Articulated Thoughts General Movie News & Discussion

[JakeEkiss]

Get another damn human being in the roll, if they are good the audience will accept them whether it's Black Panther or Spock or Luke Skywalker.

If only there were any examples of this ever working in films or TV. If only there was even one in some successful franchise...

 

[AceofKnaves]

“But we can’t recast Hamlet! Richard Burbage is iconic and no one else could ever do it!”
-some guy in 1601

 

[JakeEkiss]

“But we can’t recast Hamlet! Richard Burbage is iconic and no one else could ever do it!”
-some guy in 1601

Why give Sebastian Stan more work when we could spend the same 10 mil and three times as long in post production pixel-fucking a Mark Hammill golem? (actually don't think Stan would be the best recast there, but he'd be something)

 

[joshsquash729]

I feel like the whole "deepfake an actor's face onto another actor's body" is almost a whole other discussion, but yeah- there's very few roles that I can think of, if any, that are so tied to an actor that they can only be played by that person. Recasts might be missing a certain flair that actor brings to the role, but it might unveil something new and even more fun for the character. I'm not someone who thinks that legacy characters need to be used in every single project, but the longer studios hold out on moving past them, or stand steadfast in not recasting, the longer it'll take for audiences to accept.

 

[Damien]

And I'll be honest, though I liked that dude in Lovecraft Country fine, his Kang wasn't blowing me away anyway. You're telling me you couldn't find one other good black actor under 35? Bullshit. Get the fuck outta here with that noise. They set up the whole multiverse just to give us Kang, and then don't recast the easiest character in the whole MCU to recast given his backstory.

Yeah, I didn't care about Kang (the actor's performance) at all. It was just... physically present on the screen. And, as you said, he's the easiest character in the whole of the MCU to recast with barely a nod. Given the RDJ situation, maybe we should just be happy they didn't cast Michael B. Jordan to come back as Kang.

As for the reason for the pivot away from Kang; I expect most of it was not wanting to recast. But I also suspect with no evidence at all that during the 'recast or not' talks, they decided that the storyline they had for Kang and the MCU was financially weaker than just bringing back established actors/characters people like. Probably went something like 'we can delay the entire MCU for a few months while we recast and get someone up to speed and then carry on with our current plans, or we can push ahead the idea to bring in Jackman and RDJ and just do the Civil War/End Game spectacle mash-up style movie we know will make about 10 times more money than the next four Kang-themed films.'

It really just feels like the franchise version of Weekend at Bernie's. Marionetting the decaying bodies of these old actors, these old characters. And for no good reason. There's no plot there talking about the realities of aging and how it affects these characters. We got exactly one of those films with Logan and it more or less said it all. It was also the last time I cared about Jackverine being in a movie (DP v Wolverine was not great, just aggressively manipulative).

I liked DP v Wolvie as its own silly thing. It was -fun-. But I feel like it was the kind of film that can and should exist outside the MCU proper. Just a thing you do for fan service and to have a little goof on the whole thing. I mean, the 'joke' that he LITERALLY dug up Wolverine/dug up the retired Jackman is only funny if it's... not true? Does that make sense? It's funny if Logan is still the 'real' end of Jackverine and this is almost a 'What If' comic come to life. The entire movie was way too meta for me to take it seriously as part of the more serious-toned MCU.

 

[JakeEkiss]

The entire movie was way too meta for me to take it seriously as part of the more serious-toned MCU.

For me it wasn't so much taking it as a serious part of the MCU, I just didn't find it that good. Third bite at the apple to not make his love interest an actual character, a bunch of low-hanging meta-jokes, some jabs at popular things... meh. It just felt like bad fanfic to me (qualifier there is important, I've seen plenty of good fanfic). The only parts of the movie that stuck with me are Jackman's raging at him when they're in the car and the post credits of Evans slagging Casandra Nova. Both I think basically only stuck with me because Jackman tries hard not to phone it in and Evans is funny when he plays a dickbag. I guess I'm happy for Tatum getting to do a run at Gambit since he wanted it so bad... but also that just felt like Tatum doing Gambit cosplay to me so...

