|
Post by Brandon Walsh is Insane. on Dec 27, 2008 17:34:40 GMT -5
Jack Black in King Kong.
I mean, seriously.
And I like me some Jack Black.
|
|
|
Post by Koda, Master Crunchyroller on Dec 27, 2008 17:37:19 GMT -5
Jack Black in King Kong. I mean, seriously. And I like me some Jack Black. I forgot about that. And his character was the funny guy in the original too! How, Jack seemed to be trying too hard to be funny. So much that it made him seem completely out of place.
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Hamilton on Dec 27, 2008 17:37:37 GMT -5
I thought Black played the Denham role well, pretty much along the lines that Armstrong did in the original.
|
|
|
Post by Brandon Walsh is Insane. on Dec 27, 2008 18:24:30 GMT -5
As soon as he came on screen, I was looking for the comedy to begin.
Didn't happen.
His performance was ok for what it was, but it was a total miscast, I feel.
|
|
|
Post by Bob Schlapowitz on Dec 27, 2008 19:42:53 GMT -5
Also, anything Tom Hanks has ever been cast in.
|
|
|
Post by Rorschach on Dec 27, 2008 21:37:59 GMT -5
I've never understood the hate for Keanu Reeves as Jonathan Harker in Coppola's "Bram Stoker's Dracula". Besides the dubious accent (which isn't even that bad), Keanu plays the role well enough: Harker is a fastidious, boring, and fairly colorless man put into an extraordinary position. Captured by the most famous monster in literary history and surrounded by the likes of an eccentric doctor, a lascivious aristocrat that everyone wants to bonk, a cowboy straight from a Zane Grey novel, a howling, tormented madman, an asylum doctor on the verge of going mad, and a Jane Eyre-like tutor who becomes the single most capable person in the book, Harker is supposed to be pedestrian, supposed to be the Everyman. Until he escapes Dracula's clutches and gains the kukri, he's pretty nondescript and I think Keanu does a good job with it. I could go along with the rest of what you said, but man, the accent IS that bad. Worse even.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 27, 2008 22:06:10 GMT -5
Ok, Rorschach. But, one more point I'll make on the accent debacle: Stoker writes his accents atrociously in the novel, too! Van Helsing and Quincey are fine for the most part but there are times when both their dialects get way, way, way too stereotypical and the prose goes headlong into purple prose territory. Which I love, by the way.
|
|
|
Post by Rorschach on Dec 27, 2008 22:08:49 GMT -5
Ok, Rorschach. But, one more point I'll make on the accent debacle: Stoker writes his accents atrociously in the novel, too! Van Helsing and Quincey are fine for the most part but there are times when both their dialects get way, way, way too stereotypical and the prose goes headlong into purple prose territory. Which I love, by the way. Ok...I'll concede that, too. But somehow, I don't think Stoker EVER envisioned his Harker speaking with a Malibu surfer accent. ;D
|
|
|
Post by Paul Servo on Dec 27, 2008 22:23:27 GMT -5
Franco was far from "miscasted" in SPIDERMAN. He looked somewhat like a young Dafoe.
Dude is judging Wahlberg on the "Marky Mark" past
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Hamilton on Dec 27, 2008 22:29:39 GMT -5
Ok, Rorschach. But, one more point I'll make on the accent debacle: Stoker writes his accents atrociously in the novel, too! Van Helsing and Quincey are fine for the most part but there are times when both their dialects get way, way, way too stereotypical and the prose goes headlong into purple prose territory. Which I love, by the way. Ok...I'll concede that, too. But somehow, I don't think Stoker EVER envisioned his Harker speaking with a Malibu surfer accent. ;D Bram Stoker's editor: 'why does Harker keep saying dude to Dracula?' Stoker: Trust me.
