DC Cinematic Universe ( The James Gunn era)

[theenglish]

I really enjoyed him on SGA. It wasn't like it was a show that had great acting in it anyway, and he did a fun job with the role he was given. He was memorable. That said, I never thought that he would become the actor he is today. His next major roles as Khal Drogo and Conan were not the most demanding acting roles. But, when I saw him as Aquaman, I thought he was the best thing about that movie.

We know he'll have a place in Gunn's DCU because he said so a couple of years ago. Lobo is an obvious choice and fits with the roles he plays. Personally, I don't have an emotional reaction to him playing the role one way or the other--but I would prefer it if he were given a role against type, like he did with Aquaman.

 

[Christopher]

We know he'll have a place in Gunn's DCU because he said so a couple of years ago. Lobo is an obvious choice and fits with the roles he plays. Personally, I don't have an emotional reaction to him playing the role one way or the other--but I would prefer it if he were given a role against type, like he did with Aquaman.

Yes, definitely. Lobo is typecasting. It probably won't challenge him much as a performer, so it won't bring out his best as an actor.

 

[Mudd]

I like Momoa.

On more important topics: it's Creature Commandos day!

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

Personally, I don't have an emotional reaction to him playing the role one way or the other--but I would prefer it if he were given a role against type, like he did with Aquaman.

His skills were tested with Aquaman--an inspired example of casting; he had to tone down his acting tendencies to play that role, but he's so one-note in nearly everything else, so I expect his Lobo to chew the scenery, dominate any actors he's performing against. Essentially Momoa being Momoa.

 

[Mudd]

 

[JD]

Yes, definitely. Lobo is typecasting. It probably won't challenge him much as a performer, so it won't bring out his best as an actor.

But is it really typecasting if the actor was actively seeking out and campaigning for the role? I was always under the impression that typecasting was when a actor was stuck in a certain type of role, and couldn't get any other. I've been under the impression that Momoa likes these kind of roles and actively sought them out.

His skills were tested with Aquaman--an inspired example of casting; he had to tone down his acting tendencies to play that role, but he's so one-note in nearly everything else, so I expect his Lobo to chew the scenery, dominate any actors he's performing against. Essentially Momoa being Momoa.

Isn't that pretty much how Lobo is usually presented in the comics?

 

[Morpheus 02]

Doesn't matter, since, as I said, I think he's a much better and more appealing actor now. I mean, wow, his debut on SGA was nearly 20 years ago. Where did the time go?

Wow -- that is a super arrogant to a response to view that differs from yours. Someone disagrees, but it doesn't matter because YOU think he's much better.

Yes, definitely. Lobo is typecasting. It probably won't challenge him much as a performer, so it won't bring out his best as an actor.

And to quote CHristopher "doesn't matter" -- because Momoa isn't doing this for you or any acting award. He wants to do this for fun, and i think it will work out great for him.

His skills were tested with Aquaman--an inspired example of casting; he had to tone down his acting tendencies to play that role, but he's so one-note in nearly everything else, so I expect his Lobo to chew the scenery, dominate any actors he's performing against. Essentially Momoa being Momoa.

I have to disagree... Apple TV's "See" was really saw Momoa shine with his acting. However, I will say that Momoa was an excellent choice for the DCFU... definitely broke the idea of Aquaman being a joke character, and made him pretty badass. Also definitely positively added to diversity with an Asian/Paciifc Islander as a major hero/ star of a solo movie. DId anyone ever seriously question is race? I don't recall it.

But is it really typecasting if the actor was actively seeking out and campaigning for the role? I was always under the impression that typecasting was when a actor was stuck in a certain type of role, and couldn't get any other. I've been under the impression that Momoa likes these kind of roles and actively sought them out.

Isn't that pretty much how Lobo is usually presented in the comics?

You make an excellent point. And i think you are right -- for this particular role -- he wants this one, so he can just have fun with it. (We kinda saw it in Aquaman 2, but i think it will be a much better fit as Lobo).

 

[Christopher]

But is it really typecasting if the actor was actively seeking out and campaigning for the role? I was always under the impression that typecasting was when a actor was stuck in a certain type of role, and couldn't get any other. I've been under the impression that Momoa likes these kind of roles and actively sought them out.

Typecasting just means getting cast according to one's type -- e.g. an intimidating muscleman playing an intimidating muscleman, or an actor known for goofy comedy playing a goofy comedy part. In itself, the term is merely descriptive, not judgmental, and can refer to a single instance as well as a pattern. Getting typecast once is not necessarily a problem, but getting consistently typecast can be.

But that's not what I'm talking about. If Momoa is seeking the role because he thinks it would be fun or appropriate for him, that doesn't necessarily mean that it would challenge him as an actor. Actors don't always make choices that bring out the best in them. Often, especially when they're big and successful, they can make self-indulgent choices and fall into bad habits.

Wow -- that is a super arrogant to a response to view that differs from yours. Someone disagrees, but it doesn't matter because YOU think he's much better.

*Sigh* What I meant was that I was complimenting him on how much he'd improved, so there was no reason to take offense. It doesn't matter that I used to think poorly of his acting, because I've changed my mind and now think he's good. Saying that someone has improved is not an insult.

 

[Mudd]

Easily the least "fun" episode of CC yet. Good show, but brutal.

Also, is the violent dismembership quotient steadily increasing from week to week? Something to look forward to in the finale!

 

[Set Harth]

Easily the least "fun" episode of CC yet. Good show, but brutal.

