Articulated Thoughts General Movie News & Discussion

I didn't think that mattered we never saw it - what mattered is that she regretted, like Bucky, her past, and really was never going to get over that.
I suppose never felt it would be a better way to put it. She feels bad se says, but I never really feel any weight to it in the world. She never runs into someone whose family she killed. Nobody from her old life is after her (until her movie, well after it matters). She's seemingly totally trusted by everyone who matters at SHIELD and it's never really part of her interactions with any of the Avengers besides some vague gesturing with Hawkeye. Bucky works better because we see him being the bad guy, we have him connected to Tony's backstory and killing his parents. And those events haunt him constantly in the narrative in active ways, not just him feeling bad. He's hunted and feared. His actions drive a wedge that splits the Avengers. His time as a baddy has tremendous narrative weight.
 
  • Like
Reactions: fac
I think the larger problem is tying the entire fate of every character and every possible story arc into one cinematic continuity. We have several distinct (until recently) Spider-Man continuities where we got to explore different parts of the Spider-Man lore. Why can't we have that again? Why does Tony Stark in movie-form always have to be the RDJ version (re-cast or not)? Can we get a cinematic Iron Man story where he never fought Thanos at all? Can we get a Thor story not bound by everything that's cannonically happened to the Chris Hemsworth version of the character?
I will be surprised if we don't start to get stand alone films built around IM in the next 5 years. Same with Steve Rogers Cap. Like Batman or Spidey, different takes and actors, not connected to the past continuity.
 
I never really feel any weight to it in the world. She never runs into someone whose family she killed. Nobody from her old life is after her (until her movie, well after it matters). She's seemingly totally trusted by everyone who matters at SHIELD and it's never really part of her interactions with any of the Avengers besides some vague gesturing with Hawkeye.
I agree with this - hadn't really thought about those options but agree.
 
To me, when we talk about not recasting, that's kind of what I'm talking about. I don't need them to feel like this version of the character is the only one we can have and so we have to decide to kill it or recast it. Don't do either. Make a whole new one. The Tony Stark of the MCU can be dead without the idea of Tony Stark ever being in a movie again also being dead.
Yes.
 
THIS ALL DAY LONG.

Fuck stunt casting and fuuuuuuuuuuck “celebrities” and cults of personality.

Give me the right actor for the right role. Doug Jones and Andy Serkis are FANTASTIC examples.
I think what's so weird about this is that some of the biggest names now started out as 'some guy no one has heard' getting cast as an important character. No one but the most serious cinephile (or a liar) had any idea who Tom Holland was before he was 'the only guy I ever want to see play Spider-Man ever again.' Big companies like Disney and Warner have the ability to -create- stars by just finding the right person no one has heard of.
But they gotta make sure RDJ gets another fifty milly first, right? Blah.
 
but I never really feel any weight to it in the world.
It took six seconds of Andor shooting his contact in the back to give me all the burden he's been carrying in his fight.

You're right that Natasha needed something similar. I'd say her and Loki's performances in Avengers when he just name drops Dreykov's daughter was powerful enough to sell her past to me if it hadn't turned out to be a ruse. Something that good done in sincerity is all i needed.

Fuck stunt casting and fuuuuuuuuuuck “celebrities” and cults of personality.
I keep meaning to argue against the newer trend of casting stars as their heroes, but I can't sustain the argument.

Like, I feel like Hemsworth and Evans owned Thor and Cap because I barely had an idea of who they were. RDJ was basically irrelevant at this point.

And then Cumberbatch gets cast as Dr. Strange, and it just felt like he was there because they wanted his Sherlock in the cloak.

But most of our main characters continue to be actors I'm unfamiliar with, like Simu Liu and Tatiana Maslany, so it's not really the trend I keep thinking it is.

I really think my complaint is against fancasting. It's the fans who are generally like "I want Patrick Wilson as Mr. Fantastic because I liked him in that other movie." Or just naming Stranger Things actors because that's what's big now. Although I guess that's kind of how we got half the cast of Fantastic Four.

Anyways, I agree with the sentiment of focusing on unknowns, even if it's not really an issue.
 
My biggest gripe with stuntcasting, at least currently, is the inclination to cast big name actors and stiff well-known voice actors. Don't get me wrong- bigger name stars often are great in the role- lots of Pixar movies, for example. But you can't tell me that in ALL of Hollywood- known and unknown actors- that Chris Pratt was the best voice for Mario. And I'd say the same for Charlie Day and Anya Taylor-Joy, both of whom I have no gripe with- certainly not to the extent of Crisp Rat. Even Jack Black to an extent- like, I get what they were going for, and it certainly does work, but I'd love to see a slightly more serious take on Bowser too.

Fan-casting is a mixed bag for me. Sometimes they're right on the money and the actor is perfect. A lot of times, they're not, but the fans just cast who they like in the thing, or whoever is most attractive. Sometimes the fan-requested actor doesn't get chosen, and it almost feels like there's a concentrated effort against the film, even if the chosen actor is fantastic in the role.

