[QUOTE=Acid Lamp]
Superhero movies always have this problem.
X-men: I didn’t buy Jackman as Wolverine. He was okay, but he lacked something in the voice and delivery. Anna Paquin was a terrible choice for rogue, boring. Ditto that for Cyclops and Jean Grey, though they were merely neutral. Halle Berry’s performance was as usual, forgettable. Ian Mckellan’s Magneto was good, but he seemed to old to me for some reason. I know that the character may be that age, but he never appears that way. Lastly, Tyler Mane as Sabretooth was absolutely abysmal. Probably the most iconic Wolverine nemesis, and they just made him a punk. The design was bad, and the casting worse. I’m all for hiring a wrestler to play him, but hell there are plenty of seven-footers out there who have the look better than Mane. Sabretooth should not only be tall, but massive, and ugly to boot. Mark Calloway (the Undertaker) would have owned that part easily.
[/QUOTE]
Next year’s Wolverine movie will be awesome, with an actual actor (and a very good, intense one) playing Sabretooth: Liev Schreiber. Tyler Mane was awful (as was that feral, grunting portrayal of the character), but I can’t stand the Undertaker and don’t think he would have been any different or better.
I liked most of the X-Men casting aside from Halle Berry as Storm. That was a role Angela Bassett was born to play. James Marsden was boring and bland as Cyclops, but that was kind of the point.
[QUOTE=Big Bad Voodoo Lou]
Next year’s Wolverine movie will be awesome, with an actual actor (and a very good, intense one) playing Sabretooth: Liev Schreiber.
I liked most of the X-Men casting aside from Halle Berry as Storm. That was a role Angela Bassett was born to play. James Marsden was boring and bland as Cyclops, but that was kind of the point.
[/QUOTE]
I had heard he was slated to play Sabretooth, It’ll be interesting to see how he pulls it off. Certainly a better physical match facially, and his acting is great.
Point Break was a good enough thriller to survive even Keanu Reeves’ performance, but had someone with an edge played his part, it could have had a cult-like following.
Same for Dumb & Dumber and Jeff (I’m not funny nor will I ever be) Daniels. That one, despite appreciable success, could have been an all-timer.
Recently, I’d say Charlie Bartlett. That lead, whoever he was, was all wrong. And it pissed me off! He ought to have been a bit more smooth, charming, and in greater denial of his inner pain. But instead, he was just kind of a loser. And I blame the casting.
I don’t think that his being cast as the lead was ALL that destroyed it, but certainly having Arnold cast as “Conan” doomed that movie to be at best mediocre.
I can remember being so excited to hear that they were going to make a Conan movie. And to hear that a relatively big name like John Milius was involved in the writing, and that he was going to stay true to the Howard stories, was like a dream come true.
Then to hear that Arnold was cast to play the lead. He was a relative unknown at the time, but had had enough exposure to be recognizeable. And to know that he would be a lame Conan.
Which led to the actual viewing of the finished product on the big screen. I remember thinking/hoping/praying that “maybe, just maybe” for the first 5 minutes (the William Smith as father scenes). But the rest is history.
[QUOTE=Hampshire]
Agreed. It’s amazing how Fisher, Ford, and Hammil brought such emotion, personality and excitement into their roles in the Lucas universe.
And then how Portman and Christensen just sucked the life out of theirs.
[/QUOTE]
I think that is nostalgia speaking. Ford just oozed charisma, but Fisher’s and Hammil’s acting were nothing special - and that’s being generous. However, I didn’t notice that until I was an adult; as a kid, those movies could do no wrong. Well, no wrong other than ewoks.
[QUOTE=BrainGlutton]
Oh, yeh! Winona Ryder, I’ve heard, originally was considered for the part of Mary Corleone, but somehow it went to Coppola’s daughter.
Well, at least she’s a real Italian. :rolleyes:
[/QUOTE]
Winona had health problems, and they couldn’t delay shooting.
