Ain't It Cool News (
Movie News

X-MEN: Casting: Jim Caviezel passes on Cyclops

Oh well, I kinda hate that, but now the rumor bin is open full throttle again as Cyclops is up for grabs again. I'm very very curious about this one. Just as long as it isn't Eddie Furlong.

Hey man, just thought I'd drop a note to you that Jim Caviezel decided to pass on the role of Cyclops in the X-Men movie. The only character he really felt had any depth was Wolverine, and that cutting off his legs below the knees to meet the height requirement for that part would be going a little too far. So Jim's decided to work on a Robert Redford project that apparently is perfect for him. Thanks for listening, I'll eat the viallagers later.


Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • July 27, 1999, 3:01 a.m. CST

    Would That Redford Project Be...

    by Moriarty

    THE LEGEND OF BAGGER VANCE? And if so, what about Brad Pitt? I thought he was going to play the lead in the picture. I can't imagine using bronzed god Caveizal opposite bronzed god Pitt, so someone's got to go. This is one of those films where I'm actually hoping Pitt does stay involved. Redford is one of only two directors (Fincher being the other) who's gotten great work out of Pitt. A RIVER RUNS THROUGH IT is a marvelous film, and I'd love a reunion of this sort. Shame about X-MEN, though. "Moriarty" out.

  • July 27, 1999, 3:16 a.m. CST

    oh well...

    by Billy Idol

    Cavziel or however the fuck you spell it would have been a good Cyclops. The only other person I can think of off the top of my head is Ed Burns, he might be good. Maybe Singer could cast an unknown, he seems to be moving in a cool casting direction so casting an unknown for such a major role wouldn't be too suprising. oh well, the movie should be cool regardless.

  • July 27, 1999, 4:31 a.m. CST

    Not promising

    by Taxman

    If relative minnow's like Jim Caviezel are passing up on X-Men, what must that say about the script? If he did it for a better part instead (like in the Redford film) then that's another thing, but it seems like he just didn't want the part because it wasn't good enough. That's not a good sign. Suddenly this film is beginning to look decidedly floppy. Well maybe it's not so sudden.

  • July 27, 1999, 4:42 a.m. CST

    This means SHIT - it WILL rock !!!

    by nightsir


  • July 27, 1999, 4:55 a.m. CST

    Now wait just a minute...

    by Dash Riprock

    Don't go assuming that this film is gonna be bad just cause Jim dropped out. Is Wolverine going to be the only character with any depth? Given the content of the post, possibly. But, think about who is writing this movie, Christopher Moquarrie, the same guy who wrote Usual Suspects. Now in all reality the only character with any real depth in that movie is Gabriel Byrne's (and even he doesn't have much). Overall, the characters are supremely effective yet very elusive. They make an indellible impression without revealing much (Keyser Soze anyone?). X-Men, also being an ensemble piece could work much the same way. Now keep in mind that the story needs an anchor, and well, Wolverine is it. Singer has said that the script addresses Logan's first encounters with the X-Men. He is going to be our cynical eye in this thing. All the other X-Men will be familliar with one another (except perhaps Rogue, who, based on her history I am assumuing will be teamed with Magneto's bunch from the outset, changing sides at some point in the film). So, of course Wolverine's character will have more "depth". He has to, because based on the director's comments we'll be seeing quite a bit through his eyes. Besides, he is just plain the most popular character. Period. And arguably, he's also the most interesting, not because there isn't material there to MAKE, (for example) Cyclops interesting, Wolverine has just been more effectively utilized over the years. Think about it. Compare the two. What we think of as Cyclops' "character" is really just stuff that has happened to him. He's one of my faves, but face it, he's always been PLOT driven through and through. Wolverine on the other hand has very specific and discernible personal characteristics. He has evolved over the years and in rich in emotional detail. I mean, there is really no comparison. What I'm saying is even if the script is heavily weighted towards Wolverine, it doesn't make it and less a movie about ALL the X-Men, and it certainly doesn't make it bad. So, go watch Usual Suspects, and assign each character the X-Men of your choice. Use that imagination, and see if you still think it'll suck. Personally, though I am not a huge fan of the current X-Continuity, I'm hoping for greatness. Of coures, all of the preceeding could be bullshite...

