MovieChat Forums > The Family Fang (2016) Discussion > Kidman and Bateman are at least 20 years...

Kidman and Bateman are at least 20 years too old for their roles in TFF.

posted 9 years ago by soyarra-1
20 replies | jump to latest

Has anyone here read the book? When I first read about this film I thought Kidman and Bateman were playing the PARENTS, which would be age appropriate if they were following the book narrative. Instead, through the miracle of Hollywood age myopia, they're playing the Fang children. Unbelievable.

I'd always pictured actors such as Josh Hutcherson, Paul Dano, Dane DeHaan or even Miles Teller as Buster, and actresses like Emma Stone, Rachel McAdams or even Kristen Stewart as Annie. Instead, we're getting middle-aged Fang children - which, of course, demanded the casting of septuagenarian actors as their parents. All. Wrong. This film is going to stink, Read the book instead.

[–] Dan_Garten 9 years ago

Oh.

[–] wjwoolf 9 years ago

Have YOU read the book?

You do realize that more than half of the narrative is set in the present day with the grown-up middle aged Fang sibs coming to terms with the issues growing up in that family left them to deal with?. The grown up Fang children in the novel ARE middle-aged, (the Fang sibs were born in the 70's after all).

Now, that being said Bateman and Kidman ARE too old - but only by about a decade. :-)

But all of your suggestions are way too young to be playing the grown-up Fangs. As great as Dano, Teller, Stone or McAdams are I'd buy Bateman and Kidman playing 40-somethings way before I'd buy any of them trying to act older. And they are of course too old to be playing the adolescent Fang children in the 80's performance art segments of the novel.

[–] Iron_Gland 9 years ago

Bateman is 46, so you should be able to believe him as a 40-something.

We made a land where crap is king, and the good don't last too long.

[–] freeway109 9 years ago

Bateman is 46, so you should be able to believe him as a 40-something.

Kidman is in her forties also, there is no reason why she should be considered to old to be playing a woman close to her age.

[–] Lady_Elaine_Fairchild 9 years ago

Both Kidman and Bateman were born in the 70s-sounds to me that the OP is trying to cast millennials instead of Gen Xers

So who now is guilty of narrow-mindedness?

Conceive Deceive or Leave
https://disqus.com/home/channel/conceievedeceiveorleave/

[–] lovestoshine-92378 9 years ago

Wrong, Kidman was born in 1967 and Bateman was born in 1969. And Hollywood almost always picks younger people to play order people instead of the other way around. The reason why Bateman and Kidman are the leads is because they bought the rights to this movie, our directing it and producing it so it's cheaper to play the leads plus they might want to.

[–] Yucahaor 8 years ago

Usually it's the other way around. Older plays younger. Just look at all the high school movies being played by 30 year olds.

[–] Soodinum 8 years ago

First of all, it's older, not order.

And if you can't remember the millions of times Hollywood films have used older actors playing people younger than they are, you're stupid or trolling.

[–] lovestoshine-92378 9 years ago

Smh, clearly you didn't keep a close eye on the DATES in the book that prefixed quite a few chapters. In this story age is IMPORTANT as it's a late coming of age/finding your adulthood film. 10 years age difference is huge because you are most likely NOT in the same position you were in your 20's that you are in your 30's or your 40's. Also, this story does NOT take place in present time in the book the latest date it gives is 2009 and the book it's self was published in 2012.

Here is info from my other post about their ages.

"Actually Buster was 9 years old in 1988 in the book so that makes him being born around 1979. The year that Annie's movie came out was 2009 so it's most likely they were looking for their parents in 2008, which means my original idea that this was a late coming of age story is correct.

Also Camille Fang was pregnant with Annie in 1977, I don't think it stated the specific month though so Annie could have been born later that year or most likely born in 1978.
Annie was born in 1977 or 1978, current time she would be 37/38, in the book timeline she would be 30 or 31.

So Buster was born in 1979, current time he would be 36, in the book timeline he would be 29 or 30.

"Just because you were born in the 70's doesn't mean you are in your 40's." - Math"

Also, I don't get why people are defending the casting. It's clear that the leads have a heavy hand in producing the film and wanted the lead roles for the film, that is all. Not because they are the best suited for the roles but because it's cheap/free to play the lead in your own movie and because you want to.

[–] govinda600 8 years ago

By all accounts all the reviews have said the best part of the movie is the acting and the casting. All of the leads have been praised for their work.

[–] bpladybug 8 years ago

Goodnes Gracious all of you!

Bateman and Kidman gave great performances. Awesome.

[–] chipoetryreturns 8 years ago

😀

[–] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] murad23 8 years ago

Bateman and Kidman are absolutely perfect for the film.

[–] VanBooter 8 years ago

Bateman and Kidman are absolutely perfect for the film.

I agree and although it was obviously a wig I thought Kidman looked great as a brunette

[–] steelgator7-918-386037 7 years ago

Bateman is pretty good but Kidman is awful, and her Aussie accent is overpowering. She just can't shake it to make the part work. The movie is not too bad but I would never go to the theatre to see it. 😞

[–] uhcsux 7 years ago

Which is exactly why Bateman is directing. He directs small movies with good ironic stories. Maybe this is practice for moving on to full time directing. But strangely, the child(ren)walk away from the parent(s)in the end (Bad Words and the Family Fang both end the same way with his character walking away from his parent(s), seemingly forever.

[–] Yorick_Brown 7 years ago

What? Not a trace of Kidman's Aussie accent was in this flick.

We try but we didn't have long
We try but we don't belong...

-Hot Chip (Boy from School)

[–] Dmarfish 7 years ago

It's all over the movie. As an example, she never says the word 'there', it always comes out as 'theh'.

[–] Yorick_Brown 7 years ago

Never noticed.

She has a typically good American accent.