Cast suggestion if remake happens - Masters of the Universe (1987) Discussion

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]

[–] strangerfromuk 13 years ago

I picked skarsgard as he looks like He-man and also is 6'4 so is the right build for the role

What did you think of my other suggestions?

reply

[–] ChrEberle 13 years ago

Yeah, cool... but why not take Frank Langella as Skeletor again since Makeup covers age anyway... Langella was just PERFECT - so why change? ...and he even loved playing Skeletor - contrary to Lundgren who hated playing He-Man...

reply

[–] strangerfromuk 13 years ago

Langella was amazing as Skeletor but the reason I didn't put him forward is that I was trying to pick a cast that wasn't the same as the other film so that people dont think the new film is a sequel/prequel to the Lundgren film.

I picked Mears as he's 6'5, built like a tank, looks slightly like Skeletor even without makeup & he can fight. Also he is a veteran 'monster man' so is use to wearing a latex costume and can move very easily while wearing it.

So what do you think of my other suggestions?

reply

[–] ChrEberle 13 years ago

But the thing is - when you wear a mask you do not have to "look slightly" like Skeletor at all... you have to be able to act.

Is Mears a good actor?

More interestingly - I would even say that the actor for a villain should REALLY be a good actor. That's where EVERYONE agrees on Langella.

But whatever... I'd say this is a quite pointless discussion since the chances that Langella will ever again play Skeletor are damn low... not to mention the chance of a new (most likely a reboot of course) of MASTERS OF THE UNIVERSE.

reply

[–] KilGrey 12 years ago

I disagree that he's the right build for the role. He's tall but he's not bulky muscular like He-Man is. Skarsgard is more lean muscle than body builder bulk.

Damn sexy, but not what I think of when I picture He-Man.

reply

[–] Hendry_William_French 12 years ago

Would you forgo a bigger muscle mass in the actor playing He Man for a better acting performance?

After all, Lundgren was just a novice actor at the time despite a good performance in my opinion. It was his look that carried the role and Langella's acting that carried the movie.

Do you think a more highly developed He Man character should be seen? If so, Skarsgard would be a good choice. A nordic actor would certainly have the right physical traits for He Man, and specific camera angles and lighting can make people look a lot bigger than they are in terms of shape and muscle definition - just look at Ed Norton in History X, he is very skinny but looked like a monster in that movie.

reply

[–] Kuato_and_George 12 years ago

Do you think a more highly developed He Man character should be seen?

Maybe "some" depth, but no too much. Maybe a backstory between him and Skelator or something, but He-Man isn't a complicated character and shouldn't be. He's just a good guy who does the right thing.

Visit my movie review site!
http://www.hesaidshesaidreviewsite.com/

reply

[–] Hendry_William_French 12 years ago

Yeah I agree. More of a backstory would be a good move.

"No ma'am. They're quite impressive... bordering on spectacular."

reply

[–] Kuato_and_George 13 years ago

I love the original for it's innocent, cheesy appeal, but I totally think that a remake could be made in a much darker, more violent, realistic approach (and be good). Though, I will say I would be against a "highly stylized" look. Frankly, I'm sick of it. I'd love to see a fantasy flick for adults that doesn't look like 300, Sin City, or The Watchmen.

To be honest, I would love to see Langella as Skelator again. Acting wise, he was easily the best of the buch from the original. It was so theatrical and dramatic.The makeup was great too.

If they ever remake this, I hope to god they stay away from some of the stupid characters they had in the cartoon. I'm glad the this movie did. Smartest thing they ever did. Giving a character a power/attribute and then naming him based on on that attribute was seriously stupid. Talk about a lack of creativity.

I love your suggestion for Duncan though. Great idea.

Visit my movie review site!
http://hesaidshesaidmovies.tripod.com/index.html

reply

[–] Hendry_William_French 13 years ago

With the make up you'd never know that Langella aged. It would be a good idea to have him return.

Luke Helmsworth would be a good choice for He Man, but I think think casting he man would be a tough one. Dolph Lundgren embodied every aspect of that character. The dude literally looked like an old norse god from a mythology, which made him perfect for such an other worldly person. His acting wasn't even that bad.

