More 'Watchmen' Cast Leaked
Filed under: Sci-Fi & Fantasy, Casting, Mystery & Suspense, Warner Brothers, RumorMonger, Fandom, Comic/Superhero/Geek, ComicCon
In less than a week, we should get the official word on Watchmen casting. I think it's Friday that Zack Snyder will be presenting information about his graphic novel adaptation to the crowds at ComicCon. But we may already know everything he's going to tell us. Despite some unlikely casting rumors that have floated about -- I always had my doubts about Kate Winslet -- we've gotten good tips and heard from reliable sources. The names keep coming in, though, and the latest is actor Matthew Goode, who is said to be playing the wealthy Adrian Veidt, otherwise known as Oxymandias Ozymandias. Goode, who you may know from Match Point or Imagine Me and You, replaces the rumored Jude Law in the role. As with Winslet, I had my doubts about Law, because even though his movies don't perform well, he is too big a star for such an ensemble cast. Of course, it is possible that he was offered a part and turned it down, like Keanu Reeves reportedly did.
While Goode is not a well-known actor, he should be able to fill the purple shoes of Ozymandias just fine. For a second I had my doubts about him handling the story's third act, but then I imagined him perfectly (well, maybe he's a bit young). According to the most reliable information (or leaks), the cast is now as follows: Goode as Ozymandias, Billy Crudup as Dr. Manhattan, Patrick Wilson as The (younger) Nite Owl, Malin Akerman as (the younger) Silk Spectre and Jackie Earle Haley as Rorschach. There's still little mention of Thomas Jane or Gerard Butler these days, and we don't have an official unofficial name for The Comedian yet (both actors were linked to the tiny role). All we have, really, is an official plot synopsis and four days until we hear the confirmations directly from the mouths of the studio and director. And don't worry about not making it to the convention -- Cinematical should have those confirmations for you as soon as they happen.










Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
7-23-2007 @ 10:59AM
RP said...
"he is too big a star for such an ensemble cast"
That's exactly why i think he'd be perfect for the role of Veidt.
Reply
7-23-2007 @ 11:19AM
Christopher Campbell said...
I know, RP, I have thought the same way. But I think it goes both ways. A superstar should play the character, but also I think because of the ending that it is better if you don't think Veidt has a big role. With Law you would assume that his part would be significant.
Reply
7-23-2007 @ 12:30PM
nelson said...
I also assume bringing stardom to a role just distracts from the character. And if that actor has done many similar roles or has some distinct mannerisms or some such associated with them, you could be thinking "Hey, i'm watching Jude Law as Ozymandias", and not "Hey, i'm watching the smartest man on earth in an antarctic fortress."
Reply
7-23-2007 @ 6:35PM
Martin Conaghan said...
Ozymandias, not 'Oxymandias'!
Reply
7-23-2007 @ 8:47PM
Don't Panic! said...
Just remember folks; "It's only a movie". Personally I'd like to see unknown actors who fit the books charecters pyhsical charecteristics bring this book to life. After all it was a graphic novel.
Reply
7-23-2007 @ 10:57PM
Christopher Campbell said...
Martin: I really thought it was Ozymandias and yet I trusted that IESB had it right instead of checking with my copy of the book (or Wikipedia, or anywhere). Thanks for the correction. The funny thing is that I didn't trust they had Akerman's name correct and checked that one out and changed it. D'oh!
Reply
7-24-2007 @ 9:09AM
Michael said...
I think that Goode is a perfect choice for this role. He was excellent in Match Point and he really comes across as a younger version of Jude Law anyway. I think that a nice meaty role such as this will bring him into the spotlight more and he can start appearing in more stuff afterward. He is a terrific young actor and I feel he's got a great career in store for him if he can just get the exposure he deserves.
Personally, I'm not a big fan of those mega-star vehicles Hollywood is prone to put together. Nine times out of ten, they disappoint more than they please. Of course, it also runs the budget up to where the films cost a ridiculous amount. That's one of the reasons "Transformers" did so well this summer. I read more than one article that proclaimed how Michael Bay put all the cost of the film on screen instead of in the actors' pockets. A trend worth following as far as I'm concerned.
http://www.myspace.com/scoobarama
Reply