MovieChat Forums > Borgia (2011) Discussion > Most miscast lead role ever?

Most miscast lead role ever?


If not, it's certainly up there.

I seriously cannot think of a more inappropriate actor for a part than John Doman is for Borgia. Literally every time he opens his mouth I'm immediately taken out of the show's reality and can only marvel at how out of place he is among the rest of the cast.

Don't get me wrong - he's not a bad actor in the slightest - but he simply doesn't belong in a historical piece like this. He's just too gruff and contemporary and, well, American. His presence is jarring to the extreme.

reply

I agree. He is not a bad actor and he is relatively commanding but the most distracting thing for me is how colourless his voice sounds. They could have taken many European actors that would be much better to recite the decidedly Skakespearean lines. Worst moments for me:
1.When he shouts "Una Rinascita!" in a mockingly Italian accent, like he was imitating Tony Soprano, complete with hand gestures and all.
2.When he shouts "Yeah!" and punches the air after hearing that the French are defeated, like that amounts to his baseball team victory.

reply

As an American Doman certainly stands apart from the rest of the actors in that his accent comes out. Conventionally, for an American audience, such roles would have the actor speak with a European accent. In this case English with an Italian (Spanish?) accent. The other option would be for the actor to speak with an upper class British accent. This works for Americans as we understand the words yet the accent is European and we place the character in a European setting. However after 10 episodes the American accent does not bother me. I may even work to the good. Rodrigo sees himself as a foreigner (Spanish) among Italians. Doman's American accent sets him apart from the others. As to how historically accurate this may be I don't know. He seems to be a Renaissance version of the character he played in The Wire -- a savvy, competent political-bureaucratic player. As such Doman is giving a fine performance. The only problem I have is that he seems to be blind to the ineptitude of Juan.

reply

I agree to a certain extent, mostly on the issue that John Doman brilliantly plays the "businessman" Pope very well, somewhat like the ruthless CEO he played on Damages Season 2. For me, the accent is mostly an extension of his voice which he somewhat can't handle to his full benefit, sounding unsure how he should pronounce certain names, places or how to verbalize certain points. It is actually funny how British accents are widely considered an automatic choice for historical shows but I can't blame producers for casting British thesps in this kind of television/films: most British actors are very expressive even when they underplay a part and bring a certain flavour and colouring to their characters on such a level that is unavoidable for them to be closely associated with this genre-specific casting.

reply

Those of you who dislike Doman's American English among the other heavily-accented characters should watch the miniseries Pope Pius XII, which is also streaming on Netflix. The producers of that show would have had the same issue, with James Cromwell playing the pope among a cast of European actors. They addressed it by looping unaccented voices over the dialogue of everyone but Cromwell. I'm not sure I liked it better.

reply

My complain really has to do with casting him from the beginning. There are many European actors the show could certainly afford and fit in better in a multi-accented project.

reply

You could go get $30,000,000 and make your own production - that's always an option.

reply

You could go get $30,000,000 and make your own production - that's always an option.

That's not the point.

reply

I completely agree. Just because something requires cost and effort to be made, it doesn't mean I am not allowed an opinion on it.

reply


Every time i hear him talk i immediate think that this takes place in Rome, Pennsylvania. He has a horribly disconcerting lack of an accent.


I don't have a badge, i have a laminate.

reply

I agree and what I find even worse than his accent is that he lacks that kind of language control that is common in British thesps. As a result, his delivery of lines is often clumsy, awkward, pauses at the wrong moments etc.

reply

This is the most ridiculous complaint ever. How the heck are the other actors being any more authentic? Playing a Renaissance Italian (or Catalonian) in English with an Italian, Spanish or Russian accent is somehow more authentic?

You do realize that, if they were going for authenticity, they would at least have the actors speaking Italian, and if they were REALLY going for authenticity, the Italian that was spoken at the time rather than contemporary Italian?