Get the casting of He Man and Skeletor right, then you'll get a good start to a He-Man remake.

"Now they know that we know that they know that we know!"

reply

[–] Kuato_and_George 13 years ago

Dolph Lundgren embodied every aspect of that character. The dude literally looked like an old norse god from a mythology, which made him perfect for such an other worldly person.

Well if you're going to nab a Helmsworth brother and need him to look like a Norse God, why not Chris? He pretty much was Thor imo.

I thought Dolph was fine. For what this movie was? Not a problem. He embodied the character's personality very well.

Visit my movie review site!
http://hesaidshesaidmovies.tripod.com/index.html

reply

[–] Hendry_William_French 13 years ago

I'd suggest Liam Hemsworth, too, if not Luke. I haven't seen Luke in any movies so he might be a bad actor, but Liam reminded me of Hayden Christensen on steroids.

He has more of a round jaw, like Lundgrens, plus he's built like a brick $hithouse as well. If he started preparing for the role 18 months in advance, he could really be like Lundgren was (which is still a stretch, Dolph had a world class physique, perfectly balanced in all areas unlike Arnold who was a freak. Lundgren also suited playing a good guy).

Chris Hemsworth has already played a superhero, to have him play another in the same genre wouldn't work. It would be like Michael Keaton playing Spider or Iron man if both films came out in the 90s.

"Now they know that we know that they know that we know!"

reply

[–] Kuato_and_George 13 years ago

Chris Hemsworth has already played a superhero, to have him play another in the same genre wouldn't work.

That's kind of a sh!tty argument man. He can't play one, because he already played another? What exactly is the rationale behind that?

Visit my movie review site!
http://hesaidshesaidmovies.tripod.com/index.html

reply

[–] Hendry_William_French 13 years ago

He Man and Thor are too similar, that's all. To have the same actor play both roles wouldn't work as well as getting someone different.

Hollywood would screw up a remake of He Man, anyway. They need to totally restructure the industry before they can start making good movies again. Until, a remake of MotU would just be another Conan etc.

"Now they know that we know that they know that we know!"

reply

[–] Kuato_and_George 13 years ago

Isn't talent/believability a bigger factor rather than whether an actor has played a similar role or not?

I don't it's ever going to happen. I'd actually be shocked if it did. I agree this discussion is probably pointless. It's more for fun. I don't think audiences would react well to He-Man anyway.

I haven't seen Conan, so I don't know if it was screwed up or not. I did see some people on imdb who did like it.

Visit my movie review site!
http://hesaidshesaidmovies.tripod.com/index.html

reply

[–] Hendry_William_French 13 years ago

"Isn't talent/believability a bigger factor rather than whether an actor has played a similar role or not?"

That's the thing. Are you convinced of Chris Hemsworths talent to be He Man? Were you impressed with him as Thor? Lundgren was already a big star after Rocky IV when he played He Man. To me, he was almost an icon by that stage. They need someone on a equal scale to Dolph for He Man to work.

"I agree this discussion is probably pointless. It's more for fun."

I agree it's just for fun. It's good that way.

"I don't think audiences would react well to He-Man anyway"

This movie unfairly bombed when He Man was still a legitimate phenomenom in the 80s. The only way a modern re-adaptation would sell in the studios eyes is if it was a gory R rated picture.

"Now they know that we know that they know that we know!"

reply

[–] Kuato_and_George 13 years ago

That's the thing. Are you convinced of Chris Hemsworths talent to be He Man? Were you impressed with him as Thor? Lundgren was already a big star after Rocky IV when he played He Man. To me, he was almost an icon by that stage. They need someone on a equal scale to Dolph for He Man to work.

Talented enough....to play He-Man?! Lol, listen man I like this movie too, but it's pure fluff. He-Man has virtually no depth at all. He's a good guy with no other motives than doing good.

Not to mention, Hemsworth isn't a bad actor.

This movie unfairly bombed when He Man was still a legitimate phenomenom in the 80s. The only way a modern re-adaptation would sell in the studios eyes is if it was a gory R rated picture.

