Rumor mongering part 300: Russell Crowe as villain?
- Thread starter Rat Boy
- Start date
Wow. If they could get him, look out!! :thumbsup:
Not bad. I love it when they cast the "leading man/heroic type" against type, assuming the guy's a good actor and can pull it off.
Heck, if Crowe isn't available, get Matt Damon!!!
Heck, if Crowe isn't available, get Matt Damon!!!
The first character I thought of when the Russel Crowe rumor surfaced was Garth of Izar. In fact, I can hardly imagine a more perfect actor for that role. He even bears a passing resemblance to Steve Ihnat who originally portrayed the character, if his hair was lighter. I also find it interesting that some of the recently leaked casting information refers to a “Federation Captain,” which some, including our own esteemed PowderedToastMan, have speculated might actually be a distortion of “Fleet Captain,” with Chris Pike as the most likely candidate. However, if memory serves, Pike wasn’t promoted to Fleet Captain until AFTER he gave up command of the Enterprise, which would contradict a lot of the current speculation about Pike in the 1701’s center seat for this film.
But guess who else was a renowned Fleet Captain? Yup, Garth of Izar. Seriously folks, imagine the story of Fleet Captain Garth’s descent into madness and how he was ultimately brought to heel by an intrepid young Starfleet officer named James T. Kirk. I’m sitting here drooling at the dramatic possibilities.
People have been asking, what was it that propelled Kirk into the youngest starship captaincy in Starfleet history? This could have been it.
But guess who else was a renowned Fleet Captain? Yup, Garth of Izar. Seriously folks, imagine the story of Fleet Captain Garth’s descent into madness and how he was ultimately brought to heel by an intrepid young Starfleet officer named James T. Kirk. I’m sitting here drooling at the dramatic possibilities.
People have been asking, what was it that propelled Kirk into the youngest starship captaincy in Starfleet history? This could have been it.
Pass that bucket, I'm drooling too.
Glancing at Garth's page on Memory Alpha I don't think Crowe looks like him...the guy who plays Desmond on Lost would be a good match (but we're looking for a big-name movie star)...I almost hate to say it, but Ben Affleck is the big name that matches the best. Despite his poor movie choices, Affleck IS a decent actor.
Cool if true -- about Garth of Izar, I mean -- will we see part of the Battle of Axanar you think? We might even find out what "of Izar" bit is about.
Temis -- have you ever considered a career as a Casting Director? I'm serious BTW -- your suggestions always seem right on the money to me.
Temis -- have you ever considered a career as a Casting Director? I'm serious BTW -- your suggestions always seem right on the money to me.
Ten years ago he would've been a good choice to play Kirk.
Okay, the Garth bit has me intrigued...
But you know, if he's going to play Garth... who's gonna play Wayne???
But you know, if he's going to play Garth... who's gonna play Wayne???
I think the time line issues of having Garth be the villain may be problematic. He was Kirk's hero when he was at the Academy and a Fleet Captain of Starfleet at the time. He suffered horrible trauma after having saved several people and wound up going somewhere to learn how to molecularly change his form to help him heal from his wounds. He became insane during this time, much later than what it sounds like the time frame to be in the new movie. I have to go back and watch "Whom Gods Destroy" again. It was 3rd Season, IIRC. If they do use Garth, it would be a retcon from hell.
Great idea on the Garth of Izar point.
As for an alien, I really don't see Russell Crowe getting put under a lot of makeup of any kind but who knows?
As for an alien, I really don't see Russell Crowe getting put under a lot of makeup of any kind but who knows?
I see Russell Crowe as an unemotional actor, while good in movies like Gladiator and Master and Commander, I think he's unsuitable for Trek.
Trek needs a villain that is multi-faceted. Dr Soran, The Borg Queen, Shizon, and the S'ona played by F. Murray Abraham were all one sided cookie cutter villains. All of whom were played by "Movie Stars".
I don't see the need for this type of stunt where they will bank on a star's reputation to drive ticket revenue. Where does this leave Trek in the long run? They'll have spent big for a character that can't easily be reused, and recasting them would not bring back the people that went out to see the big star.
