I didn’t go to see Exodus recently.
I have three main reasons for this:
- It’s a bible film, and they generally suck.
- It’s a CGI-heavy film, and I’m getting sick of those
- It has a Welsh American playing a Hebrew Egyptian in the lead.
Between those three factors, I really couldn’t bring myself to see it. But it did get me thinking, which other historical (or close historical) films could have been better cast?
#1 The Lone Ranger
2013’s Lone Ranger pic flopped in a big way. One of the biggest issues with the film was Johnny Depp, playing a sidekick with higher billing than the main character. This despite the fact that that character has the word ‘Lone’ in their title. With such a major player in the role, it upset the whole dynamic of the movie. Casting a first nations actor like Cowboys and Aliens’ Adam Beach would have lent a bit more credibility to the Tonto role, while putting the focus back to the title character.
I get that you don’t want to cast a Greek/Macedonian/Whatever actor in this role. For a film of this size, they need to be world-famous, with the charisma to match. With that in mind, why the hell was Farrell cast? His biggest roles before this had been in Minority Report opposite Tom Cruise, and in Daredevil, opposite Ben Affleck, both of whom would have been better in this role.
Ok, now we’re really risking arguments. Braveheart was a great film. But was Mel Gibson the right person to play William Wallace? It’s debatable. These days Gerrard Butler would be a shoe-in, but he didn’t really break until 2004. The only major-league Scots actor at the time was Sean Connery, who might not’ve done the film any favours either (see Highlander for more details). Other potential contenders include Ewan McGregor and Kevin McKidd from “Rome”. I still feel like I’m missing someone though…
Say it with me: “They may take our lives, but they’ll never take… Spartaaaaa!”