Ryan Reynolds is Connor Macleod of Clan Macleod... WTF?

[rhubarbodendron]

Valentine Pelka might perhaps be up to that challenge. He was quite impressive as Kronos.
It's so terribly easy to overplay the villain. The result is often ridiculous rather than scary. Pelka always gets the right mixture between evil and smart without exaggerating. That's what makes him such an outstanding actor, imo.

 

[Relayer1]

Apparently, this is true - no matter where the ancient times are set. That must be why the HBO series' Rome was performed entirely in British accents, which I found infinitely distracting - as I do in HBO's Game of Thrones, a story by an American author about a fantasy land, where everyone is British for some unbeknownst reason, even fantastic lead (American) actor, Peter Dinklage.

PS - 1600 is not "ancient times", it's medieval times (barely), and if you want credibility, let's have it performed in Middle English with subtitles.

On topic - Ryan Reynolds is a good choice commercially, and honestly no weirder than casting Adrian Paul (another good-looking, limited range actor) for the tv series. Let's face it, quality has never been a major factor in the Highlander franchise. Here's hoping they can break out of the highly formulaic construction and start at the core concept, which is what has always been interesting about the whole thing.

You can't do historic stuff with an American accent. You personally may not be happy about it, but it's true. It's a modern accent and it grates.

It is in no way more accurate or convincing to have an ancient Roman, a medieval Scotsman, or the lord of a castle of Westeros speak in a 21st century British accent, which is, I regret to inform you, exactly as modern as a 21st century American accent.

You are, of course, correct. My point remains, however, that an American accent just 'seems' wrong. It is a matter of peoples perceptions and expectations.

 

[rhubarbodendron]

Thanks! That was exactly what I've been trying to say, only I couldn't put it so well (English is only my fourth language)

Accents do matter in some situations. In an interview, Peter Wingfield once mentioned that in the Stargate Series they had to dubb an actor because he had such a strong Caribbean accent and a Rasta-Goa'uld would just have been impossible to sell to the audience.

 

[Morpheus 02]

Other than familiarity, i think Reynolds sword skills would be a plus...but i also agree , he's too Americna/Canadian to play a Scottish Highlander....but i'd be willing to be surprised. i thought Chris Evans could only play the cocky guy, but did a fantastic job with Captain America.

However, i'd prefer an unknown actor with martial arts skills.

i also don't think a reboot is necessary. But if they ARE going to do one, they ought to address the issue of Identity theft, and how today's world will make what immortals have been doing impossible in this generation..so kind of forcing the Gathering. (The original was good about showing a trick that Connor did -- becoming Russell Nash...a trick that Duncan inexplicably never seemed to have used in his 6 years on the air)

 

[Bob Karo]

I know it's not true, but I'd like to think this is all just a lie and "Highlander" is just a working title they're using to secure funding.

When you get down to it, this is a movie about Ryan Reynolds playing an immortal who kills people with swords. Hollywood sees money in remakes. Hopefully they get past the point of no return before someone high enough to put the kibosh on it realizes this isn't the movie they paid for.

Deadpool Coming to theaters 2014.

Suck it, Remake-Funding-Bitches!

 

[rhubarbodendron]

That's true for 99.9% of all remakes. Almost always the original version is so much better.
In this case, however... HL1-3 were not all that bad (though imho there was a decline from one movie to the next), but as far as 4 and 5 - Endgame & The Source - are concerned, any remake couldn't possibly get worse than the original.

 

[Lapis Exilis]

I know it's not true, but I'd like to think this is all just a lie and "Highlander" is just a working title they're using to secure funding.

When you get down to it, this is a movie about Ryan Reynolds playing an immortal who kills people with swords. Hollywood sees money in remakes. Hopefully they get past the point of no return before someone high enough to put the kibosh on it realizes this isn't the movie they paid for.

Deadpool Coming to theaters 2014.

Suck it, Remake-Funding-Bitches!

Um, in Hollywood "remake" often means just slapping the title and the names of some characters and locations of a known property onto a story that is different in tone, intent, plot and characterization than the original. Didn't you see the Star Trek 2009 movie? Or the RDJ Sherlock Holmes movies? Producers are quite aware of this - and they're pretty good with it. In fact they laugh all the way to the bank since everyone piles into the seats to see the movies that are remakes, literally in name only.

