Me again, RX - while I agree that it was decidedly odd to cast Cruise in the role, he could have done a lot worse with it. What was truly appalling about Interview was this line, from Louis, toward the beginning: “My wife had died in childbirth…”
HELLO!?!?! Anne Rice wrote this screenplay her very own self, so there’s just no excuse. That one line completely diminished the entire character of Louis, who in the book blames himself for the death of his saintly brother, and assumes that he is therefore already doomed to hell. To replace that with something as plebian as a dead wife was inexcusable.
Denise Richards in The World Is Not Enough. Single-handedly she ruined this film. In fact, she sucks in everything she does. She must be pretty proficient in bj’s or something to stay in hollywood.
Uma Thurman as the “good looking one” and Janeane as the “plain one” in The Truth About Cats and Dogs. I kept going “whaaat?” thru the whole movie.
As to recent movies, Roger Ebert thought casting Anthony Hopkins in The Human Stain, given the “secret” needed to make the film work, was particularly horrible. I agree.
Note that John Wayne, Cruise, Reeves, DiCaprio, etc. are 1-dimensional actors. Any character that involves playing someone other than themselves is almost always a bad idea.
Ted McGinley in ________ (fill in the blank, they all work).
In Married with Children, at least Steve would listen and argue back with Al. As Jefferson, Ted just nodded and grinned and could have been replaced with a parrot, which would have been just as nice to look at and much funnier (I LOL when they scratch their heads with their feet!)
True, but see her in Drop Dead Gorgeous—she plays a cold, calculating, dim bitch, and she’s very good. (Not the kind of praise she’d like to hear, perhaps.)
And I think the mediocre-ness of The World Is Not Enough can’t be laid solely at Denise Richards’ door. Anyway …
Worst casting decisions I can think of:
Everyone in the last 2 Star Wars movies except Ewan McGregor and Christopher Lee.
I submit that Harrison Ford was a better Jack Ryan than Alec Baldwin or (shudder) Ben Affleck.
Now on to the mis-casting:
Richard Harris as Dumbledore in the Harry Potter movies - isn’t the good Prof supposed to have a powerful presence? Harris was too obviously feeble - I’m afraid I wasn’t surprised by the news of his death. Saddened, yes, but surprised?
Roger Moore as James Bond - yeah, the first couple’a movies were ok, but they just got worse and worse until finally they got rid of “Gram’pa Bond” a good 10 years too late.
Christopher Lambert as Connor MacLeod of the Clan MacLeod (Highlander). I had no idea Scots Highlanders often had Belgian accents.
Sean Connery as Ramirez (Highlander). - the Egyptian Spaniard who was the only Scot in a movie that places half its action in the Scottish Highlands!
Michael Keaton as Mr Bat-Mom. Batman should never have to look up at the Joker when they’re standing face-to-face.
No one should ever put that woman on the big screen, unless they can find a way to resurrect Lee Strasbourg, and then construct an Acting Boot Camp where Madonna can be imprisoned for the next 4 years (with Sargeant Strasbourg).
*[sup]Except for Desperately Seeking Susan and Evita. Madonna playing Madonna is pure gold. Proof [/sup]
I’ve always thought that Tarantino made a huge mistake casting himself as Jimmy in Pulp Fiction. Steve Buscemi would have been much better in that part. I might have been able to take his outrage and distress seriously.
I am in agreement with Tom Cruise as Lestat and the miscasting in The Truth About Cats and Dogs. I don’t watch very many movies, though, so I usually don’t notice bad miscasting.
I loved Dangerous Liaisons, but what in the world was Keanu Reeves doing in that movie? He looked purty in the costumes, I suppose.
I though Sirius and Lupin where perfect (Rickman is old for Snape) - but I am going on 40 with a six year old boy - so for me the idea the Harry’s parents friends (and Snape) would be in their 40s (although Rickman is older than that - and I think looks it) is believable and perfectly cast. This site http://www.hp-lexicon.org/timelines/timeline_main2.html#1900-2000 gives the birthdates of James and Lilly Potter and the rest of their classmates as 1959-1960 - twenty years older than Harry. Which means that when Harry was eleven, Snape would have been 31 - 33. By the time the third movie occurs, they would be 34 or 36. Thewlis, who plays Lupin is 41 - within the margin of error for casting. Oldman is 46 - a little old, but then Black did just spend 13 years in a horror of a prison - he can be expected to look a little older than he is.
Now Rickman (and Neeson) in Love Actually bothered me. They either should have cast younger men - or made the hot young things after them older. It wasn’t believable to me that a girl who looked like Rickman’s secretary would make a pass at a guy who looked like Rickman.