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Hamilton on Dec 27, 2008 22:31:04 GMT -5
Franco was far from "miscasted" in SPIDERMAN. He looked somewhat like a young Dafoe. Dude is judging Wahlberg on the "Marky Mark" past In fairness, don't we all see that in poor Wahlberg? Guy's a decent actor, but still the first thought in my head upon seeing him in a trailer for anything is " Feel it Feel it"
|
|
|
Post by Joe Neglia on Dec 27, 2008 23:44:38 GMT -5
Franco was far from "miscasted" in SPIDERMAN. He looked somewhat like a young Dafoe. Dude is judging Wahlberg on the "Marky Mark" past In fairness, don't we all see that in poor Wahlberg? Guy's a decent actor, but still the first thought in my head upon seeing him in a trailer for anything is " Feel it Feel it" Really? Cuz these days, all I hear when I see his trailers is "Say hi to your mother for me."
|
|
|
Post by texaswhopper on Dec 28, 2008 0:04:36 GMT -5
I love George C Scott but I did not feel he should be playing Ebenezer Scrooge. I feel like Im one of the only people that doesn't like that version of a Christmas Carol. He doesn't normally have an accent and if he attempted one it was just not strong enough in my opinion.
Ebenezer Scrooge is a role made for an English actor. I'm American and even I like it that way. Scrooge doesn't yuck it up like a southerner and doesn't talk like hes from the streets.
I'll tell you who was a good Scrooge. Albert Finney.
|
|
|
Post by demolitionfan on Dec 28, 2008 0:59:40 GMT -5
I would add Morgan Freeman in Shawshank and Will Smith in I am Legend because, you know those characters happen to be white guys. I'm all for equality but why do we have to alter a character like that?If Ali had been played by Van Damme people woulda been yelling racism.....Freeman was excellent in that flick though, just shouldn't have been in it thats all.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Neglia on Dec 28, 2008 1:09:04 GMT -5
I would add Morgan Freeman in Shawshank and Will Smith in I am Legend because, you know those characters happen to be white guys. I'm all for equality but why do we have to alter a character like that?If Ali had been played by Van Damme people woulda been yelling racism.....Freeman was excellent in that flick though, just shouldn't have been in it thats all. Did it really make a difference to those characters based on their skin color? And the Ali/Van Damme comparison is a wash. You're talking about a film based on a real person. Last I remember, I Am Legend and Shawshank Redemption were not true stories.
|
|
|
Post by Hanz Moleman on Dec 28, 2008 1:25:26 GMT -5
I've never understood the hate for Keanu Reeves as Jonathan Harker in Coppola's "Bram Stoker's Dracula". Besides the dubious accent (which isn't even that bad), Keanu plays the role well enough: Harker is a fastidious, boring, and fairly colorless man put into an extraordinary position. Captured by the most famous monster in literary history and surrounded by the likes of an eccentric doctor, a lascivious aristocrat that everyone wants to bonk, a cowboy straight from a Zane Grey novel, a howling, tormented madman, an asylum doctor on the verge of going mad, and a Jane Eyre-like tutor who becomes the single most capable person in the book, Harker is supposed to be pedestrian, supposed to be the Everyman. Until he escapes Dracula's clutches and gains the kukri, he's pretty nondescript and I think Keanu does a good job with it. If I hadn't decided to read everything in this thread right away, I would have said the same exact thing. His role as Harker is in m opinion his best, next to Constantine. And I'll put my head on the chopping block and defend Reeves for a second. Being an aspiring actor currently enrolled in a school of theatre, I often hear the argument of Actor vs. Movie star. Basically, an actor can make you believe hes a certain character, where as a movie star is just that, a movie star put into some plot. The 2 best examples I can give of each is, Gary Oldman as an actor (the guy is a chameleon and brilliant actor) and Tom Cruise as a movie star. As Harker and Constantine, I felt Reeves wooden acting fit the bill for those characters and he did a rather good job. I 100% agree with Winona Ryder in Dracula though. I think I may be a bit biased as I just can't stand her.
|
|