Atrocious casting choices.

Natalie Portman as Padme Amidala - she and Hayden Christiansen have no chemistry at all. Horrible acting and improvisation! As a fan of the classic Star Wars (as well as the KOTOR on XBox), I can't forgive her.

The newest Bond. I know its supposed to be a completely new character, but he's so completely different from the old Bond, as well as the Bond from the books that I just can't really get past it. Natalie Portman in V for Vendetta wasn't to great either.

Judy Davis in A Passage to India. Throughout the entire film, other characters were referring to how plain or unattractive she was, and all the while, she was beautiful. It didn't work at all.

2 dancerinthedark - Really? I would go the opposite direction. I thought Natalie Portman was okay and Hayden Christiansen was atrocious. I was shocked when I was watching another movie and thinking how good the actor was and suddenly realized it was him (he'd had a rather dramatic makeover for the movie, which is why I didn't recognize him at first).

Of course, it's not like they had anything to work with...

#3

I loved the new Bond film, but I interpreted it as backtracking. They set it up pretty nicely what with him just achieving 00-status when the movie started. They went back to the beginning, showed us the scrappy, immature, arrogant, reckless, emotional Bond and told the story of what happened to make him the smoother more detached Bond that we all know and love. I guess I read a lot in to the final moment where he's finally dressed up in proper Bond attire, looking more like a GQ model than an assassin and spy. I stand by it, we just have to wait for the next film to see if they follow thru and execute it (my theory) properly. If it fails I'll tearfully toast you with my martini.

Regardless, you've got to admit that the parkour display in the beginning of the movie was AWESOME.

Yeah, I guess Hayden's acting was too contrived. His timing was horrible. But then I kinda forgive him because he dons the Darth Vader costume at the end of EP 3.

(mimics Vader's heavy, labored breathing; enter John WIlliams muzak)

Child_of_light: Natalie Portman's portrayal of Evie Hammond was acceptable, considering that the comicbook cheracter was a one-dimensional whiner.

7 dancerinthedark

That's an awful lot to forgive for something you knew was going to happen anyway ;)

Natalie Portman in *anything* since Leon. The girl cannot emote.

Closer was the most unromantic, unsexy movie about relationships I've ever seen. Sure, I know it was supposed to be like that, but none of the actors had any chemistry, and they were supposedly good actors.

(But Closer is based on a play, so I don't know if it necessarily counts here.)

To stay on topic book-wise: Antonio Banderas as Armand in Interview with the Vampire. He's too old!

--> 9

RE: Antonio Banderas in Interview with the Vampire... HE WAS SO WRONG!! Armand is meant to be a 17 year old (when he was turned Vampire), red-headed Russian! Ugh! SOOO WRONG!

Harrison Ford as Jack Ryan. He was too old for the part and the perfect Jack Ryan (Alec Baldwin) already had the job once in The Hunt for Red October

I definitely agree that Antonio as Armand is wrong wrong wrong. Tom Cruise didn't exactly fit the physical type for Lestat either.

Also, Keira Knightley was so wrong for Elizabeth Bennet. I didn't care for that particular adaptation at all, though.

However, one that is just right is Tommy Lee Jones as Sheriff Bell in No Country for Old Men. It couldn't possibly be anyone else.

Thanks.
Elizabeth wasn't supposed to be conventionally beautiful and even if Keira is considered so now, she certainly wouldn't have been then. So maybe that's what they were thinking when they cast her. They get the beautiful lead while being somewhat in line with the story by casting a girl whose looks would've been less desirable by the standards of the time.

See how I've talked myself into contradicting myself? ha

As for the movie as a whole- I guess all that yelling at each other in the rain and that last scene that was reminiscent of that bit in Singin' in the Rain ("I love you. I love you. I love you. I love you.") just seemed like they were forcing modern sensibilities onto a period piece.

ha, yeah, I read your contributions to the other thread. Very interesting.
Do you have a copy of What Jane Austen Ate and Charles Dickens Knew? If not, I think it'd be right up your alley.

It's lucky for me that I work in a used bookstore so I can take the damage that I'm predicting you people are about to inflict upon me. ha. (I'm brand new here.)

and good call on the Lempicka. :)

edit: wow, that was fast. ha

So agree about Keira Knightley being wrong for Elizabeth Bennet. But Donald Sutherland as Mr Bennet was even worse and the whole film was disasterous - gobbled dialogue the whole way through and a house surrounded by a moat?!?!

