@Time-Control-Magician said in The Super Mario Bros. Movie:
@Robby said in The Super Mario Bros. Movie:
It's a very long standing practice for theatrical animated films to grab a name rather than a talent. Acting and voice acting are NOT the same skill. Sometimes they truly are the best choice despite the stunt casting (most of the Lion King cast) and sometimes they can wreck the film (Rosie Odonnel in Tarzan, Jason Alexander in Hunchback, Martin Short in Treasure Planet)
I’ll be honest I didn’t even know Martin Short was in Treasure Planet. But are we sure he was the thing that “wrecked “ the film?
100% The film was fine but not great up to that point. Long John Silver was carrying the film, but the moment Ben shows up is when the whole film falls apart. He doesn't even show up till the last 1/3 of the film but it's just... it's a lot. You can't introduce that kind of energy and "character arc" that late in the film... (the original story also introduced Ben late but not THAT late) and if they'd had a different talent they might have approached it differently.
They wanted a famous comedian to add that Genie energy and it just wasn't appropriate there. If they'd instead cast, I dunno, Christopher Lloyd to play the crazy old man that's lost his mind, it would have come out very very different.
Also I do get the idea of having a voice actor that’s know for playing a character usually going to that actor from time to time for the same role.
But as the Kevin Conroy & Mark Hamill thing has shown I’m perfectly fine with newer actors being brought in under the right circumstances “different take” “original actor can’t perform” to voice characters who already have established voice actors”.
It's one thing when you're actually changing the character and bringing them into a wholly new context. Especially with something like Batman, Spiderman, or Ninja Turtles that have been reinvented and rebooted a thouasand times and might be radically different between versions. Adam West in his prime would not have been the right actor for Dark Knight,.
But when its something like Scooby Doo, where its the same characters, the same interpretations, and they basically act like everything from the last fifty four years is canon no matter how absurd, AND You've had actors consistently in those roles for decades? (and their replacements are generally sound-alikes)
That horrific Velma show has a wholly new cast, and that's appropriate, they're completely different characters with different looks, personalities, and backgrounds, sharing only the names and mild resemblance. Fresh take there is warranted. It was also appropriate for Pup Named Scooby Doo.
But when it comes to classic characters that are unchanged?
You use a consistent voice to be Mickey Mouse or Kermit the Frog or... Fred Jones... for as long as the actor is able to play the role. And when the time comes that you have to replace them, try to find someone similar.
It'd be like if back in 2007 when they finally got around to making the Simpsons movie they'd cast Robin Williams to play Homer. It'd be weird and wrong.