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

[RobertoCarlos]

Emilia clarke as Sarah Connor. She's tiny and at one point in the movie you're supposed to believe she can hold a terminator as it dangles over a bridge.

Tom cruise as Jack reacher.

Every single casting choice for avatar the last airbender.

The rock in skyscraper. Seriously wtf was that movie and why did we need a giant wrestler as a man missing a leg

[upliftmonk]

I think Daniel Craig is a great James Bond but I don't think they are writing very good movies for him. I liked the 2nd one he was in. The first and third ones were pretty boring though.

For clarity, order of the films was:

1st - Casino Royale
2nd - Quantum of Solace
3rd - Skyfall
4th - Spectre

Now this is a hot take. I'm actually super onboard with Quantum of Solace, I think that movie was a lot better than people give it credit for.

But damn, blazing hot take that Casino Royale is boring, that's personally my favorite of Craig's Bond films, pretty sure it was the best received by fans and critics out of all Craig's Bond films too. Was not a big fan of Skyfall, I also think it was pretty boring, it had good scenes but the pacing was genuinely atrocious.

+1 on Quantum though, not the strongest Bond film from Craig, but the general consensus seems to be that it's bad, which I don't agree with at all. B+ movie IMO.

[RobertoCarlos]

For clarity, order of the films was:

1st - Casino Royale
2nd - Quantum of Solace
3rd - Skyfall
4th - Spectre

Now this is a hot take. I'm actually super onboard with Quantum of Solace, I think that movie was a lot better than people give it credit for.

But damn, blazing hot take that Casino Royale is boring, that's personally my favorite of Craig's Bond films, pretty sure it was the best received by fans and critics out of all Craig's Bond films too. Was not a big fan of Skyfall, I also think it was pretty boring, it had good scenes but the pacing was genuinely atrocious.

+1 on Quantum though, not the strongest Bond film from Craig, but the general consensus seems to be that it's bad, which I don't agree with at all. B+ movie IMO.

Craig himself is on record saying quantum is pretty much crap and is unhappy with Quantum because they had to string it together with no idea what the plot was because it was hit hard by a writers strike.

[Nihilist74]

I liked quantum of solace. It was about the villain setting it up so that he could gouge the country by controlling the water supply. I don't think I have seen spectre. Oh yah, I have seen spectre. I will have to watch them again to see how I feel about them.
I had not seen these four James bond movies with daniel Craig for a long time. I rewatched them the other day and I feel that they were all pretty good. I like Daniel Craig as an edgier James bond.

[Lanrefni]

I liked quantum of solace. It was about the villain setting it up so that he could gouge the country by controlling the water supply.

I'm still wondering why he even bothered doing all that illegally when he could have done it via 3rd party shell corporations and had it all done legally,throw a few 7 figure "political contributions" around and the government would have backed his play.

[Sterling Archer]

H. Jon Benjamin looks nothing like his role in Wet Hot American Summer.

[Shadowferal]

That’s it. Cancel Christmas!

What? AGAIN?
That sumbitch from the north pole owes me from last year...

...dammit

[Val the Moofia Boss]

Viggo Mortensen as Aragorn.

In the book Aragorn was never "struggling to come to terms with his heritage"; he was mature, confidant, wise, and ready to take command right from the start. Also, Aragorn was fatherly figure, and a ranger who had really roughed it in the woods. The Aragorn depicted in the Ralph Bakshi film is more accurate.

[Leadsop]

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.

I rather liked him as Khan. I thought he was a much more intimidating and wicked bad guy than Ricardo Montalban was.

My submission: Kevin Costner as Robin Hood.

[The Stormbringer]

Let's hijack this thread. This is now a discussion about what Chicken Drummer actually is. My first guess? Someone is trying to program an A.I. to showcase the worst humanity has to offer and the easier way is to teach it what posters on a World of Warcraft fan forum are like.

I think someone has gone into it before. It's more likely someone building up answers for security questions by sampling them from large groups of people in the form of asking it in an innocuous way. Then they'll feed those answers to an AI that will churn through it and be used to hack into accounts.

[Inoculate]

Their lifespan isn't hugely longer than humans. Bilbo lived past 130 with the help of the One Ring, and 100 was considered old; so being in your 50s is definitely middle age and not youth, even for hobbits. Them being "of age" at 33 says more about their culture (it being very deliberate and laid back) than about their physical appearance.

In any event, it's common practice in films to cast way outside of the fictional age range. Plenty of "teenage" movies feature actors that are all VERY CLEARLY in their 20s, for example. Part of it is appearance, part of it is legalities (minors often need extra hoops), part of it is simply the fact that older actors tend to be easier to work with.

This. I also think it's true for humans. You don't really reach maturity until your 30s.

My addition - sean connery as a russian submarine captain in hunt for red October. Dude can't sound anything but as a drunk Scott.

[Adamas102]

Viggo Mortensen as Aragorn.

