MovieChat Forums > Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas (1998) Discussion > So who should gave played Thompson?

So who should gave played Thompson?

posted 6 years ago by Otter (24464)
6 replies | jump to latest

This film is what I call an interesting failure, cool to watch but ultimately unconvincing. At least part of the reason, maybe all of it, is that Johnny Depp is nothing like Hunter S. Thompson.

Depp is slight and was still beautiful when this film was made, Thompson was a big, wild, creepy, loose cannon of a guy who must have been scary as hell when hammered out of his mind. Depp isn't wild even though he tries to be, not just physically but because he holds back from Gillian's camera.

Would the film have been wilder and better with another actor, or is Gilliam the one who couldn't let the beast run rampant?

[–] MovieManCin2 (26342) 3 years ago

Bill Murray perhaps, but I don't think he would have made much of a difference. The film would still be boring and pointless.

😎

[–] Otter (24464) 3 years ago

Yeah, he might have worked! Can't say for sure, but Murray is a damn good actor, and might have pulled it off. I can't say for sure, as I can't see Murray about to have his head explode from taking illegal human adrenalin, but better him than Depp.

[–] MovieManCin2 (26342) 3 years ago

The key words here are "might have."

😎

[–] Master (1494) 3 years ago

I thought they said Bill Murray Because of Where The Buffalo Roam

[–] MovieManCin2 (26342) 3 years ago

Perhaps.

😎

[–] BourbonKing (5612) 3 years ago

It's not just the actor choice but the director choice. I can appreciate Terry Gilliam's cinematic vision, but his adaptation of Thompson's work was standard imho.

I would have preferred an adaptation by Hal Hartley or Mary Harron but only if they were interested in Thompson's work. Gilliam's interpretation was more retail than inspired.