  • July 27, 1999, 4:57 a.m. CST

    To My eternal Shame!

    by Dash Riprock

    I spelled Mcquarrie wrong. In fact, if I've done it again, please don't stone me. Out.

  • July 27, 1999, 6:08 a.m. CST

    He's smart (Cavaziel)

    by mr_noodle

    I can't believe he's the only person thusfar that's passed on this project. It doesn't matter how much effort they put into getting good actors, this thing is a sinking ship. If they do it like the fanboys want, it's going to end up cheesy as hell and if aim toward a more mainstream audience, nobodys going to care anyway. At least Ian McKellan will redeem himself in Lord Of The Rings.

  • July 27, 1999, 6:08 a.m. CST

    Wooo hooo!

    by Poketurd

    Well, at least this gives a chance to Jason Lee. That'd be cool. Just think about a younger, dirtier Cyclops that always curses and hits on all the X-Chicks. I'd pay extra to see that.

  • July 27, 1999, 6:26 a.m. CST

    Pitt and Moriarty

    by Seafox

    I think you might want to bump that total to 3, evil one. I remind you of 12 Monkeys and Terry Gilliam. Pit did very nice work in that, as well.... But for the X-Men, since I'm not a comic Fanboy, (With 2 notable exceptions, and when will we see that SIP movie?) I'm hoping for a more mass market, less inwardly focused self referential type of movie. Something that can compete, yet still keeps the spirit.

  • July 27, 1999, 8:18 a.m. CST

    This report is bogus!

    by Whitey

    First of all, Caviezel wouldn't pass after beginning preliminary contract negotiations. You don't go back and back and back to audition and have your agents begin contract talks (which they confirmed they have w/Cinescape) only to bail now, citing lack of character depth? Harry, do you ever research these "scoops"? How does grendel know this? You have to put these scoops into some kind of context. This is like that almost impossible to believe Maria bello scoop from a week or so ago. "I overheard in a restuarant ...". C'mon!

  • July 27, 1999, 8:29 a.m. CST

    Luke Wilson for Cyclops...

    by eartug

    I think Luke Wilson would be perfect for the part of Cyclops. Ed Burns would also make a convincing Scott Summers. By the way I just watched Bottle Rocket and Rushmore again last night, brilliant movies. What do Owen Wilson and Wes Anderson have planned next? -Bryce R. Merriman

  • July 27, 1999, 9:34 a.m. CST

    How about Michael Biehn?!?


    First time in talk back. Ok, since Cyclops is up for grabs.... how about Michael Biehn ( Terminator, The Abyss, The Rock, Navy Seals, etc. ) He's a cagey vetern of the screen... might actually bring some emotion to the character.... make him more accessible to the audience. Just an idea.

  • If an actor has any brains (which very few do, thus explaining the existence of movies such as BIG DADDY) he/she will quickly pass on the ill-fated X-MEN movie. Marvel is not interested in making a good movie. From the people I've spoken with the casting is going tough because the script is LAME. Top that off with Marvel's repeated request to remove as much dialogue as possible and replace it with action and we're sure to be treated to another BATMAN AND ROBIN fiasco. Or maybe another PUNISHER-type movie. Give it up you comic-freaks this movie has all the trimmings for being wretched.

  • July 27, 1999, 10:34 a.m. CST

    Who is Kirsten Dundst Playing?!

    by Darth Siskel

    I didn't know she was cast. Is she? Who is she playing? It's starting to sound like too many 'name' actors are being cast. Except for the leads, Prof X, Magneto, & WOlvie, I think they should go with unknowns.. These name actors bring too much baggage with them.

  • July 27, 1999, 10:38 a.m. CST

    Terence Stamp as Magneto!

    by PumkinKing

    I mean, as long as we're saying that the casting isn't set in stone... Just imagine Terence Stamp playing opposite Patrick Stewart... General Zod vs. Captain Picard!!! Yea, that's what I'm talkin about! (a good hero movie needs a good villian to drive it, I say) Besides, after that all too brief cameo in SW:ep1,TPM... He could be up for the work. Let Ian McKellen have the part of Cyclops for all I care.

