Which actor just didn't suit their film/TV role?

[Bloomer]

Chris Rock in Spiral
Chris Rock in Fargo S4
Brad Pitt in Sleepers

[Kilpi]

Loved Jodie Whittaker in Broadchurch, but she was so wrong for Dr. Who. (Bad writing on her seasons hasn't helped)

I don't know if it's because I got spoiled by several seasons of David Tennant and Matt Smith, but I didn't like Capaldis Doctor either. I think I watched his first season, couple episodes of the second, but haven't seen a single episode before that. Been meaning to rewatch all of DT and MS though, now that I've seen them all once, I can skip the horrible episodes here and there (luckily Father's Day is in season 1).

[RH92]

There are so many people involved in these kind of projects. Harry Potter from the onset was a corporate undertaking, unlike other big movie franchises that grew out of success. HP started in a place of extreme success and was milked for every last billion it was worth. I don't think any single person could've influenced any of it without filtering it through corporate first, even JKR herself.

If I had to guess (and guess is all we can do), they cast Gambon on purpose because they feared book Dumbledore might've been boring in the sixth film. Who knows.

I can see your point but I think it is mainly the writers fault to be honest.

In my opinion it was a controversial decision to simply raise the drama in the movie, a "Oh my god, this must be some real shit happening that even Dumbledore is losing his mind over it" type of thing. Frankly I never gave a shit about Harry Potter franchise so I have no idea what else is in the conflict with source material. However writers and directors often change a source material quite drastically to fit the medium of a film - the pace of a movie is different to a pace of a book.

For example in Lord of the Rings the battle of Amon Hen (When Sean Bean dies again) originally happens in Two Towers but Peter Jackson decided to put it at the end of The Fellowship of the Ring to give it a sense of closure as it was the moment that actually broke the fellowship. However even the beloved trilogy was not perfect, for example I remember people being pissed off because movie Faramir was tempted by the ring unlike his book version - people felt it was a violation of his character. However it wasn't David Wenham's decision to alter this core trait.

[Biomega]

No Dragonball Evolution?

You think ANY other actors could have saved that pile of excrement? That film's problem weren't the actors. It was... everything else.

[DingDongKing]

Sienna Miller in everything. How she has a career is beyond me.

[Shadowferal]

Topher Grace as Venom.
Emilia Clarke as Sarah Connor...who in no way resembled a hardened combat veteran.
Johnny Depp as Grindlewald. He certainly didn't look anything like the Grindlewald that we glimpse in the first Hallows movie, young or older.
Johnny Depp as Barnabus Collins. But then much of "Dark Shadows" was fucked up from the beginning.

[starstationprofm]

Nicolas Cage was going to be Aragorn. Jesus Christ.

- - - Updated - - -

Emilia Clarke as Daenerys, but of course Jon Snow was even younger.

In the books shes like 12 years old. It didn't save her from getting plowed by Khal Drogo though.

Edit: A lot of the characters were much younger in the books now that I think of it

And thank god they aged them up

[Thelxi]

I can see your point but I think it is mainly the writers fault to be honest.

In my opinion it was a controversial decision to simply raise the drama in the movie, a "Oh my god, this must be some real shit happening that even Dumbledore is losing his mind over it" type of thing. Frankly I never gave a shit about Harry Potter franchise so I have no idea what else is in the conflict with source material. However writers and directors often change a source material quite drastically to fit the medium of a film - the pace of a movie is different to a pace of a book.

For example in Lord of the Rings the battle of Amon Hen (When Sean Bean dies again) originally happens in Two Towers but Peter Jackson decided to put it at the end of The Fellowship of the Ring to give it a sense of closure as it was the moment that actually broke the fellowship. However even the beloved trilogy was not perfect, for example I remember people being pissed off because movie Faramir was tempted by the ring unlike his book version - people felt it was a violation of his character. However it wasn't David Wenham's decision to alter this core trait.

