MovieChat Forums > Love & Mercy (2015) Discussion > John Cusack

John Cusack

posted 9 years ago by CowgirlUp94
33 replies | jump to latest

I'm sorry, I love him. He is one of my favorite actors. But I just felt he was not the best casting choice for Brian Wilson. He just doesn't look anything whatsoever like Brian Wilson to the point that it was distracting for me.

[–] jpozenel 9 years ago

I found the lack of resemblance to be very distracting as well.

They should have looked for an actor that bears as least some resemblance to older Brian Wilson and then worked from there.

I would have suggested Tim Guinee for the part. He is a veteran actor and bears a strong resemblance to Brian during that time period.

http://www.imdb.com/media/rm289521152/nm0347375?ref_=nmmd_md_nxt

[–] GorchBrother 8 years ago

That guy doesn't look any more like Wilson than Cusack does.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/browbeat/2015/06/10/love_mercy_fact_vs_fiction_how_the_new_brian_wilson_biopic_starring_john.html

"I don't need to believe it's real. I just need to believe it."

[–] machaltcrz 8 years ago

Thought Mr Cusack did a fine job. I suspect he really wanted this role, and I see it as a kind of homage to Mr Wilson. Real nice movie.
machaltcrz

[–] moviefool09 8 years ago

Surprisingly, I wasn't too bothered by the discrepancy in appearance between Dano and Cusack. This is a credit to how both actors were able to echo each other in how they each played the role. I didn't really buy them as the same guy but it didn't matter too much to me in the end, because the film was so effective.

"The future is tape, videotape, and NOT film?"

[–] AHumanBeing 8 years ago

To the original post: I couldn't get past it either. It sank the film more than anything, for me, and there was enough problems with this film without the fact that Cusack just looked like himself, not Brian Wilson.

[–] profitofdoom 8 years ago

Yes Paul Dano's version of Brian was so much better. It's not just that Cusack is nothing like him physically, It's that I'm sure the Brian Wilson of the '80's was nowhere near as coherent or as emotionally tuned in as Cusack made him to be. I mean we've all seen Brain Wilson today, he's a lot more messed up than that.
I guess John didn't want to "go full retard" so to speak

[–] manco82 7 years ago

Agreed. Paul Dano was virtually perfect as 1966 Brian, but John Cusack just screamed to me John Cusack! He doesn't belong in films like this.

[–] Prelude (1443) 4 years ago

Cusack ruined it for me.

Don't get me wrong, I don't need for an actor to resemble a person to a "T" but there has to be SOME degree of physical similarity, and it's not there with Cusack. His behavior may have been slightly evocative of Wilson but this looks mismatching ruined that.

Paul Dano, for instance, does not look EXACTLY like the young Brian Wilson BUT he resembled him just enough to bolster an excellent performance even more.

Cusack looks SO different from the older Wilson that when I first saw his first scene, I genuinely asked myself "Okay who's this now?" I seriously didn't know this was supposed to be Brian older.

[–] DaveBowman2001 (472) 3 years ago

Totally agree. Odd choice. I kept saying the entire movie, they should have found someone unknown/lesser known. All I saw was John Cusack. Someone below suggested Sam Rockwell. I'd agree on that choice.

Overall, pretty good movie though, for what it is. I'm not a massive BB fan, but I don't hate them either, but have heard BW was a studio genius in documentaries. Kinda feel like they could have gone deeper though into drugs/abuse/other stuff.

[–] bobbydallas (8085) 3 years ago

i feel like he channelled Forrest Gump for like 78% of this role..

it's a no from me.