Casting mis-steps

[montavilla47]

> Carol earlier:
> > > However, zanooda wanted an example of miscasting. I'll try to find one that everyone can agree on. How about Judi Dench as Narcissa Malfoy or Hugh Grant as Wormtail? I was going to say Keira Knightley as Professor Sprout, but that's too extreme, right? No one would ever consider it.
> > > 
> > > Carol, tossing out what she considers to be humorous casting ideas
> 
> > Montavilla47 resonded:
> > 
> > Hugh Grant would be a hoot as Wormtail!  True, he's not a blond, but that would be the only drawback.
> 
> Carol:
> Was Wormtail blond? All I remember is that he was short and, as an adult, formerly fat (he might have had some skin hanging off him-ugh!). He had a pointy nose and possibly a weak chin. As a kid, he was a "little lump of a boy." So I can't imagine Hugh Grant in the role. He's just too good looking.

Montavilla47:
It's true that he's good-looking, but to my mind, physical details are 
less important than the qualities of an actor.  I'm not using "qualities" 
in the sense of excellence, but in the sense of non-physical character
traits.  I've seen Hugh Grant portray qualities of cowardice and 
nervousness and he's very funny doing that.  

Also, Hugh Grant does have a somewhat weak chin.  At least I recall
him playing characters with weak chins.  A pointy nose is easy to create
with make-up--and it's easy to do without looking made up.

I've never heard anyone say a bad word about the actor who plays
Neville Longbottom, but I don't find him at all like Neville physically.
Neville is also described as blond and "moon-faced."  Starting in
POA, Matthew Lewis has been anything but moon-faced.  Also, he
wears fake teeth as Neville in order to make him look less
handsome.

But we don't really care what he looks like, do we?  He's perfect for
the part his acting and that's what's important.

A lot of this discussion has focused on how Clemence Poesy is wrong
for the part of Fleur because she doesn't "look" stunning enough.  
My problem isn't so much her looks--she might have benefited from
better costuming and a lighter tint to her hair--but that they 
didn't give her anything to do in the film.  As a character, Fleur isn't
so much about being beautiful as about being vain and self-
centered.  With practically no lines or scenes, just how was Poesy 
supposed to convey that?

> Montavilla47: 
> > I always imagined Umbridge as being Judi Dench.  I so wanted her to play that part--especially if they had left in the cat fight between  McGonagall and Umbridge.  But, barring that, Imelda Staunton was a great choice.
> 
> Carol responds:
> Big difference in age, though. Judi Dench at, say, 50--perfect! Failing that, we can settle for Imelda, who had the right walk and voice but wasn't sufficiently toadlike. Then, again, who'd want her Umbridge to be more repulsive and despicable than she already was?

Montavilla47:
I agree.  Judi Dench is old for the part, although I'm sure there were
ways to make her look younger.  Again, that's done all the time and 
usually successfully.  (Although people complained that Emma Thompson
was too old to play Elenor in "Sense and Sensibility," she was still 
magnificent in the part.)

But I don't think we were settling with Staunton.  She's a terrific
actress, either comic or dramatic.  To see her in a dramatic role, 
I would suggest "Vera Drake," although the subject matter (pre-
legal abortions) may be objectionable to some.

For comic roles, she was great in "Sense and Sensibility."


Carol:
> BTW, Sir Ian McKellen is campaigning for more parts for older actresses (with Judi Dench in mind). Both Imelda Staunton and Julie Walters (Molly Weasley) have signed a petition originated by the actors union Equity, presumably at Sir Ian's instigation. Go, Gandalf!
> 
> http://us.imdb.com/name/nm0001767/news#ni0820477

Montavilla47:
Good!  There are never enough roles for older actresses.  And
Helen Mirren seems to be playing all of them!


> Montavilla 47: 
> > As for Keira Knightley as Professor Sprout--I suppose it would  depend on your conception of the part.  I don't think Madam Sprout is described much at all, other than being short?  Is she even referred to as short?  It's not like Keira Knightley can't get muddy.  She was  very muddy at times in "Pride and Prejudice."
> >
> Carol responds:
> 
> I thought that Professor Sprout was dumpy and middle-aged (by WW standards)--a squat little witch with flyaway hair and patches on her clothes, according to CoS. A pretty, perky, slender young woman just wouldn't be right even with the patches, IMO. I think that Miriam Margolyes has the right look. Madam Hooch (I forget who played her) was well cast, too. James Potter, OTOH--much too old. Unless, possibly, the parents in the mirror were supposed to be the age they'd be when Harry was eleven--but the Lily protecting Harry and the Lily in the mirror are the same age, that can't be the case. JKR should have said something to prevent that problem. (It's odd that Book!Harry himself didn't notice that his parents looked only ten years older than he was at the time. Even an eleven-year-old can tell a twenty-something from a thirty-something!)
> 

Montavilla47:
See, my objection to Keira Knightley wouldn't be that she was 
slender or young, but that she comes off (to me) about as 
warm and maternal as a slab of marble.  

Zoe Wanamaker played Madame Hooch.  

Honestly, the players of James and Lily never bothered me.  I
think it would be more jarring for the audience if they had been
played by twenty-year-olds.  

Of course, it might have started the audience thinking about
how young James and Lily really were, which wouldn't necessarily
be a bad thing.

But I think it would have been confusing, especially for children
watching the film to see James and Lily looking more like 
Harry's older siblings than his parents.


Carol:
> I second whoever said that Robbie Coltrane is perfect as Hagrid. I also think that Emma Thompson was brilliant as Trelawney. Too bad she can't come back to drop a few crystal balls on DEs' heads for DH2.

Montavilla47:
I think Robbie Coltrane is amazing as Hagrid.  He's amazing in 
just anything he does.  In the late eighties he played Falstaff in
Kenneth Branagh's "Henry V."  Heh.  Looking at the IMDB, I see
he was in his late thirties at the time.  Here I was thinking he 
was in his twenties.  He's only four years younger than Alan
Rickman!



> Carol, who would have liked to see Keira Knightley as Tonks

Montavilla47:

I think that would have been excellent casting.  As you can
probably tell, I don't much care for Keira Knightley, but I 
think she would have brought some charisma to that part 
which would help if they intend to include the Remus/Tonks
love story.