That approach didn't work so well for Conan.

Visit my movie review site!
http://hesaidshesaidmovies.tripod.com/index.html

reply

[–] Hendry_William_French 13 years ago

"Talented enough....to play He-Man?! Lol, listen man I like this movie too, but it's pure fluff. He-Man has virtually no depth at all. He's a good guy with no other motives than doing good."

I didn't mean talent wise so much, as in acting or line delivery.

I meant, looks-wise. Screen presence. Likeability. To look like a hero, and be believable as one. It takes a special actor to play an iconic character and not just be another guy in a role, even if there isn't that much depth. Christopher Reeve had it for Superman. Mark Hamill for Luke Skywalker. Stallone for Rocky and Rambo. Lundgren for He Man.

He looked like he stepped out of a comic book as He Man:

http://www.dolph-ultimate.com/gallery/pictures/dolph-mr13.jpg

This guy is just not as cool looking:

http://www.popcrunch.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/Chris-Hemsworth-As -Thor-500x475.jpg

I'm not saying he looks bad, far from it. Just that he suits playing a more "medieval" braveheart type role or generic warrior roles, not necessarily a leading role.

Lundgren looked amazing as He Man, and had the movie not unfairly bombed, he should've been a big star in hollywood on the back of this movie. I compare this to Mark Hamill as Skywalker, who embodied everything that character stood for and meant. A role no one else could play. And even though the SW movies did not bomb, their astronomical success had a similar effect meaning he could never get a role to suit the one that made him so big.

However, this is just my outlook as a movie fan. The studios and casting agents don't really notice this stuff, so it's just fanboy fantasy.

"Now they know that we know that they know that we know!"

reply

[–] Kuato_and_George 13 years ago

Just that he suits playing a more "medieval" braveheart type role or generic warrior roles, not necessarily a leading role.

Thor was a leading role.

Visit my movie review site!
http://hesaidshesaidmovies.tripod.com/index.html

reply

[–] Hendry_William_French 13 years ago

Oh yeah, I know. I just meant he'd be more effective in a supporting role. I reckon he'd look good as Man At Arms.

"Now they know that we know that they know that we know!"

reply

[–] PatrickS77 7 years ago

No. It's not. Unfortunatly Hollywood is too stupid to realize that and always hires the same actors to play superheroes/in sperhero movies, making at all become safe, stale and boring. Where is the out of the box thinking? Giving unknown fresh faces that fit the role a chance. I would like an unknown, who fits and looks the part, play He-Man and not Hemsworth or whoever just because that one played a similar role before.

reply

[–] Boxbest 13 years ago

Darker than the original animated series, and not afraid to show real violence (characters getting hurt, even killed).
The filmmakers should look at Star Wars and LOTR for inspiration in style and how to tell an epic fantasy tale with sci fi elements, but still have its own distinct feel and NOT look as a rip-off.

The different characters' powers and attributes, should be played out and NOT toned down. Tri-Klops should really be a sword fighter who's able to "see everything", Ram Man should really be about brute strenght when it comes to tearing down walls (even though it's all he's got), Stratos should be able to fly at great speeds, Merman should be a slimy water humanoid who pulls off surprise attacks, Trap-Jaw should be a dangerous cyborg with heavy weaponry and since he's part robot, his mind will work faster than an average human.
And if they inlude Zodak, he should be above humans too in terms of strenght and wisdom. Not as strong as He-Man, but he used to be a part of the same council as King Greyskull.
In fact, everyone of them has something special: Beastman, Evil-Lyn, Fisto, Teela, Man-At-Arms. The later is not only an inventor who serves the warriors with weapons, armour and stuff. He's a soldier himself with many years of experience behind him, and he's the General of the troops (Teela's only Captain). I imagine him to be somebody who's able to hold a speech in front of the good army to give them courage to fight.

reply

[–] Kuato_and_George 13 years ago

I dunno man, I think the smartest thing this movie did was ignore a lot of the cartoon. Some of those characters were just plain awful.