Trek needs a villain that is multi-faceted. Dr Soran, The Borg Queen, Shizon, and the S'ona played by F. Murray Abraham were all one sided cookie cutter villains. All of whom were played by "Movie Stars".
I don't see the need for this type of stunt where they will bank on a star's reputation to drive ticket revenue. Where does this leave Trek in the long run? They'll have spent big for a character that can't easily be reused, and recasting them would not bring back the people that went out to see the big star.
Russell Crowe would be cool, beyond that, as Garth, well as 137th Gebirg says, it's a retcon.
-- If the battle of Axanar is shown, Garth was the big hero of it. Kirk distinguished himself at the peace mission which followed.
-- Though exactly when is iffy (outside fan fic), Garth had his accident and went mad some time after Axanar. Maybe quite a time after. Probably outside the time period of this movie given the ages being tossed around.
-- For what it's worth, we'd also know he lives to meet Kirk again. The worst fate he faces in XI is being put in an asylum. Doesn't mean the story will be bad. But compared to the fates of the other trek baddies, rather anti-climatic.
-- Another crazed baddie as villain. Maybe XI's Kirk will have a scene where he shouts, "Garrrrrrrrth!"
-- If the battle of Axanar is shown, Garth was the big hero of it. Kirk distinguished himself at the peace mission which followed.
-- Though exactly when is iffy (outside fan fic), Garth had his accident and went mad some time after Axanar. Maybe quite a time after. Probably outside the time period of this movie given the ages being tossed around.
-- For what it's worth, we'd also know he lives to meet Kirk again. The worst fate he faces in XI is being put in an asylum. Doesn't mean the story will be bad. But compared to the fates of the other trek baddies, rather anti-climatic.
-- Another crazed baddie as villain. Maybe XI's Kirk will have a scene where he shouts, "Garrrrrrrrth!"
But would the Lord Garth villain and story be enough for a feature film and the huge investment?
That would be something that the general populace would not know about and need to already be familiar with.
I thought they were trying to go with something that you don't need any foreknowledge to enjoy. No complicated backstory, no tie-ins to other Treks.
That would be something that the general populace would not know about and need to already be familiar with.
I thought they were trying to go with something that you don't need any foreknowledge to enjoy. No complicated backstory, no tie-ins to other Treks.
I don’t think they would have to retcon too much. No exact dates were canonically established. All we know is that Garth was a personal hero of Kirk’s from his Academy days and that he later suffered some terrible “accident,” leading to mental instability and attempted genocide against the inhabitants of Antos IV, which in turn landed him in the Asylum at Elba II by the time of the episode “Whom Gods Destroy.” Given the ages of the actors they are supposedly looking for, I’d say the timing would be just about right.
On the other hand, the original episode certainly seemed to suggest that Garth had never met Kirk or Spock before, and the dialogue between Kirk and Spock, as I remember it, held no hint of either of them having been instrumental in the events surrounding Garth’s downfall. Still, there might be ways to work around that or they may simply ignore the nitpickier details in favor of a good story.
The other problem with this is that it seemed to me like the villain and the "Federation Captain" definitely seemed like two different roles. I don't think there's any reason to think that the villain is a Fleet Captain or a member of the Federation at all, and especially not based on that article.
The audience wouldn’t need any foreknowledge of “Whom Gods Destroy” as the events of that episode happen after the events we’d be seeing in the film. Knowing what eventually happens to Garth would be no more relevant to the movie’s storyline than knowing what eventually happens to Khan was relevant to one’s ability to enjoy “Space Seed.” Narratively speaking, nothing in the film should rely on a knowledge of later events in the Trek universe in order to understand them or there is something fundamentally wrong with the story.
Then again, with Abrams’ penchant for non-linear storytelling, almost anything is possible.
It's reasonable to guess that the headliner will at least appear in human form or without much make-up. They aren't going to want to obscure the face of their headliner.
And the corniness associated with the last few films' villains -- save Soran -- was derived at least partly from the massive amounts of make-up, which I guess made it hard for those typical actors to take the role seriously enough to give a nuanced performance.
Similar threads
