themselves. And if they are portraying the character at different ages, they’d have to be wrong for some of them.
I did forget how young the Beatles were when they broke up though, and how old the actors I mentioned are.

Daniel Radcliffe is a good one. He’s one I’d thought of before but forgot. I actually think he could potentially be John, Paul or George. Paul would be interesting because he’s the most different from Harry Potter.

Actors who can do music is also an interesting idea. I’ve been thinking of the movie Control and if any of the actors from that would work. The guy who played Bernard Sumner in that movie might make a good Paul or George. He’s kind of got the baby face like Paul, and in that movie he acted uptight which could work for Paul or George in different ways.

I’d watch that movie.

bienville, see the “#t=0m43s” at the end of the URL? That’s how he got it to start at the specific time. At the end of the URL you insert #t=XmYs, where X is the number of minutes and Y is the number of seconds. Another cool thing with youtube URLs that you might know about but is still cool is that you can insert “&fmt=18” without the quotes and it will force a high(er) quality audio and video. It’s really noticeable when looking up music.

And I could see the Chekov guy working as Paul. That’s one that I hadn’t thought of but think could be good.

8

I would cast it with different actors to play the parts of very young <25 year old Beatles, and older >30 year old Beatles. I’d skip the middle in the movie except for some montages that might be taken from actual footage. I’d concentrate more on having them sound right speaking, and act like them, than looking the part precisely. And I’d prefer unknown actors to keep the audience focused on the story instead of the actor’s celebrity. In between brief concert and crowd scenes, I’d concentrate more on the intimate moments between the characters and others in their lives, than with each other (except at the beginning). Anything to do with friction between them would be referenced third person instead of some cheap dramatic confrontation.

I say all this because I don’t make movies, and so would be doing this for my satisfaction instead of what would sell the most tickets. If I was doing it to sell tickets, I’d just try to get the 4 most popular young male actors, a variety of young starlets to play wives, lovers, and groupies, and a few older established actors, maybe a Ben Kingsley to play their wise, magical managers and advisors. And the music would be remixed, dubbed, and altered to suit current popular tastes. Then I’d have Paul and Ringo make cameo appearances playing other parts. Yoko would help market the movie, but unless she was financing it, she wouldn’t get a part, because I hold grudges against people I don’t know for things other people say they’ve done.

9

[re-hijack]YouTube just added a feature now where you can right click the video and hit “Copy URL at current time.” A lot easier now [/re-hijack]

10

James McAvoy could do it.

And for Ringo Starr, how about Simon Helberg?

11

True, but I happen to think it is a (sometimes unavoidable) flawed practice.

There is a benefit to watching one actor portray the character from the beginning, but sometimes the required suspension of disbelief is ridiculous- as was well parodied in Walk Hard.

For a movie about the Beatles, we don’t need to see them at age fifty (not even an option for John).
If you just do Hamburg through Let it Be, that’s 10 years. Not at all a difficult stretch of time for one actor to bridge. Actors in their early to mid-twenties could fill this gap perfectly. I would much rather watch a 24 year old play a 29 year old than watch a 30 year old play a 19 year old.
Yes 30 year olds often enough play teenagers in Hollywood films, and yes we are conditioned to accept it. But I think we as an audience also subconsciously accept certain age-extraordinary behavior from the characters, because they seem older and more mature because the actor portraying the character is older and more mature.

We think we are fully suspending disbelief because we are accepting a 30year old as a 17year old. But, in fact, impact is lessened because we are subconsciously attributing advanced age and experience onto the character.

I think this is notable significant in the case of bio-pics.
If a true person achieves something truly extraordinary at the age of 20, or is shooting heroin at the age of 14. I think we as an audience would more fully process the greater significance if we saw these experiences expressed through a performer with an appropriately youthful face.
Sometimes, with a no perfect solution situation, the choice is made to use an older actor who can better portray the character from start to finish over a broad age range.

That’s not the case, though, with The Beatles. We only need ten years. This is a case where age-appropriate casting is possible, and because it is possible I find it preferable.

Watching a 17year old George go off to Hamburg to play in Rock n Roll clubs doesn’t really mean much if George looks like he’s 30.

I’d say look for actors that are between 22 and 26.

12

P.S. thanks for the tip on YouTube links!

13

That’s an interesting idea. For me personally I’d include that because it would be interesting to see their most popular period from their perspective, and how their private lives differed from their image. Of course there’s no way such a movie would ever get made because it would show the bad sides of each Beatle as much as the good sides.

Actually with the Beatles I think there would be a public outcry if those things happened, and the movie would bomb. As stupid as the general public can be, they still respect the Beatles. That angle could work if they didn’t use any actual names associated with the Beatles and made a completely fictional movie about how four young men rise to superstardom.

I think that’s the most convincing reason to cast younger. I hadn’t really thought of that. Emphasizing how young they were would make an interesting angle.

14

I thought that was the part that would be most difficult to match up to people’s subjective view of the period. Anything that was presented would be discounted as fiction by a large segment of the viewers. That’s based on the idea of the movie being directed at Beatles fans who remember the time (like me).

Among Beatles fans yes. But in the ticket selling mode I was aiming at the youngsters who want to project themselves into the movie. I don’t make or sell movies though. Could be way off base here.

15

A recent BBC comedy sketch show, “Harry & Paul” (i.e. Harry Enfiled and Paul Whitehouse), envisaged the Beatles 50 years on, as they would be today if they had not broken up, hadn’t taken any drugs and had not been involved in any other controversies.

Messrs Enfield and Whitehouse essayed John and Ringo, I think. I have no idea who did Paul and George but “Paul” was a tubbier, greyer (no dye!) version of the real one today.

It was fairly amusing. There might be clips on You Tube but I cannot access it from here at work.

16

Simon Cowell as Lennon. Just the right amount of sarcasm. Gorden Ramsey as Harrison , perfect as the frustrated one. Paul and Ringo as themselves. This of course would lead to great explosions of ego!