Pain is to pleasure as disco is to punk.You need to live through one to fully appreciate the other.

reply

Historical roles written in English is the canon in period films/television so Doman playing an Italian-speaking Spanish Pope in a Spanish-accented Italian language isn't part of the complaint at all. People are merely complaining that though he's a decent actor his dialogue is written in a way that doesn't facilitate him to deliver it, which is partly his fault, partly the writers' and partly the casting department's. He's obviously struggling with the long sentences, his intonation is frequently wrong and he doesn't make any effort to speak in a more generic English accent.

reply

Fontana’s ‘Borgia’ is a COMPLETELY European production. I guess English was chosen for the filming mostly because it’s a common language that everyone seems to speak, more or less. Then it was dubbed into many different European languages.
There is no cent of US money in it; moreover: no one US TV-channel agreed to air it, since, you know, they kind of believed the North-American TV market is not big enough to endure TWO shows on the same subject running simultaneously. Yeah Netflix bought the rights for the US premiere but only in fall 2011 when the season was already completed. So I really can’t see why the French and German producers should have made any efforts to force Doman to speak in more universal English – in the show that, at the time of shooting and post-production, was not supposed to be broadcasted in US at all.
As everyone else in Europe I firstly watched the synchronized version of the series. Obviously I had no problems with Doman’s or anyone else’s accent. So I totally love how the part of Rodrigo is written AND performed and I MUCH prefer this version of the character compared to Jeremy Irons’ one.

reply

Everyone's entitled to their opinion and their preferences. I too like how the part of Rodrigo's written in "Borgia", except for his dialogue, and I like the cutthroat quality Doman injects the character with. BUT: when it comes to the more sensitive/emotional side of the role I think Doman's laughable (the scene when he announces Juan's death as his own punishment, in front of the cardinals, springs to mind) and I understand that Irons may be an acquired taste but there's no denying he's the superior actor, his voice is unique, his range is incomparable (to Doman's, at least) and his performance in "The Borgias" is layered and original.

reply

BUT: when it comes to the more sensitive/emotional side of the role I think Doman's laughable

But Doman’s Rodrigo is NOT supposed to be sentimental, that’s it! Emotionally he’s rather cold and also not accustomed to express his feelings openly; no wonder he does look and sound awkward in these scenes. And when he, for example, tries to persuade his children he truly loves them it doesn’t work either: he knows he used to lie to them and to manipulate their feelings too often to be convincing enough.
As for Irons: in fact I love him and think he’s one of the finest actors ever. But sorry I just cannot stand him in the part of Rodrigo for a one simple reason: the way the part is WRITTEN is pretty much awful imo. No matter how good his acting is, say, in the scene he’s receiving the French ambassador with Lucrezia’s baby in his lap; this scene is totally unbelievable and silly and making no sense at all. If Rodrigo had ever acted this way he must have married his still “virgin” daughter to that stable boy, indeed, because nobody else would have agreed to take her! Again, no matter that Irons is perfect in “making” clever face; his character is NOT clever. Most of the time he’s doing nothing and to be honest, it’s also better so, because all his so-called “intrigues” and “plans” are either senseless or simply idiotic. Sorry it’s just NOT Rodrigo Borgia.

reply

I will take your explanation for Doman's Rodrigo being cold and emotionally distant but when it comes to Irons' Rodrigo I don't think he's a fool: he acts goofy and is generally far more relaxed and less calculating than Cesare but he doesn't have to worry a lot because he's insulated and he works through others. I agree, Neil Jordan has him caring only for women, cigars and money and he only gets defensive when it comes to his authority getting threatened but all things considered, he can be cunning and manipulative (not as much as Doman obviously, but it's just the difference in the way their characters are written).

reply

when it comes to Irons' Rodrigo I don't think he's a fool: he acts goofy and is generally far more relaxed and less calculating than Cesare but he doesn't have to worry a lot because he's insulated and he works through others.

Unfortunately I cannot agree.
It's not a problem he acts goofy; he acts just STUPID, that's it. The way he treats the french amsassador is silly, not only in terms of his and his daughter's reputation but also generally spoken... especially because the french king is his enemy now. I can't see why he doesn't have to worry about the situation: Charles VIII does feel tricked and betrayed; obviously he also wants revenge and his army is the best in Europe. And instead of doing something for Rome's safety or at least fleeing for a while( as historical Rodrigo did) the pope choses to bed some random women, spent the last money for some silly feast and tease the envoy of his angry and strong enemy. *facepalm*
Sleeping with your ally's wife at the crucial moment with the risk to create another enemy is not the best idea, either... and honestly, you don't need to be particularly bright or "calculating" to see it.
Again I cannot call his reaction to della Rovere's( btw rather silly, too) accusations being intelligent; as a matter of fact the pope literally FORCED Giuliano to leave Rome and start plotting with the French. And after the several appemps on della Rovere's life failed one after another - of course, the best way to act is to forget him completely and let him go on plotting...
Also there is no sense in forcing your only beloved daughter in an obviously unhappy marriage and killing this poor innocent turk prince only because you trust Sforzas so much and hope to get some kind of help against the French from them( what help? why exactly from Sforzas? against the french army, oh... seriously??)
I could go on and on and on...
Sorry but if an individual repeatedly acts like a fool all the time I can only conclude, he IS a fool, indeed.
My point is: it's just not the right way to deal with any actually existed historical character... and even Rodrigo's worst enimies couldn't deny the fact he was really clever, able and talented politician.
The worst thing: I actually feel Irons could have been TERRIFIC as Rodrigo: he's just brilliant in pure family and human interactions and as I said before, he also can play intelligence very well... if only the writers could make some effort and write some really complex, interesting and clever plotlines for him...