  • July 27, 1999, 10:41 a.m. CST

    Who the hell cares!

    by Cineman

    oooohh, Jim Caviezel dropped out, this is the worst thing that could ever happen. Anyone who is mad about this needs to get a life. Who really cares if some loser like Jim with a last name nobody can pronounce or spell without a reference is not going to play Cyclops. Are you really saying "OhmiGod, the guy from The Thin Red Line isn't gonna be Cyclops, the world has ended". This guy obviously doesn't have the greatest taste in film scripts. His credits are also G.I. Jane, Wyatt Earp, and Ed. I really don't think this guy should be in a position yet where he can choose, he should still be auditioning. I'm sure Bryan Singer knew his box office clout isn't big and it wouldn't be raised by this Dennis Quaid movie he's doing now, so he must've wanted him for some reason but I can't think of one. I don't even think he was that good in The Thin Red Line. Let's hope Byran uses this opportunity to make at least one more good casting choice.

  • July 27, 1999, 11:03 a.m. CST

    Sidebar: Pitt Status on Redford project

    by zenobia

    In today's Variety they say Pitt passed on the Robert Redford pic "The Legend of Bagger Vance". He has just signed on to "Diamonds" a pic for Guy Ritchie (Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels). According to the article, he will join an ensemble cast and only be there for a short stint and is still looking for another project to fill time before he does "Waking Up in Reno". Hope this clears somethings up. So maybe Caviezel is headed over to Redford's Legend, at this point in his career with how uneven a Stone picture can be following "Any Given Sunday" up with a solid respectable Redford project, he would certainly be improving his stock!

  • July 27, 1999, 11:25 a.m. CST

    Oops: Cavaziel may not be in Legend

    by zenobia

    Oops! Sorry, it would appear that Matt Damon will star in Robert Redford's "Legend of Bagger Vance" and begin shooting in October in Savannah according to Army Archer in Variety. I guess Cavaziel may not be heading over as the star, maybe a supporting role? or I guess maybe not at all.

  • July 27, 1999, 12:12 p.m. CST

    Random Ranting

    by The Garbage Man

    I'm a little disappointed that Caviezel (supposedly) passed, I think he looks just like Cyclops, but oh well. On another note, all I've seen of the Toad was in the old X-Men animated movie, and he seemed like a midget-sized, "flat" character. This makes me wonder if they will "shrink" Park for the role (that is, if he really is in the film). Finally, mr_noodle and Omega: Shut up! No one wants to hear your stupid rantings on how the film will utterly and completely suck. Why did you even read the article as you obviously have no interest in the movie? Also, not everyone who wants to see this movie is a "comic-freak". I for one don't even read the comics, but I did watch the show I will see this movie no matter how badly it sucks.

  • July 27, 1999, 12:24 p.m. CST


    by Clockwork Taxi

    Please let it bed Ed norton!!!!

  • July 27, 1999, 12:24 p.m. CST

    what about.....

    by DEADLY16

    Jamie Kennedy. I think he'd be ok. He has the physique and he's a fan of X-Men I think. Plus if there's a sequel deal with the contract, he wouldn't cost much.

  • July 27, 1999, 12:40 p.m. CST

    The Ideal Cyclops

    by Matt Murdock

    There have been plenty of good suggestions in Talk Back for Cyclops yet- Ed Burns would be fine if they could get him, and I would be wholeheartedly rooting for Michael Biehn if not for the age factor- but I've only seen one person touch upon who I view as the ideal candidate. Does anybody else think Edward Norton would be perfect? We can already tell that Singer is trying to cast good actors, so Norton would fit in well with the cast. He's got the acting ability to give Cyclops depth- I mean, he was able to pull an Oscar Nomination out of something as cheap as "Primal Fear." He's shown that he could get buff for the role, as he did in "American History X." And, well, he looks like Cyclops. On another note, is anybody else slightly worried about the addition of Toad to the movie? That's, what, FOUR villains? I'm desperately hoping for a really cool flick, but we're already seeing this start down the character-crammed road that "Batman and Robin" took.

  • July 27, 1999, 12:45 p.m. CST

    X-men movie

    by Hellblazer

    WHO CARES if Cavaziel passed on the X-Men? WHO CARES who they get to play Cyclops? ALL of the other casting choices (except MAYBE Stewart) are awful! Ian McKellan is way too old to play Magneto. Dougray Scott is far too tall and lacks the physical skills to play Wolverine. Anna Paquin is far too young for Rogue. And don't even get me started on Ray Park as the Toad. At this point it matters so little who they get to play Cyclops, its not even worth discussing.