In the book Aragorn was never "struggling to come to terms with his heritage"; he was mature, confidant, wise, and ready to take command right from the start. Also, Aragorn was fatherly figure, and a ranger who had really roughed it in the woods. The Aragorn depicted in the Ralph Bakshi film is more accurate.

That doesn’t seem like an issue with miscasting. Pretty sure Viggo could have played that character just as well if it was what Peter Jackson had been aiming for.

I think there's also a strong argument to be made that Jackson's Aragorn is the superior version. As impressive as Tolkien's work is, I'm not under the illusion that it's all 100% perfect. Adaptations shouldn't be slaves to the source material and there are plenty of examples where an adaptation made an improvement on the original.

That's very different compared to casting choices like Kevin Costner (Robin Hood) and Keanu Reeves (Dracula) who couldn't even pull off the accent for the character they were hired to do.

[Queen of Hamsters]

Chris Rock in any-fucking-serious-role ever.

He single-handedly dragged Fargo Season 4 down, it could've been a slam dunk without his grating voice and lackluster acting chops. I have seen the trailers for Spiral, that's enough.

Horrible that he's getting roles he's simply not cut out for. Even at his most serious, he's still that zebra from Madagascar.

Some others:

Michael Gambon as Dumbledore, but I hated the entire turn the series took past the 2nd movie
Daniel Radcliffe as Harry Potter, and they couldn't even give him green eyes...
Gary Oldman as Sirius Black
Cameron Diaz in Gangs of New York
Emma Watson as a Disney Princess that had to be auto-tuned...

God I hope they do a proper reboot of the Harry Potter movies, and this time they do it far more truthfully to the books and the British culture surrounding the wizarding world. Jared Harris as Dumbledore would erase Michael Gambon's horrid performance. The caveat would be the roles that were so perfectly cast the first time around, like Snape, but alas... I'm sure Adam Driver could pull off a proper British accent.

[Vakna]

Johnny Depp did not fit as Grindelwald in the Fantastic Beasts movies. His look is just too outlandish and personally I don't think the type of character he portrays fits with how the character was described in the books.

Really? I thought he was a great Grindelwald, it's a shame he wont continue the role.

My pick is Jesse Eisenberg as Lex Luthor, yikers.

[jazen]

In that case...Keanu Reeves as Constantine or Tom Cruise as Jack Reacher?

Didn't much care about the Jack Reacher Film...but Constantine...I loved. Without the baggage of knowing the comics.

Yeah, Tom Cruise as Reacher was a stretch. Books describe him as tall, big not short/small....Like Tom Cruise as actor, didn't mind the movie, just didn't fit the role physically.

[draynay]

My addition - sean connery as a russian submarine captain in hunt for red October. Dude can't sound anything but as a drunk Scott.

Or an Irish cop or a Spanish/Egyptian swordsman

But I love him in all those movies all the same

[Queen of Hamsters]

NGL, when it comes to Jesse Eisenberg as Lex Luthor, I was more or less expecting him to be a red herring for the REAL Lex Luthor's entrance later on.

I just could not believe that they'd cast the role so badly, and allowed Jesse Eisenberg to keep up his best impersonation of Mickey Mouse on ADD-meds...

[segara82]

NGL, when it comes to Jesse Eisenberg as Lex Luthor, I was more or less expecting him to be a red herring for the REAL Lex Luthor's entrance later on.

I just could not believe that they'd cast the role so badly, and allowed Jesse Eisenberg to keep up his best impersonation of Mickey Mouse on ADD-meds...

That's because he is based on Alexander Luthor Jr, Lex's son:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexan...hor_Jr.#New_52

But, yes, the director still dropped the ball on the char. Even AL jr. is usually smarter than that.

[AcidicSyn]

Well, age is very often adjusted in adaptation for various reasons. Not having a 12-year old have sex on screen I think I'm entirely willing to accept as a reason.

Reverse for LotR, funnily enough, where Frodo was in his 50s in the book. Which I'm sure they chose to adjust because they wanted the main character to look younger and have broader appeal.

I wouldn't really count that as a miscasting, though. It's not like they saw Clarke and went "man we really wanted a preteen but okay, let's go with this one"; they'd have done that either way.

Actually for LotR the decision is because Frodo, while being in his 50s, does not look like what a human in their 50s would look like. Remember hobbits come of age at 30, while humans do typically between 16 and 20.

So casting someone who was actually in their 50's would be more along the lines of a hobbit in their 80s or 90s. Same with Aragorn, who is something like 85.

[Biomega]

Actually for LotR the decision is because Frodo, while being in his 50s, does not look like what a human in their 50s would look like. Remember hobbits come of age at 30, while humans do typically between 16 and 20.

Already addresses this earlier. Nowhere does it say they look youthful in that age range, and even if you scale it exactly to average lifespan (~80 for humans and ~100 for hobbits, or about 25% more) then 50s is STILL far from young (human ~37 years old adjusted for 25% higher hobbit lifespan).