Alan Ruck


This is a very poorly cast character. How are we supposed to believe that an actor who is 64 years old is the brother of siblings who are in their 30's and early 40's. Stretches believability for sure.

reply

Ruck doesn't look 64. If you asked people who had no idea, i think they'd guess 50's. So its really not poor casting. Or unrealistic. Its not like he has the same mom as the other 3. Logan had him when he was younger, then with his second wife 10 or so years later he had the rest.

reply

Then the super 8 films in the intro aren't to be taken as real. Ruck's character doesn't look much older than the other children in the home movies. They all look just a few years apart from each other. That is what kind of confused me. If it wasn't for that, then I wouldn't have found it that unbelievable.

reply

The Super 8 intro footage features different children from different wealthy families as well as the Fathers. The intro establishes the tone along with sinister Vivaldi-esque music

reply

Oh OK, that makes sense. There are 3 boys and a girl in the opening super 8 footage, so it confused me. Thanks for the explanation.

reply

No, the intro is clearly the Roy kids in different stages of their lives.

reply

Exactly. Different mom makes it entirely plausible...And don't forget he got his start in movies as a 30 year old playing a high school student!

reply

Was he really that old in Ferris Bueller!

reply

He was 29 when the movie was filmed...

reply

They were all old! Broderick was 24, Jennifer Gray was 26! Mia Sara was the baby

reply

Alan Ruck was miscast. Especially in the scenes were you can see his flabby, wrinkled neck... The other mistake was when they had him grow facial hair, which made him look his age even more...

I get it, that he was from an earlier marriage or something, but still.. Doesn't quite fit...

reply

I get it too, but what confuses me is the photos from the opening where home movies show the 4 children all together and they all look like they are a few years apart from each other. That is what made me wonder why Ruck was cast in the role.

reply

He's perfect for that role of a insulated clueless plutocrats spawn, thinking he should be President.

reply

He we well suited for that part of the role, it's just the age gap that was a bit much...

reply

I have no problem with Ruck in the role, but the actor is twice the age of the actress who plays the daughter.

reply

That's called acting! ;-)

reply

The best of actors can't make a 30 year difference in age believable.

reply

You've gotta suspend your disbelief man .... see it in your mind!
You may be right, but I never gave it a moments thought until I saw these comments. I don't care, I just accept it. It's not science, it's not archeology.

reply

C'est tout.

reply

Even though it wasn't used for this series, the idea of Alan just being the eldest of the siblings is like the audience seeing Robert DeNiro in his late 20s (with de-aging CGI) in "The Irishman". His face looked less wrinkly, but his body and posture still looked like that of a 70+ old man. LOL

reply

OK ... don't believe it and don't watch it. Does that sound reasonable?

reply

lol. the guy is hilariously idiotic.

reply

Look at the family tree of Mick Jagger

reply

Alan Ruck is 18 years younger in real life than the character of his father. It's entirely plausible. Don't forget, the siblings are half-siblings of Alan Ruck's character Conner.

reply