  • July 27, 1999, 12:50 p.m. CST

    Script Reviews Online

    by STAX

    Interested in script reviews for comic book movies like DAREDEVIL or IRON MAN? Scorsese's DINO? Mel Gibson's next (The Patriot)? GLADIATOR? The check out FlixBurg, USA!: I'm working on getting a draft of the X-Men to review. Check it out!

  • July 27, 1999, 1:01 p.m. CST

    Not too old!

    by Criticlysm

    If you will remember, Magneto (Erik Magnus) was a Holocaust survivor (Quite a turn from Apt Pupil.) Ian was born in 1939, and Magnus was supposed to be around 5 when he was imprisoned, which is just about perfect. And whoever made the observation about McKellan being the same age as Nolte, that was very astute, and the point was well made.

  • July 27, 1999, 1:14 p.m. CST

    Just goes to show you

    by Sterling Wolfe

    Until they're confirmed, they ain't confirmed. Harry's reports made it look like 100% lock, yet Coming Attractions made explicit reference to the lack of official confirmation. In a way, too bad, IMHO, since Cavazial was a non-wimp that I could at least get behind, whereas with some of the other potential choices will cause me to have a magnetic attraction to sharp objects. Hey, here's a new wacky idea for Brian. Go back to the original audition tapes, and choose somebody who not only *can* do the role, but who really WANTS to do the role. /// I very much agree that this much trouble in getting somebody who *wants* to play the role indicates a very serious problem with how the project is viewed from talents' end. No prob, kids. Like I said. Cyke is in shades for all scenes, to my understanding, except *one* flashback sequence, so go with a talented unknown who *is* Scott Summers, rely on your academy award winning cast, and shoot the darn thing.

  • July 27, 1999, 1:56 p.m. CST

    McKellan is too old

    by Hellblazer

    If YOU will remember, Magneto was returned to infancy by Erik the Red. Despite being a Holocaust survivor, he's physically in his mid-thirties.

  • July 27, 1999, 2:01 p.m. CST

    Don't forget, kids

    by Sterling Wolfe

    Whoever signs for Cyke is on for a three picture deal. That's enough to scare the hardiest of souls.

  • July 27, 1999, 2:13 p.m. CST

    Why so surprised?

    by Spell Checker

    Gee, let's see... I'm an up and coming Hollywood actor trying to establish himself as a major talent, and I've got the choice between working with Robert Redford (considered by many to be one of the FINEST and most respected living actors) or working on this comic book thingee movie with a director at the helm who's had a Jeckyll and Hyde track record (Usual Suspects, great but overrated, Apt Pupil, not so great)... WHAT WOULD YOU DO??? Sheesh, anyone wondering why he'd drop out should buy themselves a clue. I don't care if the latest X-Men script is the comic movie equal of Citizen Kane, it still ain't gonna garner the respect a Redford movie would!!!! You think he's got a chance of being nominated for an Oscar for playing Cyclops??? Of COURSE NOT!!! I can see it now... "And the Oscar for best performace by an actor playing a character that frowns a lot, wears a cheesy jumpsuit, and shoots laser beams out of his arse, er, I mean eyes, goes to... " Sheesh. Some of you people are clueless.

  • July 27, 1999, 2:46 p.m. CST

    Terrry Stamp's OK but......

    by jasper Stillwell

    I agree that Terence Stamp would be a rather cool Magneto (aristocratic bearing, great cheekbones etc) but I beleive in McKellan's hands we're going to get simply the ultimate supervillain portrayal that'll make everything else that's been committed to screen look like Knight Rider outtakes. Although saying that I always saw Frank Langella in the role......

  • July 27, 1999, 2:49 p.m. CST

    Comic books versus movies

    by DarqueGuy

    You know, I've read a lot of posts by people like Hellblazer who are throwing facts from the thirty-plus year run of the X-Men comic around like they are going to be incorporated into the film. You guys have GOT to realize that stuff like the Erik the Red regressing Magneto to infancy and the like are just not pertinent to a two-and-a-half hour movie script. If they were to bring in Erik the Red, they would have to devote even more time (which is probably going to be widely spread between characters and action scenarios as it is) explaining who in the hell this guy is and where he came from. I enjoy the comics and all, but for this film, those facts are unimportant and non-existant. That's why we won't be seeing Ms. Marvel or the Kree where Rogue is concerned, Alpha Flight where Wolverine is concerned and ESPECIALLY not any of the "age regression" stuff Magneto has gone through.