That being said, I've seen some of the newer action figures of some of the characters (I think there ws a relaunch a few years ago) and they were pretty kick-ass.

Visit my movie review site!
http://hesaidshesaidmovies.tripod.com/index.html

reply

[–] Boxbest 12 years ago

Interesting.
You want a Masters of the universe movie without the Masters' characters.

reply

[–] double_ah 12 years ago

Triple H should play He-Man.

reply

[–] Kuato_and_George 12 years ago

Interesting.
You want a Masters of the universe movie without the Masters' characters.

Dude, the cartoon f-cking sucked. It was nothing but lame character one another. The only reason somany existed was to create more action figures. If you think all those character had merit and were anything more than cheap gimmicks, try pulling your head out of the sand once and a while.

If character like "Ram-Man" or "Moss-Man" strike you as good creative thinking, I'm happy for you.

Visit my movie review site!
http://hesaidshesaidmovies.tripod.com/index.html

reply

[–] Boxbest 12 years ago

Think outside box. Most of the characters can be written in a different way to suit a big live action adaption. That includes Ram Man and a whole bunch.

Every character in the film keep its special power, but they will be more dangerous and warrior-like. No dim-witted and clumsy buffon characters here.
The characters have real names. Evil-Lyn is actually Evelyn, Man-at-Arms is Duncan and Trap-Jaw is Kronis. Just to mention a few.

reply

[–] Hendry_William_French 12 years ago

Kuato's right, the cartoon and most of its characters were kinda lame.

The flying orco and all the rest wouldn't work that well. The ones they chose for the movie were theatrical and worked onscreen. I'd keep a similar format.

"whatever they're charging to get in, it's worth more to get out" - Michael Bay movies

reply

[–] Boxbest 12 years ago

But what made them lame - their names or their personalities?

reply

[–] Kuato_and_George 12 years ago

But what made them lame - their names or their personalities?

They didn't have any. They were't created to add depth, improve the storyline, or add anything of substance to the show. They were all about marketing.

Visit my movie review site!
http://hesaidshesaidmovies.tripod.com/index.html

reply

[–] Hendry_William_French 12 years ago

"But what made them lame - their names or their personalities?"

I'm not too familiar with those characters.

It's been since about age 4 or 5 since I last saw a he man cartoon episode, so I can't really tell you that much except in the 87 movie they actually improved the look of the characters in most cases, and got the best ones onscreen.

I guess now with CGI you could have battle cat and orco. Maybe they might work?

"whatever they're charging to get in, it's worth more to get out" - Michael Bay movies

reply

[–] Kuato_and_George 12 years ago

There is no box. The show was VERY bad. As panned as this movie is, it's a freaking miracle its as fun as it is considering the crap that it is based on.

Visit my movie review site!
http://hesaidshesaidmovies.tripod.com/index.html

reply

[–] Boxbest 12 years ago

You must be able to see that the characters can be improved upon and changed for the better in a live adaption.
The original series were aimed at kids and every hero and villain were turned into brainless retards just to tone down the possible acts of violence these characters could have performed.
Look at their different powers and think about how much damage they could have done to each other if they weren't mentally challenged.

reply

[–] Hendry_William_French 12 years ago

That's a good point. However, too many characters onscreen can ruin a movie. Lets say you have 5 good characters in the movie to choose from, and 5 or 6 bad guys (same number as the movie), which characters would you choose?

"whatever they're charging to get in, it's worth more to get out" - Michael Bay movies

reply

[–] Boxbest 12 years ago

Five good characters:
Man-At-Arms
Teela
Ram Man
Stratos
Mekaneck (or Fisto)

These are the ones that will fight alongside He-Man and Battle-Cat in the war. I don't count the royal couple, Sorceress or Orko because they will not be an active part of the war to begin with.

Other classic characters will be introduced in the sequels when things are going to heat up: Sy-Klone, Roboto, Mossman, Buzz-Off, Man-E-Faces and Zodak.

