The Geek Beat: High and Lowbrow
Filed under: Comic/Superhero/Geek, The Geek Beat
Late last week, news broke that Anthony Hopkins had joined the cast of Thor as the Nordic paterfamilias, Odin. As I was writing up the news, I could practically see the Thor coverage that will titter across USA Weekend, Entertainment Tonight, and the local newspapers that are still landing on your driveway by 2010 and 2011. There will be so many articles shocked (shocked!) that an actor of Hopkins' caliber has chosen to embrace the pulp of the colored panels, smirking at pervasiveness of the geek trend, and engaging in shallow cultural criticism. It will look remarkably like USA Weekend's goggle-eyed look at the ladies of Iron Man, The Dark Knight, and The Incredible Hulk back in 2008.
Now, there's no doubt that the pages of Marvel, DC, and all the Dark Horses in between are being taken far more seriously than they once were. I think it's also becoming a bit of a Hollywood trend, and that many A-List actors want a little piece of the superhero pie, to permanently become part of the Marvel or DC universe. I believe a very similar trend sprung up around Disney animation in the 1990s, when everyone longed to voice a Disney character of their own and be permanently installed at the Magic Kingdom. Nowadays, animated characters are so superfluous that even McLovin' has a CG-3D flick to his resume, and the characters are forgotten as soon as the next Burger King tie-in comes out.
When I first began writing this column, I believed that comic book adaptations would reach such a point of saturation as to eat its own tail. But then Disney bought Marvel, and DC ballooned into something equally huge, and there's no end in sight. We're rapidly reaching a point when superheroes are going to become casual mentions on an Oscar winning resume. But you know what's really surprising? That's not new.
Think back, all the way back, to 1978. That's when Richard Donner's Superman: The Movie hit theaters and kicked off a trend that would continue all the way down to us in the aughts. It also began a tradition we've forgotten in our squealing over the illustrious casts of Thor, Iron Man 2, and The Dark Knight, and that's one of great casting. Even in its pre-production stages, the biggest and brightest names were chased down for the cape. Superman was such an iconic character that his tights were seriously offered to everyone from Paul Newman, Robert Redford, Steve McQueen, James Caan, and Clint Eastwood. Now, I'm not denying that every one of these actors may have turned it down because they felt it was a childish or campy part. But I think it speaks to the general perception that an iconic character needed a macho, iconic man to play him. I don't believe the press would have screamed "Geek chic!" if Redford had decided to fight for truth, justice, and the American way. It would have been natural. Big name, big part.
Donner's Superman famously chose an unknown for the part, but it's not as though the rest of the cast was anything to sneer at. This is a film that boasts Marlon Brando, Gene Hackman, and Glenn Ford in supporting roles. That's a casting coup for 1978, but now? Now it would be evidence to critics that even Brando had to cater to fanboys.
Donner's Superman wasn't an anomaly, though. Tim Burton's Batman didn't exactly plumb the depths of the D-List for its Batman or Joker. Mel Gibson and Kevin Costner were serious contenders (among many others, including Bill Murray who is a choice I am still perplexed by), and I don't think anyone would have been surprised to see the sexiest man alive take the part. (Mr. Mom -- now that was a surprise.) I do remember there was a lot of shock, awe and excitement when Jack Nicholson took the part of the Joker, but it didn't raise the kind of eyebrows it would today. Now, Jason Patric joining The Losers causes ripples of wonder.
Even as comic movies fell into that deep, nipples-on-the-Batsuit place we don't like to remember, the casting has always been good. Tommy Lee Jones wasn't necessarily a lousy choice to play Two-Face (a little too craggy and mature, perhaps), it was the interpretation of the character that was bad. George Clooney would probably have been a decent Batman had the film been less about Batman's codpiece. But by then, superheroes had the whiff of the slums about them and Clooney wasn't derided for playing to the geeks, but for his desperation. (Remember the days when critics and audiences said Clooney should have stuck to television? Heady times.)
My point is that it's simply the quantity of adaptations that's increased, not necessarily the quality of talent drawn to them. If you really know your comics and movies (and fans do -- it's those who put together flashy cover stories who seem a little out of it), it shouldn't even be surprising that an actor like Hopkins is drawn to Asgard. The grandiose settings aren't that far removed from Shakespeare or Maryland mental institutions, the characters aren't any more unbelievable than Titus Andronicus or Hannibal Lecter. The dialogue is simpler, the costumes a little flashier, but it's all produced for the masses. It's all larger than life, and it's pretty a fine line that puts pulp on the right or wrong side of the Oscars. I hope that the critics and analysts begin to reevaluation this particular genre, and recognize that actors and directors aren't signing on out of a great need to pander to a convention crowd.
Black Friday Movie Deals: Best Buy
Sex and Nudity Don't Draw You to the Movies?
What Makes a Real Vampire?
Robert Downey Jr. Wants to Retire?
Jaycee Dugard's Horrific Story to Get a Sleazy Adaptation
_thumbnail.jpg)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
11-03-2009 @ 9:45PM
The Mutt said...
Thanks for this perceptive article.
You could also have mention Laurence Olivier in Clash of the Titans. Orson Welles in Transformers. Peter O'Toole in Supergirl. And many, many more.
There was a time when there was a stigma attached to appearing in genre films. Some A-List careers were derailed by taking a role in the wrong movie. (Vincent Price. Anthony Perkins. Donald Pleasance.) That doesn't seem to be the case anymore, and that's a very good thing.
I myself have played Macbeth and and elf in a supermarket commercial. In that order.
Actors act. It's what we do.
Reply
11-04-2009 @ 3:38AM
Elisabeth said...
There were so many I wanted to mention! Alec Guinness in Star Wars certainly is worth noting (even if he did regret it), Patrick Stewart and Ian McKellen in X-Men, though they were arguably unknown to a lot of people unfamiliar with Star Trek or Shakespeare productions.
The Harry Potter films have been a real pinnacle of great casting, and despite their "childish" content, they aren't held up to the same derision by the media.
The article actually started out as a "Isn't it great superhero movies can hire people like Anthony Hopkins?" and turned into a realization that it *wasn't* particularly new to have solid casting in "geek" films. It's just that we've gotten very fond of labeling them and shoving them into convention center corners.
I'm glad you liked it, though. I'm just happy when they turn out readable!
11-04-2009 @ 1:58AM
villageidjut said...
Well put.
Hell,even Frank Langella has no regrets about playing Skeletor.
Who wouldn't want to be a superhero/villain,ya know?
Unless the head of the developing studio happens to be Tom Rothman...
Reply
11-04-2009 @ 10:34AM
Kill Shakespeare said...
I really believe that comic books (whether they are superhero-based or otherwise) are the modern version of operas or Shakespeare's plays. They feature larger-than-life characers and grand situations, involving life, death, violence, sex and everything else in-between. They are the trademarks of great entertainment. And more people are realizing this.
I'm interested to see what Kenneth Branah will do with "Thor" - and what other actors/directors/talent will do with other comic book-based properties.
Reply