I can sympathize with the people upset over that, and it is indeed quite similar to what I am talking about, and there were ways in which the writing also failed to illustrate Dumbledore's part in the story, but no single writer or director told Gambon to nasally yell at students to shut up while he theatrically "thinks" about something he just can't figure out. From the ground up his portrayal is off, from his dirty fingernails to his weight and height to his lack of self-control. We can bring into the speculation the costume department and the casting department and their employers, but at the end of the day it was his acting job, and this is a thread about actors.

[Relikk]

John Wayne as Ghenghis Khan

Yikes!

John Wayne as anything, really. "He couldn't act the bollocks" as we say here.

[Lodreh]

I know I'm going to get shit for this:

Keanu Reeves as Constantine. I enjoyed the movie but the look clashed with every fiber of my being.

[Daffan]

We know very little from the books about the older Grindelwald, don't we? Most of what we have direct access to is his youth, the older years are all indirect accounts of what he did, not so much actual portrayals of him. Irrespective of the accuracy, I personally found him EXCELLENT in the movies.

Biggest miscasting for me is Daniel Craig as James Bond. He looks more like a Russian agent than a British one, and his dour demeanor really clashes with the suave super-spy image the character had cultivated previously. (Controversial take: Pierce Brosnan was the best Bond. Sorry, Sean.)

Another bad casting is almost any Vulcan in Star Trek other than Leonard Nimoy and Tim Russ (who is not recognized enough for being THE perfect Vulcan, I mean holy hell does he do a good job...). It's a tough ask for actors to play characters defined by their lack of emotion, but a lot of them don't even TRY to make it work. Ridiculous.

I agree with you on Craig. It's way too rough and doesn't fit the mold of Suave Sean or lmao 'Picturesque' Pierce or really anyone in-between. Some people like Craig just because it's 'different' or 'hardened' like the movies are meant to be some sort of hardcore CIA crime syndicate rubbish.

[Nihilist74]

Charlie Sheen in Platoon. Platoon is one of the greatest war movies made. Charlie Sheen is a terrible actor though. Oliver Stone got a decent performance out of him but it would have been better with a better actor.

[Mihalik]

Benedict Cumberbatch as Khan in Star Trek. He's a good actor and had good malice, but he lacked the physical and structured air of superiority that Ricardo had. Old Khan, you could tell just by looking at him this is someone not to fuck with. New Khan just looks like a superpowered nerd cause he doesn't have the physical appearance to pull off the feats he did.

Ricardo Montalban was a beast, had the personal aura and charm of someone like Sean Connery or Jack Nicholson and the acting chops of someone like Anthony Hopkins or Marlon Brando. Pretty fucking tall order to live up to. I really can't quite think of a younger actor these days that could pull that off. Like a serious actor who is also willingly to fully embrace the theatrical eccentricity of the character while still being menacing and charming.

The Rock in Jungle Cruise was a pretty huge misfire for me. He just didn't work for me as a 450 year old reformed Spanish Conquistador turned scam artist/adventurer. He also just didn't work as a romantic lead.

They really should have used someone like Javier Bardem (if they wanted an actor who looks like he can shit all over anyone in a brawl), Viggo Mortensen (can speak Spanish and English without an accent) or Benicio Del Toro.

[RH92]

I can sympathize with the people upset over that, and it is indeed quite similar to what I am talking about, and there were ways in which the writing also failed to illustrate Dumbledore's part in the story, but no single writer or director told Gambon to nasally yell at students to shut up while he theatrically "thinks" about something he just can't figure out. From the ground up his portrayal is off, from his dirty fingernails to his weight and height to his lack of self-control. We can bring into the speculation the costume department and the casting department and their employers, but at the end of the day it was his acting job, and this is a thread about actors.

I understand your frustration.

As I said, Michael Gambon is known to ignore source material and having no knowledge of character himself. If this wasn't the case, he could still give a more grounded performance faithful to the source of adaptation even if everything else fails - the writing, directing and even production.

I am honestly amazed how the hell he can still get a job when he is such an ignorant lunatic (the dude is indeed crazy).

[Ihavewaffles]

daniel craig isn't bond, stop casting that guy..