  • July 27, 1999, 3:05 p.m. CST

    I've said it before and I'll say it again...

    by Agent Sharpe

    ...what's important is the script and the direction. if it's mishandled, this could be such a disaster. what concerns me more than casting "said actor of the moment" is what "Omega" said about the script. (is he an insider?) does the script in fact suck? that would be a damned shame cause the X-men don't deserve a weak send-off (not to mention how great the Andrew Kevin Walker draft was that they balked on). I told myself that I wouldn't write in here anymore, cause this place is a little too scatological for me. anyone remotely trying to make a point is shot down by every pimply-cynical-nihilistic-jaded-teen-with

  • July 27, 1999, 3:10 p.m. CST

    Big Deal

    by Frostbite

    First off, I'd like to say hello to everyone on this page, I've been reading here for over a half a year now, and have enjoyed the hell out of it, but never felt compelled to write anything. Unitl now. Ok, let me say this, Caviezel or however you spell it, doesn't totally destroy this movie by not accepting the role of Cyclops. He's a boring character anyway, despite the fact he's one of the 'Original 5.' Big deal. Let him go act for Robert Redford, I say good for him, if that's the way he wants to take his career. More power to him. Now onto who should play him, and I gotta agree with the rest of the crowd, I'm all for Edward Norton. He doesn't EXACTLY look the part, but then again, neither does MacKellan, Scott, Paquin, or basically any of the other castings in the movie. But still, I'm behind it 100%. As for MacKellan and Paquin's age... so what. Magneto is supposed to be a mean old bastard, so let him be a mean old bastard. Who cares if he's an OLDER mean old bastard. He's still one hell of an actor. And as for Paquin, Rogue is a character who's age has always been in question, if Singer wants to make her a 16 year old high school student, let him. It's his movie, after all. Not ours. And now...Doug Ray Scott. I can not say how thrilled I am at his casting. I like the guy, what can I say. He's not this travesty people make him out to be. He's actually (GASP!) a talented actor! Much like the rest of this cast. I'm looking forward to him as Wolvie. And now, last but not least, Ray Parks as the Toad. True, in that crap ass X-Men animated movie, 'Pryde Of the X-Men,' the Toad was a really flat character. In the comics, he's actually a really intriguing character. He's fun to watch, and he bounces around and does all kinds of flips. So yeah, I guess Darth Maul is the guy to play the role. Looking forward to December 2000 and Singer's version of the X-Men.

  • July 27, 1999, 3:26 p.m. CST

    if not caviezel, then how about...

    by tommy five-tone

    jonny lee miller (sick boy from trainspotting) as cyclops? right age bracket, can actually act, got the right look. still, i thought caviezel would have been really cool.

  • July 27, 1999, 4:58 p.m. CST

    no way

    by Roger T Shrubber

    Okay, I love the X-Men and I want this movie to be good, but none of you really believes Edward Norton would take this role, do you? Take a clue from Cavazava or whatever his name is -- any young guy lucky or good enough to be considered a "serious" actor does not want to F with that by playing a comic book character. And right now Edward Norton is THE guy, the consensus best young actor in Hollywood. Spell Checker is right -- some of you folks need to get a clue.

  • July 27, 1999, 5:02 p.m. CST

    Frank Langella as Magneto?

    by PumkinKing

    Yea, that's a good one too. Haven't seen him since his stint on DS9 though...

  • July 27, 1999, 5:14 p.m. CST

    X-Men Will Blow or Your Money Back

    by Funmazer

    I shall say it now. X-Men will BLOW. It's gonna SUCK big-time. Usual Suspects WAS VERY overrated. And him directing an action/fx picture? I really don't see it. Anyway, just wait and see! BOMB! PS No one gives a crap about X-Men.

  • July 27, 1999, 5:41 p.m. CST

    Beware the naysayers!!

    by Whitey

    for some of them are studio execs creating non-existant bad buzz for a potential blockbuster made by rival studios! Any regular AICN reader knows execs such as New Line's Mike DeLuca read and post here (don't believe me? check the archives!). You don't think execs are pulling this sort of crap nowadays? 'Course they are. Harry has shown he'll post ANYTHING with little or no fact-checking so why wouldn't they exploit that? BTW, New Line's gotta big event film scheduled to open around Xmas 2K. Think its called Lord of the Rings. Should be opening against ... the X-Men. Don't be duped, people. Think!

  • July 27, 1999, 5:51 p.m. CST

    this movie's hopeless

    by Coopcooper

    I was flipping through the latest issue of Wizard (a comic book magazine, for those of you non-fanboys out there) and they had a section on X-men casting which was surprisingly up to date. They were talking the executive producer, name of Avi Arad, and he had this to say about Dougray Scott as Wolverine - "When you meet this guy you look at him and there's something about his eyes, the way he carries himself, that makes you say, 'Wow, this is Logan.' This is Logan with all of the animal sex appeal that Logan brought to the X-Men, and what Dougray will bring to this movie." Jesus Christ! That was taken word for word out of the article. These are the people that are making this movie. This is just great, because the reason we all love the old canucklehead is because of his fucking animal sex appeal. That's why us fanboys buy the funnybooks. That's almost as bad is when that Jon Peters jack-ass said Sean Penn would be a good Superman because he has that killer instinct. Why do these people make movies of comic books they know or care nothing about? Oh yeah, to make money. It still sucks though. I hope one of these days someone gets it right. Sorry for the length.

  • July 27, 1999, 5:53 p.m. CST


    by accordian cat

    Wouldn't Brendan Fraser be the perfect Cyclops? Tall, built, fearless about playing someone who looks ridiculous in costumes?

  • July 27, 1999, 5:55 p.m. CST

    ed furlong?

    by accordian cat

    Eddie Furlong as Cyclops? And Andy Dick as Namor

  • July 27, 1999, 8:09 p.m. CST

    X-Men is gonna bite!!

    by Ferris Bueller

    Listen up movie-goers,Ferris is on the X-Men case. In the last few months there have been developements on the movie which have not sat well with F.B. Now I don't know about Doug Ray Scott(spelling?) as Wolverine. He came off being opposite Drew Barrymore in "Ever After." He doesn't seem to fit the role of Wolverine, but since they're in charge, they have the power to make the bad call. This is one of many reasons why X-Men is going to fall apart before it opens. I'll be back to tell you what else is to come of this movie. F.B.

  • July 27, 1999, 8:12 p.m. CST

    Deltahead, What the fu...

    by Kn

    Who ever said that Kirstin Dunst was in the picture? accoarding to my sources (corona, marvel, coming attraction, variety, and AICN) the lineup is (in order of signing) Tyler Mane... Sabertooth Patric stuart... Proffesor X Ian Mckellan... Magneto Dougray Scott... Wolverine Anna Paquin... Rogue Halle Berry... Storm Rebecca Stamos... Mystique Bruce Davison... Sen.Kelly (confirmed by marvil yesterday.) their aint no Kirstin Dunst their my freind

  • July 27, 1999, 9:30 p.m. CST

    whats the big fuss

    by ali

    heh all u negative fags how would he know depth? remember the thin red line? besides he would have sucked big and this is a MOVIE, if they can recast characters on a freakin soap in the same day its taped then im positive they have a back up. its his lost anyways u think he were an actual star i bet he will hate him self for not taking the part when this becomes the biggest hit of summer 2000.

  • July 27, 1999, 9:35 p.m. CST

    The Lord of the Rings

    by Mr Hand

    New Line's Lord of the Rings is scheduled to come out summer 2001, Whitey, not Christmas 2000 with X-Men. How would Ian McKellen (Magneto and Gandalf) be able to work on them both at once?

  • July 27, 1999, 9:35 p.m. CST

    I can't believe I just read all this X Men shit!

    by The Godfather

    Is the X Men a movie about former Seattle Super Sonics forward Xavier McDaniels freaky and cycloptic illegitimate children? I guess I'm out on this discussion, but there is no way in HELL that the most talented young actor in Hollywood, Edward Norton, will be associated with this disaster....By the way, I think Eartug or somebody asked about my homeboys the Wilsons and Wes' next movie. It's about a family of geniuses....stay tuned.