Six evil characters. I see that as Skeletor with his closest five henchmen Evil-Lyn, Beastman, Tri-Klops, Trap-Jaw and Merman

I don't think it will be difficult to keep track of these. They aren't THAT many. Compare with the good guys in LOTR, the very FIRST film: Bilbo, Gandalf, Frodo, Sam, Merry, Pippin, Aragorn, Arwen, Elrond, Legolas, Gimli, Boromir and Galadriel. Everyone got their amount of screen time. And the sequel introduced lots of others counting both the good and the evil side.

But just as the case with the good Masters, a bunch of the evil warriors will be saved for sequels as well. We have Stinkor, Whiplash, Clawful, Webstor, Jitsu, Spikor, Two-Bad and several more to choose from. But I think Kobra Khan will be the only "must have" in the second film if the plot is going to focus on Snake Men. Khan betrays Skeletor and joins King Hiss, right?

reply

[–] Hendry_William_French 12 years ago

I like the cut of your jib.

However:

"Compare with the good guys in LOTR, the very FIRST film: Bilbo, Gandalf, Frodo...... Everyone got their amount of screen time."

That movie lasted for 2 days. I'd avoid the lotr format and have the new movie stick to the same themes as the original or star wars (just with some expansions here and there). It's not an epic, it's a sword and scorcery action sci-fi movie.

"whatever they're charging to get in, it's worth more to get out" - Michael Bay movies

reply

[–] Boxbest 12 years ago

It should be an epic, with all the story material there is. Why shouldn't the film be closing in on 3 h? Is it better to rush with the story just to have a shorter running time?

"it's a sword and sorcery action sci fi movie"
Well, LOTR is a sword and sorcery action fantasy movie!

reply

[–] Hendry_William_French 12 years ago

Sword and sorcery yeah, but I don't remember high tech weaponary, lasers, spaceships etc. He Man in style and theme should be more like the Star Wars movies than the LOTR ones just using this set up alone.

Making it three hours will chase away audience numbers who aren't willing to sit through something they don't know much about. Movies like Titanic, LOTR etc can afford to have running times that long because they already have a reputation and demand. He Man won't have this.

"whatever they're charging to get in, it's worth more to get out" - Michael Bay movies

reply

[–] Boxbest 12 years ago

Are you talking about what YOU want or what the general audience would prefer?

reply

[–] Hendry_William_French 12 years ago

I don't know. A three hour he man film would be a box office disaster, and the only good movie I've seen that lasted for three hours was the godfather, and this movie should not be a character piece, as it the content doesn't suit it.

"whatever they're charging to get in, it's worth more to get out" - Michael Bay movies

reply

[–] jaypat1181 12 years ago

Putte-4, correct me if I'm wrong but - Lonestarr - I think the point Putte is trying to make is that rather than using the format of LOTR, he actually is trying to say that MOTU should simply have every character in the movie just for the sake of the audience saying 'oh, I remember that character!'. Take the first X-Men movie for example; it contained the main characters which were the X-men, along with the main villains - Magneto, Mystique, etc. - and then there were the less-important characters (all I can remember right now is Jubilee who was actually in the cartoon but not a member of the original X-Men team). They actually displayed what her ability was and whatnot but I personally think its necessary to have them in the movie. On the other hand, I also agree with what you said about not having so many characters so the focus can be placed on the main heroes and villains and I lean more towards your statement, simply to allow those who did not grow up or know anything about He-Man to understand who he and his team members were, the story behind them, and their abilities, etc. Of course with that said, there would definitely need to be a sequel, perhaps a trilogy because I think the other villains should definitely be in the sequels just as Batman Begins and Dark Knight, or any superhero movie have for that matter. I'd definitely love to see this re-made, but theres that huge possibility that it'll bomb and possibly even worse than this one did, but who knows. =/

By the way, this is a pretty interesting topic...really takes me back because I saw this when it came out when I was like 6 and of course as a kid I was crazy about the movie.

reply

[–] Kuato_and_George 12 years ago

You must be able to see that the characters can be improved upon and changed for the better in a live adaption.

I can't assume that they would automatically be better, especially considering how many there were; which was a big strike against them. There were simply too many characters and not a single one of them had any depth at all.