Last jason bourne movie didn't have matt damon, daniel craig would have fit right in.

Nicolas Cage was going to be Aragorn. Jesus Christ.

thx, now im gonna have nightmares for weeks...

[Dch48]

Are you trolling? Serious question. Timothy Dalton's Bond is the prototype for Daniel Craig's Bond. You could pull Dalton out of the 80s films and drop him into the current set and it wouldn't be that far off in portrayal. I find it unfathomable that you can have Dalton as your favorite and not like Craig.

Dalton had the look, Craig doesn't

- - - Updated - - -

Controversial, but Rick from TWD. The accent and overall performance gave me anxiety with how exaggerated and obviously fake they were. Way too strained. Takes me out of my immersion.

- - - Updated - - -

Also, Michael Gambon as Dumbledore is by far the most offensively unfaithful portrayal of any character I have ever seen. Not only does he not portray the character he is supposed to, but manages to portray opposite traits while butchering the character. Where Dumbledore is calm and whimsical most of the time, Gambon is erratic, aggressive even violent with students (lol!). Where Dubmbledore is the most powerful wizard alive, absolutely terrifying when he (rarely) reveals his power and the only person Voldemort actually fears, Gambon is a sassy old man yelling at the top of his lungs hoping to impress somebody.

To be fair he clearly received some feedback and seriously dialed back his absurdly incorrect performance in the last couple of movies, but holy shit he should lose his acting license just for his performance in the fourth movie alone.

If I ever get to talk to JKR this is the first and probably only thing I will be discussing with her lol.

Rick was great. Andrew Lincoln nailed it and didn't really have an accent at all. As far as Dumbledore goes, I didn't even realize that they had changed actors until I really looked. Gambon was fine and seamlessly carried out the transition. I will admit though that I have never read any of the Potter books or TWD comics. I haven't read any of the LOTR books either so the movie characters are what I know and I'm fine with them. I did read all of the Bond novels though and my biggest criticism of the Daniel Craig casting is that he just doesn't have the look.

[Dakhath]

Probably showing my age here, but Kevin Costner in Robin Hood, Prince of Thieves. Loved the movie when I was younger, and I think Costner is great, but watching it now it seems like they grabbed a guy from small town USA and put him in an English period piece.

[ohwell]

Hell, the Lex in Lois and Clark had hair, and he was well into his billionaire adult phase, like mid-40s to 50s. And he was also tall and lanky. He only lost his hair in the second season, much like Jesse's Lex.

The Lex from Smallville was bald, but also not bulky. Really Spacey's Lex was the only "bulky" Lex of the newer Superman reprisals (don't know how Lex was depicted before Lois and Clark, tbh).

I think Jesse was poorly directed in that film, tbh. He seemed more sinister and fucking twisted in The Social Network playing Mark Zuckerberg, than playing Lex in a Superman movie, where he came off zany and wacky (almost Riddler or Joker-esque).

I was talking more the animated/comic depictions of the middle aged(I think cloned also in some cases) versions of him that seemed more beefy(even compared to the previously seen versions of Lex). Although it could have just been when he had a beard it seemed like he was beefier when he wasn't. There are teen versions of Lex seen that match up to the BVS version although they didn't stammer like him so I draw back to what you were saying(and others have said) it falls on the directors often to either correct something or they're the actual source of the problem.

[Lanrefni]

Probably showing my age here, but Kevin Costner in Robin Hood, Prince of Thieves. Loved the movie when I was younger, and I think Costner is great, but watching it now it seems like they grabbed a guy from small town USA and put him in an English period piece.

Robin Hood Men in Tights is still the best Robin Hood movie ever made,Prince of Thieves was redeemed solely by the scenery chewing of Alan Rickman,it was otherwise crap.

[Ayirasi]

Robin Hood Men in Tights is still the best Robin Hood movie ever made,Prince of Thieves was redeemed solely by the scenery chewing of Alan Rickman,it was otherwise crap.

Every Rickman scene, and one Slater line: