therewillbeblus wrote: ↑Sat Jan 28, 2023 10:04 pm
This is a really interesting point, and makes me wonder how this film would play out if someone like, I don't know, Ben Mendelsohn was cast in Hanks' place. I don't think the film would suddenly become good or anything, but having an actor who inherently embodies a lived-in slimy and deceitful persona (not to mention a strong actor whose performances in this arena feel effortless) could at least alleviate that sore-thumb distraction and give Butler the necessary spotlight to make this even feel like a movie about Elvis, which I really don't think it does with any interest. Then again, Mendelsohn's naturalism would feel so alien amidst Luhrmann's bombast that it would probably be distracting in its own way, and still steal the attention. Just in a good way, probably.
Perhaps that would have helped, but I still think the filmmakers would have had to take DI's advice upthread and cut (at least) half of the character's screen time/narration out of the film. As it is, he's way too one-dimensional to be this prominent in the film - I don't think any actor could pull that off without being tiresome. It reminded me of Christoph Waltz's character in
Big Eyes - like, we get it, literally everything he does is transparently for his own manipulative self-interest, this was apparent from the very beginning, and there's nothing to add after making this clear at the outset but the film keeps thumping this same note again and again and again and....
