I thought I said no more Matt Damon rumours.
IGN.com is reporting that Matt Damon really is in talks to play "the young James T. Kirk" in Star Trek XI, even though the character is supposed to be over a decade younger in the movie than he was in the TV series, and even though Damon is already one year older than William Shatner was when he created the character.
But it gets better.
IGN.com also reports that Adrien Brody and Gary Sinise have been approached to play Leonard Nimoy and DeForest Kelley-- er, I mean, Mr. Spock and Dr. Leonard H. McCoy, respectively.
Shatner and Nimoy were 35, and Kelley was 46, when the original TV series went into production in 1966.
Damon turned 36 a few months ago, Brody turns 34 in April, and Sinise turns 52 in March.
If this movie takes place during the original series, I have no beef with this casting, at least not on this level -- though I would, of course, have a whole bunch of other questions about the movie as a whole. But if this movie really is supposed to take place during the characters' Starfleet Academy days -- over ten years before the original five-year mission that brought them all together on the Enterprise -- then, um, what sense does any of this make?
FEB 27 UPDATE: I forgot to mention, IGN.com also claims Daniel Dae Kim is being considered to play Sulu. George Takei was 29 when the original series began. Kim turns 39 this summer.
But it gets better.
IGN.com also reports that Adrien Brody and Gary Sinise have been approached to play Leonard Nimoy and DeForest Kelley-- er, I mean, Mr. Spock and Dr. Leonard H. McCoy, respectively.
Shatner and Nimoy were 35, and Kelley was 46, when the original TV series went into production in 1966.
Damon turned 36 a few months ago, Brody turns 34 in April, and Sinise turns 52 in March.
If this movie takes place during the original series, I have no beef with this casting, at least not on this level -- though I would, of course, have a whole bunch of other questions about the movie as a whole. But if this movie really is supposed to take place during the characters' Starfleet Academy days -- over ten years before the original five-year mission that brought them all together on the Enterprise -- then, um, what sense does any of this make?
FEB 27 UPDATE: I forgot to mention, IGN.com also claims Daniel Dae Kim is being considered to play Sulu. George Takei was 29 when the original series began. Kim turns 39 this summer.
posted by Peter T Chattaway at 3:08 PM
3 Comments:
make-up does some wonderful things, Peter.
why, i distinctly remember a movie where gary sinise had no legs. and then come to find out, he did in the next movies after that.
yep, the miracles of make-up!
You know, given how fundamentlaly opposed I am to recasting those parts in the first place, the ages of the actors scarcely seems to even matter to me. :)
I don't see the problem with ages so much, as many people don't tend to age much between their early twenties and mid-thirties.
A bigger problem, as I see it, is the casting of established celebrities in the roles. It will smack of novelty rather than reinvigorating the dead franchise with a new cast. Can we really expect these name-above-the-title actors to carry on in these roles, or, if the film is successful, will we see them re-cast again in just a few years?
Post a Comment
<< Home