Good Actors, Horrible Role Choices

He was mentioned before but, John Travolta.

Just a big wtf.
 
Eddie Murphy is really the best pick out of this thread.

I mean...wow.
 
Frank Langella in Masters of the Universe. It was EXTREMELY obvious he was far and away the best actor in this movie.

How DARE you disrespect the combined talent of Ivan Drago, Monica Geller and that smartass guy from Star Trek Voyager! :woot:
 
I think Connor should look super heroic above everything else. He needs to be someone inspiring, like a Captain America or Superman.

Nah. Bale could have been a ****ing awesome John Connor. The ****tacular writers dropped the ball.
Nah. I disagree. I think that Bale's an excellent actor and yes, he could've pulled off portraying John Connor. But all that fuss over how good his performance was in it was just ridiculous. Yes, I understand that a better writer and director could've found a greater performance in him (James Cameron). But, for now, I think that it was a miscast. If they would've hired an actor who could've argued with the director on how they should've portrayed the character, the movie would've succeeded. Just my opinion.
 
Murphy turned down the role of Eddie Valiant (which went to Bob Hoskins) in Who Framed Roger Rabbit? and Chris Turckers role in Rush Hour.

Really? It really does sound like Eddie Murphy's been killing his career on purpose.
 
Honestly though, I don't know that those two roles looked all that appealing on paper. I mean, Roger Rabbit turned out to be a great film, but I could see how the concept could turn an actor off. I'll wager that Murphy wasn't the only actor that turned it down... I mean, Bob Hoskins is a pretty far cry from Eddie Murphy. It's likely that several high-profile guys didn't want anything to do with it.

As for Rush Hour... I personally thought that was crap, anyway. Murphy wouldn't have been much of an improvement over Chris Sucker.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"