[QUOTE=BrainGlutton]
Oh, yeh! Winona Ryder, I’ve heard, originally was considered for the part of Mary Corleone, but somehow it went to Coppola’s daughter.
Well, at least she’s a real Italian. :rolleyes:
[/QUOTE]
To be fair to Sofia, she was literally a last-minute replacement for the ill Winona.
The worst performance in Godfather III had to be from Eli “Look at Me, I’m Acting Italian” Wallach.
The 2004 Phantom of the Opera. Actually, only one part was miscast, but it was a doozy. The Phantom is supposed to be a grotesque figure with amazing musical talents. Casting Gerard Butler, a handsome actor with sub-average vocal skills (putting it very charitably) did not work at all. There was no chemistry between him and the outrageously gorgeous Emmy Rossum. Patrick Wilson was a bit stiff as Raoul but that Phantom casting just didn’t work.
[QUOTE=Big Bad Voodoo Lou]
You must hate Superman: The Animated Series and Justice League, where Clark is built like a linebacker, but still comes across as meek and mild-mannered.
[/QUOTE]
Because, Og knows, there’s no such thing as a “meek and mild-mannered” linebacker. :rolleyes:
[QUOTE=Askance]
… and yet Julia Roberts would have been perfect in the two otherwise-great movies that Andie McDowell walked though without leaving a trace: Four Weddings and a Funeral, and Green Card. I guess for movies made by not-born-here directors in the early 90s, she had the right combination of price and name-recognition factor. Or something.
[/QUOTE]
However, Julia was not perfect in Michael Collins. Her Irish accent was ludicrous. Beyond the accent, she didn’t seem aware of how she’d landed on the film set.
She didn’t ruin the whole movie. Just the scenes that included her.
[QUOTE=NDP]
Shire was just reprising the role she played in the previous two Godfather movies. If they’d cast anyone different (which was absolutely never going to happen), the result would’ve been too jarring.
I’m surprised you didn’t mention the obvious bad casting move in Godfather III.
[/QUOTE]
Duh. That’s what I meant. I thought I said GF 3, and the role I meant was the Godfather’s daughter Mary, the role originally intended for Wynona Rider. Coppola’s daughter was dreadful. Any high school girl could have done at least as well.
Gotta agree here. I loved the movie, except for Gerard Butler, whose vocal skills are underwhelming . (I also have to complain about his makeup, which isn’t at all horrible. If Erik is hiding away from the world down in the Cellars of the Opera, he must be a Very Sensitive Monster. What were they exhibiting him as in those flasback scenes? The Boy With The Bad Sunburn?)
I know that much of the story revolves around Christine, not Erik, but he’s supposed to be the story’s real center. Just like Dracula, who also doesn’t get much screen time. This usurpation of the center of the film from the title character was the worst case since Bo Derek made Tarzan, the Ape Man.
[QUOTE=NDP]
Shire was just reprising the role she played in the previous two Godfather movies. If they’d cast anyone different (which was absolutely never going to happen), the result would’ve been too jarring.
I’m surprised you didn’t mention the obvious bad casting move in Godfather III.
[/QUOTE]
Sofia may have been bad, but she wasn’t a professional, so at least she has an excuse. But that film has a myriad of bad performances (Shire, Eli Wallach, George Hamilton, Bridget Fonda–even Diane Keaton and Joe Mantegna don’t do themselves any favors) from people who act as a career choice. Ugh.
[QUOTE=Pollux Oil]
This actually jogged my memory on another horrible miscasting: Denise Richards as a nuclear physicist in The World is Not Enough. Yes, I enjoyed seeing Ms. Richards as a Bond girl. No, she is not believable in that movie as a person who is smart enough to handle nuclear material.
[/QUOTE]
I came in here to say this. Denise Richards is pron material, pure and simple. She single handedly ruined TWINE and made me want to just punch her.