The one I always go back to is Heath Ledger. I know at this point it's been talked about ad nauseum, but honestly, who among us, even fans of his, were expecting that he had that in him? Or most recently Jacob Elordi in Frankenstein- another traditionally pretty boy (ironically also Australian) who delivered a very nuanced, heartfelt performance. I truly try not to judge casting until I see the thing.
 
The one I always go back to is Heath Ledger. I know at this point it's been talked about ad nauseum, but honestly, who among us, even fans of his, were expecting that he had that in him? Or most recently Jacob Elordi in Frankenstein- another traditionally pretty boy (ironically also Australian) who delivered a very nuanced, heartfelt performance. I truly try not to judge casting until I see the thing.
Ironically, those are two examples of actors who, at the point they were specifically cast in their respective roles, were 💯 in my “ooooooh these guys can do ANYTHING” books. It’s weird, though, because in general they are the kind of guys I would have said “HELL NO” to. Elordi really surprised me: I was not ready to love him at all but then I saw “Priscilla” and was all “wait THIS GUY is one of those Euphoria kids???!” And then he just *slammed it* in Saltburn. I was *excited* when he took over for Garfield, and I *love* Garfield.
 
When I saw the comic con footage of RDJ in green robes taking off the Doom mask, I sat at my screen and thought......."Um.......????" Imagine being in attendance at the thing and being obligated to cheer. I wouldn't have been able to do it because I'd be trying to process what I'm seeing. Is it something I SHOULD be cheering for? I still don't know.
Oh man - remember when the ML team at a con panel was building and building the BAF reveal and then they revealed "Titus!" and the room just had a silent "WTF?" reaction?

If that had happened at RDJr's reveal - hmmmm...

I think what's so weird about this is that some of the biggest names now started out as 'some guy no one has heard' getting cast as an important character. No one but the most serious cinephile (or a liar) had any idea who Tom Holland was before he was 'the only guy I ever want to see play Spider-Man ever again.' Big companies like Disney and Warner have the ability to -create- stars by just finding the right person no one has heard of.
But they gotta make sure RDJ gets another fifty milly first, right? Blah.
Tom Holland deserved an Oscar for The Impossible. That movie didn't do that well, but come on.
 
I think of this reply a lot when I think of fancasting.

with-the-number-of-times-ive-seen-this-meme-reposted-bro-v0-kpim94bnl75e1.png

There are some fans who have a wide range of viewing experience and can say "I want the guy from that Canadian lumberjack show to play Wolverine," but most of the time it just seems like they want to keep recycling the same people through different roles.

I recently saw someone do a fan pitch where he wanted to cast actors *like* so-and-so, and was able to draw from a long history of actors as a form of character description shorthand. I liked that approach.
 
My eyes put Chalamet as Starfire for a second and that made me laugh. :)

Fans only know what they want, not what they need. That's what storytellers are for.

I wasn't a fan of sayings like this for awhile, but it has turned out to be very true.
 
The RDR stuntcasting made me furious because it's...
an increasingly desperate bid to have nostalgia in place of decent writing
^^^
I don't think recasting Kang was the whole reason they abandoned ship though. The character didn't seem to resonate with audiences as a legit big bad so the legal troubles were an excuse to pivot.
Yep. None of the Kang/Multiverse stuff landed with audiences. The Majors incident was a get-out-of-jail-free card.
When I saw the comic con footage of RDJ in green robes taking off the Doom mask, I sat at my screen and thought......."Um.......????" Imagine being in attendance at the thing and being obligated to cheer. I wouldn't have been able to do it because I'd be trying to process what I'm seeing. Is it something I SHOULD be cheering for?
No.
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
There aren't any. Studios need to stop treating audiences like babies and invest in new faces, new characters, and new properties. There isn't a "next Star Wars" because they won't make it.
In general, I found that the Avengers got satisfying conclusions to their stories in Endgame and was ready to move on. I have a suspicion that if they'd treated She-Hulk, Shang-Chi and Thunderbolts as Big Damn Heroes instead of niche themes that don't intrude on their big names, audiences would've taken to them.
Absolutely. Maslany brought a ton of charm to She-Hulk, but she never had a chance. It's like wrestling, where you have to sell your opponent's move. Marvel is no longer selling its actors. We didn't get 300 Chris Hemsworth Thor appearances because they gave up on the actor/character after a mediocre start.
I will be surprised if we don't start to get stand alone films built around IM in the next 5 years. Same with Steve Rogers Cap. Like Batman or Spidey, different takes and actors, not connected to the past continuity.
I'd be surprised simply because it means that Disney has thrown in the towel on the MCU as currently constructed. I think the plan is to revitalize the Avengers before bringing in the X-Men. By that point, it'll be 2032.

I've always said unconnected superhero stories are the way to go. Think Nolan's Batman or The Batman. There's no reason we can't get an upbeat Batman & Robin in theaters one year and a dark noir Batman the next. I'd rather distinct visions with complete beginning, middles, and ends than franchise purgatory.
 
Back
Top