I keep trying to engage with Deadpool because I remember liking him a lot in some of those late 90's comics, but I think that time has passed and actually I just don't like the character much now. That's on me and I should take my own advice and not watch any more presuming they get made.

 

[yojoebro82]

Why give Sebastian Stan more work when we could spend the same 10 mil and three times as long in post production pixel-fucking a Mark Hammill golem? (actually don't think Stan would be the best recast there, but he'd be something)

We've all see that side-by-side with Stan and Hamill head shots as Luke circa ESB, but I think they lost their window for Stan. Aren't all those phase 1 MCU actors in their 40s now....at least? If they're looking to tell more Luke stories around the post ROTJ era, they need to go at least ten years younger. But yes......ANYTHING besides more deep faking. Please!

 

[JakeEkiss]

We've all see that side-by-side with Stan and Hamill head shots as Luke circa ESB, but I think they lost their window for Stan. Aren't all those phase 1 MCU actors in their 40s now....at least? If they're looking to tell more Luke stories around the post ROTJ era, they need to go at least ten years younger. But yes......ANYTHING besides more deep faking. Please!

Yeah. I mean, on one level it doesn't matter to me much on his age because Star Wars historically has no problem casting people outside the right age-range for their character (Bo Katan should be HOW much older than Boba Fett?). If Stan could do it relliably I'd be fine letting him. I'd be just as happy with someone new in the role. I'd be SUPER happy with more stuff that simply did not feature a Skywalker. Much like the MCU, it's time to move on. Those characters got an ending; most of them got two.

I know it's absurd to ask Disney to take risks, that's not the market they're in.

 

[joshsquash729]

Yeah. I mean, on one level it doesn't matter to me much on his age because Star Wars historically has no problem casting people outside the right age-range for their character (Bo Katan should be HOW much older than Boba Fett?). If Stan could do it relliably I'd be fine letting him. I'd be just as happy with someone new in the role. I'd be SUPER happy with more stuff that simply did not feature a Skywalker. Much like the MCU, it's time to move on. Those characters got an ending; most of them got two.

I know it's absurd to ask Disney to take risks, that's not the market they're in.

I think I'd much rather they de-age someone with makeup or CGI than put another actor's face onto a character. Within reason, of course- I don't want them trotting out a 65 year old trying to play a 35 year old. Plenty of de-aging, even recently, has been pretty rough (here's looking at you, Wicked part 2 flashback Jeff Goldblum). But I feel it's the easier option, and certainly more ethical (in my opinion) than literally or figuratively erasing someone's performance just to slap a famous- living or dead- person's face onto theirs.

 

[Ru1977]

I don't want them trotting out a 65 year old trying to play a 35 year old

See: The Irishman. I haven't rewatched it yet, but I know there is a fantastic movie in there if I can see past the senior citizen struggling to get down the stairs like a character in his 20s. I love DeNiro and it's fantastic they worked together again, along with Pesci and Keitel, but fawk me man. If he did Goodfellas now, would he have had Liotta play Henry Hill even in the beginning of the movie as a kid too short to see over the steering wheel as he parks cars for gangsters? Fawk, Marty.

 

[AceofKnaves]

I feel *slightly* differently about recasting/“finishing the story” of Star Wars in the sense that those characters originated in film. I’d be more OK with Star Wars characters’ stories “ending”, although I really don’t think that is necessary either.

But for comic book characters? I absolutely, categorically do NOT want their stories to “end”. Nope, nope, nope. ALWAYS RECAST. A bajillion writers, artists, editors, actors, etc have created these characters over nearly a century. I think it is absurd and insane to yoke Iron Man, for example, to one particular actor and/or “kill” the character when said actor is “done”.

I know I come from maybe a different place on this because a lot of my favorite characters and stories have been around a lot longer than comic books and dozens of creators have worked on said characters/stories, but I *expect* characters to be recast and reinterpreted regularly. Like part of what makes Dracula so awesome is that there is a remarkable wealth of versions and interpretations in media. Imagine if we’d stopped with Bela Lugosi, or Max Schreck, or whoever played the Count at the very first staging of the novel before there was even a stage play? Nah, that ain’t it.