reply

Your points are very interesting. Once more, I would argue that this is matter of writing but even then, in terms of the universe of "The Borgias" (that only loosely adheres to documented history) most of these things make sense.
On the baby and the French ambassador: he doesn't bring his grandson in the meeting just to act the silly grandfather but as a prop to help fend off the ambassador. That wouldn't have worked if the show had introduced an able and determined ambassador but given how spineless the dignitary was, Rodrigo's ploy and aloofness -in terms of the show- works. That is further proven by the fact that in the next scene Rodrigo is deadly serious as Juan and Cesare pay their respects and inform him on how their plot against the French is going (and it is implied that he set the trap in Naples).
On sleeping with his general's wife: I though that was something that referenced a Biblical event (I could be mistaken) and seemed to be of minimum risk. She initiated the seduction, it was a one-time thing, nobody saw her (except Cesare) and her husband was conveniently out of the way.
On his reaction to Della Rovere: Della Rovere's French affiliation was never mentioned in the first two episodes of the show (and he actually tried to recruit the Neapolitan first, after his flee from Rome) so I don't think there was the particular danger that he would go plot with the greatest arsenal in Europe.
On his decision to marry Lucrezia to the Sforza: the Milanese family is presented in the show as, perhaps, the strongest in Italy (given that the Orsini and the Colonna hardly appear at all) and with a considerable army, so his decision makes sense in terms of the show.

You do realize we are arguing about whether entirely fictional things make sense and if the question was "which show is closer to historical detail?" I would have to go with Borgia. But since this thread is about whether Doman was miscast and the inevitable comparisons with Irons, I think we'll ultimately reach the conclusion that we agree to disagree.

All in all, Doman is decent (but miscast in my opinion, there are many actors, both European and American, that would do much better in the role) but inferior to Irons (who is a very original choice for the role and presents a man with compelling contradictions - but that doesn't mean he's perfect or that there aren't many other actors who would be equally good if not better in this particular role).

reply

Once more, I would argue that this is matter of writing but even then, in terms of the universe of "The Borgias" (that only loosely adheres to documented history) most of these things make sense.

Yep, it's, in fact, my main point all the time: I think the script is weak and very often just stupid and making no sense. And inaccurate, but it goes without saying...
Maybe you're right and Jordan's script does make sense for the part of the audience that neither knows history nor cares for it. Maybe. As for me I find the real story of Borgias much more interesting and appealing than the Jordan's lame fantasies.
it is implied that he set the trap in Naples

So if I understand correctly Rodrigo contaminated Naples with pest and hopes now that Charles gets infected, too, and just dies before he can take revenge? That's why he does nothing to save Rome and his family? Well... Now just compare this "plan" to the words of Doman's Rodrigo: " I am Borgia and I leave nothing to chance" and see the difference...
On della Rovere: It doesn't really matter who exactly della Rovere was going to plot with. It's quite simple: if you think your enemy is dangerous enough and should be murdered, it's pretty stupid to chase him out of Rome and pursue him then through the whole Italy, isn't it? And after you tried to killed him once and failed,.. please make some efforts and bring the matter to the end 'cause there's no way back now: for some reason people usually don't forgive attepts on their lives... and exactly this we see in season 2!
On the Sforza plot: Even if the army of Milan is represented as strong enough to be able to stand up to the French( which, as I'm sure you know, is completely wrong: in fact it was no one else than Lodovico Sforza who "invited" the french king to Italy exactly because his own army couldn't compete against the one of Naples) it's still totally silly to trust Sforzas to such extent and give them 400.000 as a dowry... particularly if one recalls by which dirty means the pope got this money.
On Rodrigo sleeping with Gonzaga's wife: So what exactly does this scene add to Rodrigo's characted? We already know the pope loves young and pretty ladies( expecially if they start the seduction themselves) and is not strong enough to resist. And if no one is going to get to know of this one-time affair... what does it add to the plot?
You see, even a very intelligent man can behave idiotic sometimes... it's fully OK. But Iron's Rodrigo is like this ALL THE TIME. Once again: no one of his plans or moves I can call really clever, quite the contrary. He is always at the edge of destruction and mostly because of his own silly behavior. Seriously if historical Rodrigo had ever acted like this he would have been killed right after his uncle's death.
So my opinion is still the same: Irons is a brilliant actor and in "The Borgias" he is great as ever. But what he's playing is just not Rodrigo Borgia, unfortunately...
John Doman may be not so great as an actor( I say " may be" since in fact I haven't seen him in anything else) but his Rodrigo is excellent and absolutely right on the place in the Fontana's clever, complex and very well researched script. IMO there is no way he's miscast.