Quite liked Daniel Craig as Bond taking it all back to the start, but I've never read the books, so...

Here's another horrible casting move: Tom Hanks and Melanie Griffith in Bonfire of the Vanities. Tom Hanks is too likable, too middle class, too everyman for the role, and Melanie Griffith just came off wrong.

Old movie, I know. Probably everyone has (rightly) forgotten about it.

The most egregious piece of casting that comes to my mind is Scarlett Johansson in the adaptation of the Black Dahlia. Awful.

I LOVED Christian Bale as Patrick Bateman - the film was not that good compared to the book. The book is one of my all time favourites, but I do think Christian Bale did his best.

Leonardo Di Caprio in The Beach - terrible, terrible choice of actor!

tom hanks in the green mile. he just didnt fit

Let's see if we can revive this thread..... *smile*

So, what do people think of Julia Roberts as the lead of Eat, Pray, Love? I have not seen the movie yet, but the book was a fun read for me - a chronicle of total self-indulgence (sorry, it wasn't inspiring or philosophical or life-changing beyond that).

I guess I was expecting someone less of a celebrity. Julia has such a Julia-ness about her in every movie - if that makes sense. Not sure who I would have preferred instead. Maybe a younger Annette Bening?

I've avoided Eat, Pray, Love because from what I hear of it, it would drive me crazy (self-indulgence, etc.). I may read it one day, but there are soooo many other books I need to read first. Anyway, I thought casting Julia Roberts seemed like an odd choice too.

And speaking of Tom Hanks, I didn't like him in the Da Vinci Code. That's not how I imagined that character at all (but it's been a while since I read that book and I can't think of who I had imagined--someone smoother and less nice-guy).

I agree with you about Julia Roberts in Eat, Pray, Love, though I've only seen the previews. Except for her role in Erin Brokovich, she always seems to me to be playing the same character. In the previews for Eat, Pray, Love she sounds like she did in Mona Lisa Smile.

I have to confess to never liking any of the young actors cast in the Harry Potter movies. Nothing against them personally, but from the first movie I was distracted by their obviously amateur performances, and really wished they had just used more experienced actors, instead of going for character look-alikes. I thought poor Daniel Radcliffe looked stunned in most of his scenes, Hermione has always come off as just annoying to me, and I somehow never really thought of Ron as quite so peculiar looking as the boy who plays him. But that's just my opinion, like I said, and I'm sure other people appreciate the actors just fine.

#27 Nickelini - I agree. I was expecting someone less nice than Tom Hanks in those movies. I'm not a fan of the books or the movies, I have to admit, so not sure who I'd rather have instead.

#28 Phlox72 - I actually came to the HP books after the movies. And that sort of sealed the movie characters somewhat for me. I much preferred the ensemble of other secondary characters besides the main 3 - Maggie Smith, Robbie Coltrane, Alan Rickman, Michael Gambon, Ralph Fiennes, Gary Oldman, Emma Thompson...... all these folks make the movies immensely watchable again and again.

I've just started Up in the Air by Walter Kirn. Another book I came to after the movie. Loved George Clooney and Anna Kendrick. Will have to read the book to see if they fit well.

Since Natalie Portman is coming up so much... I didn't like her in "The Other Boleyn Girl." I loved the book, and Anne Boleyn is one of my favorite historical characters. Now whenever I picture her in my mind, I picture Natalie Portman. And she didn't really capture Anne in the movie, in my opinion.

One of the BIGGEST disappointments was definitely Anne Hathaway in the screen adaption of Ella Enchanted. As a kid, Ella was my absolute favorite book. I read it over 10 times - more times than I have read any other book, except for Lord of the Rings of course.
Not only was Hathaway completely not right, but so was everyone in the entire movie.

I just loved the book Corelli's Mandolin, and I know that there is a movie, but I haven't watched it particularly because I hate Nicholas Cage. His acting is always horrid.
Am I right to stay away from the movie?

I thought it was a good movie. Of course, I like Nicholas Cage, whose real name is Nicholas Coppola. Did you ever see him in Matchstick Men? A fine movie, I thought.

>31 barney67: I haven't seen that movie, but I saw him in National Treasure and The Wicker Man - absolute disgrace.
Maybe I could give him another chance.

I just thought of one today. I really never liked Renee Zelwegger as Bridget Jones in Bridget Jones's Diary at all. I always thought of Bridget as a somewhat sassy English woman, nothing like Renee's kitten voiced portrayal of her.