  • July 27, 1999, 9:51 p.m. CST

    take a valium

    by saurion

    For the love of whatever deity you may beleive in. Final confirmations of the cast have yet to be released and most of you are busy trying to rip each other apart. Could you at least please try holding off till they begin shooting to piss on the movie. I will not enter my opion on the movie but will on the cast. Magneto- Ian can work as long as he doesn't wear that helmet. Xavier- Stuart was practically preordained. Wolverine- Back off, the only thing most of you have seen Dougray Scott in is Happily Ever. I think he's gonna rock. Rogue- I got a problem with Anna's age vs. how the character uses her power (touching & kissing her victim). No opinion on actresses to play Storm & Mystique cause I haven't seen their work. Sen. Kelley- Bruce Davison is a good casting. Sabertooth- The look,yes. Acting ability, we'll see. Toad- Only as a <no pun> toady to Magneto. I'll give Ray Park credit, his role as Darth Maul was patheticaly small and overblown by Lucas-Film and I think he could work pretty good in this film if the studio exces don't *f* it up with their greed. Last point -costumes- If they do the Underwear-on-the-outside of the men's costumes IT WILL HURT THE MOVIE. As a comic fan since I was five, I would like them to stay as true as possible but I'd make sizable leanences if it helps the movie. Peace out ;)

  • July 27, 1999, 10:06 p.m. CST

    I just met Jim Caviezel and....

    by Gonzo123

    I just finished working with Jim Caviezel on a short film called "Resurrection." Although he was in his trailer most of the time, and I never got a chance to have an in-depth conversation with him about the X-Men, I do have this to say: He would have made a terrible Cyclops. Sure, his face looks like it would have been ideal for a pair of red-crystal goggles, but the rest of him just doesn't fit the character. He's way too thin, and he's quite soft-spoken. The sound operators had to ask him numerous times to speak louder. Overall though, he was a really nice guy. Just not good for Cyclops. I hope this thing with Redford works out for him.

  • July 27, 1999, 10:33 p.m. CST

    Calm down! Please!

    by Matt Murdock

    Guys, don't start jumping down others' backs simply for suggesting, say, Edward Norton for Cyclops. Sure, he's probably the best young actor these days, and there's a one-in-a-million chance he'd take the role. But it's simply a wish-list kind of thing! Didn't we all put "Corvette" on our Christmas lists when we were ten, despite that we knew we wouldn't get it? And Spell Checker, don't act like we're idiots by questioning Caviezel's decision. He may want to go the "utterly serious actor" route... but some actors may also want to get their name out there with a giant blockbuster movie. Thanks to everybody that's keeping a level head about all of this stuff. It's infinitely more pleasant to read Talk Back if there are those that don't assault your every post with a childish "I know one more picky detail than you, so your opinion is invalid" rant.

  • July 27, 1999, 10:42 p.m. CST

    Casting? Who cares?

    by the devil

    No amount of casting can save this idea. Only fanboys really care, and no matter what this movie will be ridiculous. It's been too long. No one will be able to take it seriously. Visions of the gay-ass streetfighter movie come to mind. Even if it IS cool, it will still be unbelievable. Then again...i hate the Xmen, so that might be my problem. But in my opinion, it can't work for the public AND for the fanboys, and there's the rub.

  • July 27, 1999, 11:11 p.m. CST

    For Matt Murdock...

    by Spell Checker

    I don't think ALL the Talk Backers are idiots... just A LOT of them. And anyway, my bone of contention isn't with anyone's dream tream X-Men (I've got my own dream team in my head, too), it's with people who can't use common sense to discern the obvious. I'm not naysaying the concept, the casting decisions, the script, or anything else about the project. On the contrary, I'm crossing my fingers and hoping it'll be great... I certainly think they're off to a fantastic start. All I'm saying is, simply, use your heads, people (and try to take them out of your collective myopic fanboy asses).

  • July 28, 1999, 10:03 p.m. CST

    Natalie Portman as Kitty Pryde!!

    by Darth Siskel


  • Aug. 17, 2006, 8:41 a.m. CST

    McKellan, Stewart, this flim is uber fabulous!

    by Wolfpack