Visit my movie review site!
http://hesaidshesaidmovies.tripod.com/

reply

[–] beautyofthedarkness-283-224604 12 years ago

he man - karl urban

reply

[–] Kuato_and_George 12 years ago

Anyone else think that Conan and John Carter bombing ruined a chance a remake ever happening?

For my latest movie reviews and news:http://www.hesaidshesaidreviewsite.com/

reply

[–] Hendry_William_French 12 years ago

Wouldn't have been a great idea to remake this movie. First, Hollywood needs to be restructured before it can start making good movies again. Second, this movie was bashed when it came out but chances are it will be the best onscreen version of He Man that we will see. Like I said in the Innerspace thread you started, those movies from the 80s just had an unescapable charm that made the films that much more enjoyable - they were cheesy but were so fun and lightheated and carried a theme that ran through them that's impossible to describe or replicate. They looked real and felt genuine - because everything was physically onscreen. The costumes, sets, characters, enviornments. There was no digital manipulation.

A CGI infused reboot of He Man would just look like any other big budget atrocity that studios pump out of Hollywood like raw sewage into cinema's worldwide. If they cared about art and making something good there wouldn't be a Transformers franchise. If they had scrapped Conan and Carter for He Man instead, it would've come out just as bad.

Is the atomic weight of cobalt 58.9?

reply

[–] Kuato_and_George 12 years ago

I mean to throw in Prince of Persia too. It seems like audiences aren't all that into sword and sorcery or sci fi/fantasy stuff lately.

First, Hollywood needs to be restructured before it can start making good movies again.

I don't think it's "just" Hollywood's fault though and you do recognize that in your post as well. That's not to say I thik there aren't bad movies being made, but it's more than that.

The Fright Night and Conan remakes opened the same weekend. Fright Night had great ratings at RT, but actually did worse than Conan in theaters. I didn't see Conan, but did see Fright Night when it came out on Blu-ray and thought it was really quite funny; but people didn't even bother seeing it. So I think remakes can carry an unfair stigma.

When I say John Carter and Conan ruined any chances of remaking this I don't mean it just from the POV that they were not high-rated movies. I also meant it from the perspective that people don't wanna embrace the cheese anymore.

For my latest movie reviews and news:http://www.hesaidshesaidreviewsite.com/

reply

[–] Hendry_William_French 12 years ago

"When I say John Carter and Conan ruined any chances of remaking this I don't mean it just from the POV that they were not high-rated movies. I also meant it from the perspective that people don't wanna embrace the cheese anymore."

Yeah, I got you. They won't have a hankering for cheese anymore when they've sampled it on a toothpick and it's all rottenly generic. Fun cheese just doesn't exist anymore, and it needs to be fun if audiences want more.

Is the atomic weight of cobalt 58.9?

reply

[–] Kuato_and_George 12 years ago

I don't agree that it doesn't exist. Sure, it may not be exactly the same as it was in the 80s and there may not be as much of it, but there's still corny (but fun) stuff out there. I do agree it's not as light or heart-felt as it was in the 80s. 80s movies just had this feel-good sense to them. Innerspace, MOTU, Back to the Future, Harry and the Hendersons, Short Cirtcuit, there was an innocene to these movies which doesn't exist in the same exact way today. I agree with you on that.

For my latest movie reviews and news:http://www.hesaidshesaidreviewsite.com/

reply

[–] Hendry_William_French 12 years ago

Sure. By movies that exist, I suppose you mean stuff like Avengers? Did you see battleship?

"MOTU, Back to the Future, Harry and the Hendersons, Short Cirtcuit, there was an innocene to these movies which doesn't exist in the same exact way today. I agree with you on that."

Glad I'm not the only one who thinks the same. Either we have good taste and are in a certain minority or many years from now people will finally look back on that era of cinema as something very special.

Is the atomic weight of cobalt 58.9?

reply

[–] AleksandertheDraconian 12 years ago

Your cast is amazing anyways that would have to be if the remake was produced by a major studio.