reply

I fully respect your opinion. As I said, we agree to disagree.

reply

I am watching this now and almost done with the season I have to agree, John Doman is awful in this role. Every time he says "Be gone from my sight" I just want to laugh out loud. His voice seems more suited to voice-over work and while I'm not saying he's a bad actor, his accent makes this series hard to take seriously.

reply

Many of the comments here seem to refer to Doman's "plain" American accent. I would argue that the problem is that his accent is not plain enough. It is a Pennsylvania accent. Not strong, that is for sure, but it is not plain.

Many Americans, after a century of filmmaking, are used to the California manner of speaking or even parts of the Midwest. It can be considered "pure," or the lack of an accent. This is similar to the way Italians consider Roman speakers and the French consider Parisians -- there is no accent.

In Doman's case, we have a strongly regional American accent, so it is that much harder to accept him as a Renaissance Italian. Or should I say I_alian, as Doman is fond of saying on the show. He completely forgets there is a "T" in the country's name!

reply

All I know is, watching and listening to Doman, I feel as if I've somehow stumbled onto a Baltimore Community Theater production starring Commissioner Rawls.

reply

oh, I totally disagree...if they were going to have Doman and the guy playing Cesare using Spanish accents, that would make some sense, but a bland American accent makes as much sense as Jeremy Irons sounding like the first Pope to have gone to Eton.

The accent was jarring for the first 20 minutes for me and then I got over it. Refusing to get over it means missing out on some pretty good entertainment.

reply

^ this

Also, lets not forget that Borgia is internationally produced. Italian, French, and US based production companies are behind this.

Finally I applaud the fact that many of the actors do have their native accents in tact, as opposed to The Borgias or Da Vinci's Demons (despite how I enjoy those shows as well). Where everyone speaks in a flat transcontinental stage accent.

reply

It's not just his accent, it's the delivery of his lines. It's as if he were reading the script for the first time. Keep in mind that Sansoni also has an American accent, but his delivery was natural as was his cadence.

Even when he spoke Latin, you almost burst out laughing because this guy clearly did not do his homework.

reply

his delivery of lines is often clumsy, awkward, pauses at the wrong moments etc.
his dialogue is written in a way that doesn't facilitate him to deliver it, which is partly his fault, partly the writers' and partly the casting department's. He's obviously struggling with the long sentences, his intonation is frequently wrong

I completely agree with these statements.

I don't find Doman's American accent to be the problem. It's his intonation.
He is astonishingly wrong for this part. I cringe every time I hear him say,"Be gone from my sight!"

There are American actors, with American accents, who could pull off the role.
Frank Langella, Steve Buscemi, Bryan Cranston, to name a few of the bigger names.
John Doman just isn't one of them.

I am just watching the season/series I, up to episode 10 or so now.
I haven't seen the Jeremy Irons' Borgia show, so my comments are not in comparison to that work. (But I'm not much of a Jeremy Irons fan, for that matter.)

reply

Rodrigo as written is fine (aside from the drug addiction storyline and overuse of certain phrases). As for Doman, I think he was picked primarily for his looks and commanding presence - which he does have. He might struggle with some other emotions but I still find him entertaining to watch. Also, the primary market for the show are non-English speaking European countries so his delivery didn't even matter much.

reply

natalie0407, that is quite an interesting point. I don't suppose that even someone who knows English in, say Hungary, would care or even notice the accent. I didn't realize that was the target market. As a previous poster noted, he does have a powerful presence, so combined with a captioned performance, the physical acting would be more important than the verbal.

Unfortunately, still makes it impossible for me to enjoy! But I hope it will be successful, from the standpoint of international television.

reply