Could have happened because Hugh Jackman was almost Captain Jack Sparrow!
What If Hugh Jackman Had Been Jack Sparrow? - MOVIE TALK on Yahoo! Movies
Could have happened because Hugh Jackman was almost Captain Jack Sparrow!
What If Hugh Jackman Had Been Jack Sparrow? - MOVIE TALK on Yahoo! Movies
probably would have been a bad ass Jack Sparrow
From the Vanity Fair article on Depp (in conversation with Patti Smith):
:-DOn the set of the upcoming installment of Pirates of the Caribbean, Smith asks Depp what it’s like to play the iconic role of Captain Jack Sparrow. “Somebody once asked [Hunter S. Thompson], “What is the sound of one hand clapping, Hunter?,” and he smacked him. Captain Jack was kind of like that for me, an opening up of this part of yourself,” Depp says. “There is a little Bugs Bunny in all of us.”
“They couldn’t stand him. They just couldn’t stand him,” Depp says of Disney’s reaction to his controversial interpretation of Sparrow. “I think it was Michael Eisner, the head of Disney at the time, who was quoted as saying, ‘He’s ruining the movie.’ Depp reveals to Smith, however, that he remained unfazed by the studio’s hysteria. “Upper-echelon Disney-ites, going, What’s wrong with him? Is he, you know, like some kind of weird simpleton? Is he drunk? By the way, is he gay?… And so I actually told this woman who was the Disney-ite… ‘But didn’t you know that all my characters are gay?’ Which really made her nervous.”
Well that's disney for you: no basis in the real world. To be honest Depp's jack is what makes the movies. I always just thought he was drunk or he used it as a way to get people to let their guard down by making them think he was a bit off in the head.
Well, obviously they revised their position, because we're on film 4 now. I'm pretty sure Mr. Depp was being quite facetious in the above quote.cobalt crimson said:
Disney-ites, as they're called in the article, may not be entirely grounded in the same reality as us, but they know a cash cow when they see one. Jack was a huge piece of why the first PotC movie was as huge as it was and they had no choice but to let Johnny do his thing after that. If the feedback they got indicated otherwise, you can bet that he would've been forced to tone down Jack's outrageousness in the followup films.jlee562 said:
WHEW! I opened this half afraid to discover that Burton had been put in charge of an X-Men film.
I love that when people love the movie, it's because Depp was brilliant, but when they hate the sequels, it's the writer's fault.
Depp was brilliant in the first one... but sorta... well... lost more and more air in the second one... and the third one... well... where was the air? You can't keep the air up if the story sucks donkey poop. And the story in the first one was already pretty crappy... and it got progressively worse in the sequels.
Too Much Garlic said:
Kinda illustrated exactly what I'm saying.Too Much Garlic said:
If the story was so crappy, how could Depp be brilliant? He's speaking words written by the same people who were responsible for that "crappiness." Depp gets all of the praise and none of the blame.
Whenever people talk about the character, or that first movie, they always mention his introduction and how brillant it is. Do they think Depp came up with that?
Nick, have you seen much of the special features? That would explain a lot.
Sure, I've seen the special features. All of 'em, in fact. And read various drafts of each of the movie's screenplays. So what?Too Much Garlic said:
Just asking.
And we all know that the same words spoken and the same character can come out very different when performed by different people - just watch any audition tapes. Depp altered the role. When the writers clearly tried to adapt to that in the following movies... they couldn't.
Last edited by Too Much Garlic; Dec 2, 2010 at 12:02 PM.
If it makes you feel better, I really don't care for any of the POTC movies.nickytea said:
Really don't like Capt. Jack at all.
/\ You are very lucky!!! /\ It is like RUM to me!
This completely reminds me of a quote by Eddie Murphy (in the mid 80s hot off the success of Berverly Hills Cop and Trading Places)...nickytea said:
He was on Letterman being asked about his next film project. Murphy said he was undecided and that directors were a little hesitant to approach him (really paraphrazing here).
He said that when a movie does well- the critics scream "EDDIE MURPHY DOES IT AGAIN!"
But if it tanks- the same critics would say "The directing and writing were terrible."
Kevin
nickytea said:
It's simple. A great actor can make even bad dialogue good through timing and delivery. But even the best performance won't help a crap plot.
The script for the first Pirates movie was crap too, but Depp and Rush gave such great performances that I was able to enjoy it despite the story flaws. But on movies 2 and 3 the story bloat was so bad that even their performances got lost in the muddle.
I guess you could call it Sucking by Attrition.
Like Cage's Wickerman.... not the bees not bees aaaAAaaAaaAAAAAAaaaaahOzymandius said:
Jackman would have been a great jack sparrow...of the two, i think jackman is a better actor...
depp is good, but he isnt great...also, the past several movies...it seems like he is playing the same character
I could see Jackman as Sparrow but never Depp as Wolverine.
Probably 'cause Hugh knows how to do camp.handler said:
There were scripts?!nickytea said:
Reply with Quote
