21 replies to this topic

[AHF]

niremetal, on 09 November 2011 - 12:33 PM, said:

(even the scene you referenced of Indy stumbling into Hitler was an intensely dramatic moment, despite its practical implausibility),

That was actually in Last Crusade, which I agree with you was clearly better than Temple.  It struck the best balance of earnest action, some resonance of the storyline, and entertaining camp.  That was one of the challenges of both Crystal Skull and Temple as they did not hit any touchstones like the Lost Ark of the Covenant or the Holy Grail.  I'll watch Crystal Skull again sometime and try to remember to return to this thread to give you the thoughts when viewing it as a parody.

Edited by AHF, 09 November 2011 - 01:03 PM.

[sultanofatl]

Christopher Lambert- Highlander
Christian Hayden?sp- Anakken Skywalker

[AHF]

sultanofatl, on 09 November 2011 - 01:56 PM, said:

Christian Hayden?sp- Anakken Skywalker

Because there is something wrong for him about the part or because he is a sucktastic actor?

[sultanofatl]

AHF, on 09 November 2011 - 03:57 PM, said:

Because there is something wrong for him about the part or because he is a sucktastic actor?

Because he was wrong for the part.....and he sucks.  I think an actor with a better presence would have made the film.

[AHF]

sultanofatl, on 09 November 2011 - 05:23 PM, said:

Because he was wrong for the part.....and he sucks.  I think an actor with a better presence would have made the film.

I agree he sucks as an actor.  A good actor at his age, with his looks and physique, etc. could have done a fine job with the role, IMO.  As for the films with a better actor, I don't know whether they were dead on arrival or not.  The fact that the direction and script led to the worst performance of Natalie Portman's career makes me think they were probably dead on arrival.

Edited by AHF, 09 November 2011 - 05:26 PM.

[sultanofatl]

AHF, on 09 November 2011 - 05:26 PM, said:

<br />
I agree he sucks as an actor.&nbsp;&nbsp;A good actor at his age, with his looks and physique, etc. could have done a fine job with the role, IMO.&nbsp;&nbsp;As for the films with a better actor, I don't know whether they were dead on arrival or not.&nbsp;&nbsp;The fact that the direction and script led to the worst performance of Natalie Portman's career makes me think they were probably dead on arrival.<br />

Well I think chemistry is the missing piece.&nbsp; Let's face it there was no chemistry between those two. You add in a young Leanardo or even the guy Micheal Pitt from Boardwalk Empire

checkout these scenes

Edited by sultanofatl, 10 November 2011 - 11:29 AM.

[DJlaysitup]

guess you wouldn't call these "casting decisions" as much as just - the way things worked out.

The role of Indiana Jones was basically written for Tom Selleck ("Magnum P.I.)...but his contract butted up against the filming schedule and Selleck was one of the very few actors who took contracts seriously.  He gave up the part - and it ended up that the writers went on strike and there wouldn't have been a conflict anyway.  A young actor named Harrison Ford (who had just been a character actor on a sci-fi movie and was in American Graffiti) got the part.  Now let's be fair...Tom Selleck would have been a helluvan Indiana Jones and would have OWNED the franchise.

...but Harrison Ford did great and became a mega-movie star.

Going back a bit...for the movie "Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid"...the role of the Sundance Kid was basically given to Steve McQueen...and he would have done it great...but he turned it down because he would not get top billing over Paul Newman.  Robert Redford - a newcomer - got the role and went on to be a serious movie star, starring in a bunch of shows and founding the Sundance Movie Festival...or something like that...which launched many independent movie makers like the Cohen brothers.

Timing is everything.

Edited by DJlaysitup, 08 December 2011 - 09:43 PM.