I think one of the problems is that Marvel doubled-down so hard on the MCU that a lot of folks can’t even see those characters outside of it, which does those characters a MASSIVE disservice. These characters and stories are SO MUCH BIGGER than one series of films, or one creator’s run of comic books, or one animated series, or even a line of action figures.

We always think too small with this stuff, and live in the tiny boxes we build.

 

[joshsquash729]

Honestly, I think there just needs to be more love for stand-ins and/or stunt doubles taking over the roles. Granted, not all of them are great actors, but I think the greatest evidence for this would be Doug Jones. He started out as just the stuntman or physical actor for larger stars to fill in later, before moving on to actually playing and getting credit for the role. Max Lloyd-Jones, who played the physical Luke in The Mandalorian, I'm sure did a fine enough job and looks at least decently like a young Mark (at least at the time- he kinda skews more Han now) that they should just let him take over. I'm sure he did more than enough work studying Mark and his mannerisms to prepare for the role. Say what you will about Solo as a film (I personally love it), but you can't deny Alden and Donald did their damn homework.

It's so interesting that we're okay with other actors taking over for Chewie or R2- heck, even Obi-Wan and Anakin (though they certainly got their fair share of flak back in the day), but other more face-forward actors can't be replaced. Like- I get why; the attachments to a certain face or voice or whatever- but it does seem a little silly when you really stop to think about it.

 

[AceofKnaves]

not all of them are great actors

Mmmmmm that part won’t work for me.

I need *excellent* actors, every time, for every role. Talent and ability will absolutely always beat out “looking like the character” to me: that is what costumes, makeup, and preparation time are for.

Actually a major reason I don’t favor certain genres of film (like action movies, for example) is because other attributes are prioritized over talent and ability. Now “talent and ability” is not a monolithic metric: different skillsets are necessary for different roles. But I never, EVER want to sacrifice acting ability for “looks”. Not ever. Start with excellent actors who ALSO possess the necessary skillsets for the role, and go from there. But I require great acting, always.

 

[JakeEkiss]

I think it is absurd and insane to yoke Iron Man, for example, to one particular actor and/or “kill” the character when said actor is “done”.

I don't really mind if the on-screen character gets shuffled out. Treat the MCU like Godzilla or Bond. Every 10-20 yrs you reboot the whole thing and start fresh. Update it all to fit where you're at culturally.

Or, better yet, retire them and leave them that way on screen. In comics they live forever young, but you get ten, twenty times as many comics as you ever will movies anyway. So use the movies to dig into the catalogue and shine a spotlight. Iron Man wasn't necessarily an A list comic character prior to the films, at least not the same tier he was after. The Guardians of the Galaxy surely weren't. Use the film power to elevate more characters that have wallowed in obscurity. I'm happy to let some stories end. Shang Chi was a good effort, and while it doesn't hold together in the third act, it is much more what I want than anything on the slate right now. A new guy, a new backstory and myth that is barely connected to the rest of the Marvel universe we know, a whole new adventure to have.

 

[AceofKnaves]

I don't really mind if the on-screen character gets shuffled out. Treat the MCU like Godzilla or Bond. Every 10-20 yrs you reboot the whole thing and start fresh. Update it all to fit where you're at culturally.

Yes, I’m absolutely fine with this approach. It’s the “it’s over and we won’t do it again” thing I object to.

Use the film power to elevate more characters that have wallowed in obscurity.

Agreed, but as a “yes and” to the higher-profile characters, not “instead of”. Like I’m honestly not interested in a Marvel Universe without Doom/Steve/Peter/Banner etc, just as I am not interested in a DC Universe without Bruce/Clark/Diana/Joker/Lex . . . they don’t always have to be “out front” but I need them to be there existing.

Like I actually *prefer* the “tone” of the MCU post-Endgame, the only thing I’m missing is the presence of the marquee characters I love. I dearly wish they would just reboot already, with a less militant and cynically mean tone overall.