Also, is the violent dismembership quotient steadily increasing from week to week? Something to look forward to in the finale!

You were not kidding!

 

[Morpheus 02]

I disagree entirely

Doesn't matter, since, as I said, I think he's a much better and more appealing actor now. I mean, wow, his debut on SGA was nearly 20 years ago. Where did the time go?

*Sigh* What I meant was that I was complimenting him on how much he'd improved, so there was no reason to take offense. It doesn't matter that I used to think poorly of his acting, because I've changed my mind and now think he's good. Saying that someone has improved is not an insult.

You miss the issue -- how you dismissed @Tuskin38 -- THAT is the arrogant part! That his disagreement doesn't matter, even though it is a legitimate opinion.

And nothing "wrong" with your opinion of Momoa's acting over the years, but everyone else's opinion matters just as much, and i can certainly hear where they ar ecoming from, whether or not i agree.

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

]I have to disagree... Apple TV's "See" was really saw Momoa shine with his acting. However, I will say that Momoa was an excellent choice for the DCFU... definitely broke the idea of Aquaman being a joke character, and made him pretty badass. Also definitely positively added to diversity with an Asian/Paciifc Islander as a major hero/ star of a solo movie. DId anyone ever seriously question is race? I don't recall it.

Oh, there was screaming to the pit of Hell about Momoa getting the Aquaman role, with the typical charges of "replacing" a white character with the "wrong" actor (an ideological spin-off of "The Great Replacement Theory" argued by White Supremacists from every corridor of social and professional life). I'm sure there's "Never Momoa" types still crawling around the world, wanting the big screen Aquaman to be blonde and as White as possible.

 

[Mage]

You miss the issue -- how you dismissed @Tuskin38 -- THAT is the arrogant part! That his disagreement doesn't matter, even though it is a legitimate opinion.

And nothing "wrong" with your opinion of Momoa's acting over the years, but everyone else's opinion matters just as much, and i can certainly hear where they ar ecoming from, whether or not i agree.

Basically this. Honestly, the way it was phrased made it seem as if Tuskin38's opinion didn't matter at all.

 

[Ray Hardgrit]

I'm never impressed when they cast actors who don't look like the characters they're supposed to be... but when I heard Momoa was playing Aquaman I was 100% for it. Mostly because I like Momoa a lot more than I like Aquaman.

He turned out to be a very likeable Aquaman and I'm sure he'll make an excellent Lobo as well. Zero complaints about that casting choice from me.

 

[Mage]

I'm never impressed when they cast actors who don't look like the characters they're supposed to be... but when I heard Momoa was playing Aquaman I was 100% for it. Mostly because I like Momoa a lot more than I like Aquaman.

He turned out to be a very likeable Aquaman and I'm sure he'll make an excellent Lobo as well. Zero complaints about that casting choice from me.

Honestly? I felt both Aquaman movies were shit. Except for Momoa. Dude is has a sense of humor. People are forgetting movies should be fun instead of reduced to every singular second by us (yes, I count myself) nerds and geeks on the internet.
Buy beer and snacks. Watch over the top CGI stupid shit and enjoy yourself. The world is a shitshow as it is. Movies don't need to be amazing, they need to make feel happy.

 

[Ceridwen]

He was the best thing about Fast X. Very silly, enjoyable villain performance.

 

[Captaindemotion]

I like it when actors are cast against type and I thought Momoa’s Aquaman ended up an inspired choice and he was a lot of fun in the role. But sometimes while a casting choice may be pretty obvious as to be almost uninspired, it’s still so perfect that I can’t complain. Patrick Stewart as Charles Xavier, Pierce Brosnan as James Bond are such examples and I think Momoa as Lobo is equally spot-on.

 

[JD]

Typecasting just means getting cast according to one's type -- e.g. an intimidating muscleman playing an intimidating muscleman, or an actor known for goofy comedy playing a goofy comedy part. In itself, the term is merely descriptive, not judgmental, and can refer to a single instance as well as a pattern. Getting typecast once is not necessarily a problem, but getting consistently typecast can be.

But that's not what I'm talking about. If Momoa is seeking the role because he thinks it would be fun or appropriate for him, that doesn't necessarily mean that it would challenge him as an actor. Actors don't always make choices that bring out the best in them. Often, especially when they're big and successful, they can make self-indulgent choices and fall into bad habits.

Why does it matter if he's "challenging" himself? If he wants the role and has fun playing, and we have fun watching it, should that be all that matters?

 

[Mudd]

*sees the source is Grace Randolph*

Yeah can we not give the time of day to that grifter?

Did not age well.

 

[Christopher]

Why does it matter if he's "challenging" himself? If he wants the role and has fun playing, and we have fun watching it, should that be all that matters?

What a bizarre question. Why does it matter if athletes challenge themselves? Would you have fun watching sports if the games were easy to play? The fact that it's a challenge, that the people we're watching are striving to achieve something difficult rather than just coasting through something easy, is the very thing that makes it worth watching.

Actors who challenge themselves to give richer, more interesting performances are more fun to watch than actors who just phone it in. The actor having fun and the audience having fun are two different things. The audience's fun is generally the result of the creators' hard work. It's the result of them working long hours, losing sleep, training and rehearsing hard, doing takes dozens of times to get them just right, and generally running themselves ragged for months so that we can have two hours of entertainment. It's their profession, not their hobby. The satisfaction comes from striving to do their best, not just from playing around.