I try so hard not to get upset, because I know all the trouble I'll get

reply

[–] jamesob5-265-908024 12 years ago

Here's my picks for Masters of the Universe:

*He-Man - Chris Hemsworth
*Skeletor - Ralph Fiennes
*Man-At-Arms - Jeff Bridges
*Beast Man - Hugh Jackman
*Teela - Jessica Chastain
*Evil-Lyn - Carla Gugino
*Man-E-Faces - Arnold Schwarzenegger
*Tri-Klops - Hugo Weaving
*Ram Man - Gérard Depardieu
*Trap Jaw - Mickey Rourke
*Orko (Voice) - Frank Oz

http://fillthepart.com/movies/mastersoftheuniverse

reply

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Grumftheld 11 years ago

For years now I always thought the casting of a new He-Man was obvious, Ryan McPartlin aka Captain Awesome from Chuck. He's got the height (about 6'3-6'4 range) and he's got the look. Most of all thought, what puts him over the top for me is that he has the right voice for the character.

I grew up in the 80's with these cartoons, and I always loved them because the lead characters looked and sounded like superhuman heroic MEN, not angsty boys that is common now. McPartlin has all that going for him. I thought Skarsgard was a great choice, but out of the 2 McPartlin would get my vote because he looks and sounds more the part, not by much, but enough. I wouldn't be disappointed if it WAS Skarsgard in the end though.

As for the issue over He-Mans size, I think he needs to be heavily muscular. Prince Adam can be a thinner, leaner man, but He-Man needs to have the Superhuman look about him, it would be hard to take him seriously without it. I'd like to see the film made using the same tech used in Captain America when Chris Evans' body was 'shrunk' to make him look small and weedy. McPartlin (or whoever gets the part) can bulk up for the role and stay that way, and the transformation into Prince Adam can be done later.

As for the other cast, well, I always liked Gary Oldman for Man at Arms, Bridget Regan for Teela, Dolph Lundgren and Melissa Clark for the King and Queen, Seth McFarlane as voices for Orco and Cringer, Cassidy Freeman for Evil Lynn as I'd prefer I younger one, but if an older one was called for then Tilda Swinton is a great call. I also like Marcia Cross in the role as an older Evil Lynn. Skeletor only ever had 2 options for me, either Frank Langella or Mark Hamill. The other cast members I wasn't too concerned about. Sorceress I couldn't decide on as I couldn't decide on a young, middle aged or old sorceress, as all options would work. As an interesting side note, I always thought that Yvonne Strahovsky would make a perfect She-Ra.

reply

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Kuato_and_George 11 years ago

I audibly laughed at your suggestion of Gerard Depardiu. It would never happen, but it's crazy enough to work. I think the same about Arnold as Man-E-Faces. It woudl work in the way his Mr. Freeze did; which was the only entertaining thing about that awful batman movie.

I like Hemsworth and Fiennes is a fantastic suggestion for Skeletor. I also like your suggestion of Tyler Mane and I would pay money just to see Jessica Chastain in a Teela outfit. Carla Cugino is a good suggestion for Evil-Lyn. I love Mickey Rourke as Trap-Jaw.

I don't remember enough about Tri-Klops to picture Weaving as him. I could care less about Orko, but Oz would be the man for the job. Is Tome Selleck even in good enough shape anymore to pull that off?

For my latest movie reviews and news:http://www.hesaidshesaidreviewsite.com/

reply

[–] indianman 9 years ago

For starter there is only one actor who could pull off the top role of a He-Man remake
so my cast choices is

He-Man- Chris Hemsworth
Adam- Liam Hemsworth
Duncan(Man at Arms)- Jeff Bridges
Teela- Jaimie Alexander
Sorceress-Angelina Jolie Pitt
Skeletor-Tom Hiddleston
Evil Lyn-Helena Bonham Carter
Beastman-Peter Hambleton
Merman-Jed Brophy
Trap Jaw-Ray Stevenson
Ram-Man-Ken Stott
Orko-Frank Oz voice

There are many others that need to be included
King Randor- Dolph Lungren
Queen Marlena-Cate Blanchett

reply