 

[rhubarbodendron]

eeks, yes, that new Sherlock Holmes series is an offense to any fan of Arthur Connan-Doyle's works. It's like a version of Gluck's wonderful baroque opera "Orpheus in the underworld" I saw 15 years ago, where Orpheus crossed the land of the dead in a bumper car (!!!) searching for his late love - unforgettable, I can assure you, but also unforgivable. May the director of that nonsense have to spend all eternity in Hades in such a vehicle!!

 

[Satyrquaze]

That's true for 99.9% of all remakes. Almost always the original version is so much better.
In this case, however... HL1-3 were not all that bad (though imho there was a decline from one movie to the next), but as far as 4 and 5 - Endgame & The Source - are concerned, any remake couldn't possibly get worse than the original.

I have to say, the decline of which you speak works differently that you describe here. HL2 was horrible and not redeemable. HL3 was positively not bad by comparison.

Also, I borderline take offense to Endgame being put into the same catagory as The Source. Endgame is the second best film in the Highlander franchise IMHO, The Source was even worse than The Quickening.

 

[The Doctor]

I know it's not true, but I'd like to think this is all just a lie and "Highlander" is just a working title they're using to secure funding.

When you get down to it, this is a movie about Ryan Reynolds playing an immortal who kills people with swords. Hollywood sees money in remakes. Hopefully they get past the point of no return before someone high enough to put the kibosh on it realizes this isn't the movie they paid for.

Deadpool Coming to theaters 2014.

Suck it, Remake-Funding-Bitches!

Um, in Hollywood "remake" often means just slapping the title and the names of some characters and locations of a known property onto a story that is different in tone, intent, plot and characterization than the original. Didn't you see the Star Trek 2009 movie? Or the RDJ Sherlock Holmes movies? Producers are quite aware of this - and they're pretty good with it. In fact they laugh all the way to the bank since everyone piles into the seats to see the movies that are remakes, literally in name only.

Trek 09 may have been the purest form of Trek since the original series. It was fun, action-packed and it took itself not-at-all seriously.

 

[MacLeod]

With regards to the original Highlander films they should have heeded their own tag line for the movie. "There Can be Only One."

 

[sojourner]

^old joke is old.

 

[Captaindemotion]

^But immortal.

 

[Lapis Exilis]

I know it's not true, but I'd like to think this is all just a lie and "Highlander" is just a working title they're using to secure funding.

When you get down to it, this is a movie about Ryan Reynolds playing an immortal who kills people with swords. Hollywood sees money in remakes. Hopefully they get past the point of no return before someone high enough to put the kibosh on it realizes this isn't the movie they paid for.

Deadpool Coming to theaters 2014.

Suck it, Remake-Funding-Bitches!

Um, in Hollywood "remake" often means just slapping the title and the names of some characters and locations of a known property onto a story that is different in tone, intent, plot and characterization than the original. Didn't you see the Star Trek 2009 movie? Or the RDJ Sherlock Holmes movies? Producers are quite aware of this - and they're pretty good with it. In fact they laugh all the way to the bank since everyone piles into the seats to see the movies that are remakes, literally in name only.

Trek 09 may have been the purest form of Trek since the original series. It was fun, action-packed and it took itself not-at-all seriously.

There are a variety of opinions on Trek 09 and how much it carried on the spirit of TOS, and I respect yours. True, the film was fun and action-packed. It was also mind-numbingly dumb. Plenty of TOS was dumb too, but those episodes are not exactly what I think of when I think of what it is about Star Trek that made it a universe worth revisiting. I could probably have a long argument with you about whether or not TOS took itself not-at-all seriously - I think that's way off the mark, except perhaps in reference to the later episodes and last few of the films, when TOS became somewhat a parody of itself. Basically, in my humble opinion, anything that had such absurd story logic is just a bad movie, and anything that so thoroughly got the character of Jim Kirk wrong was a remake of Star Trek in name only.

As for Highlander - it's always been a great concept that is better for what it implies than in the actual stories that were told (even the first movie sort of falls apart in the Third Act). That's why it's an excellent candidate for a remake. It's a property where you can actually take the barest bones - a title, an immortal Scottish guy, a bunch of other immortals, all trying to hack each other's heads off - and go to town. I wish them luck 'cause I've always enjoyed the concept.

 

[Avalon]

I know it's not true, but I'd like to think this is all just a lie and "Highlander" is just a working title they're using to secure funding.

When you get down to it, this is a movie about Ryan Reynolds playing an immortal who kills people with swords. Hollywood sees money in remakes. Hopefully they get past the point of no return before someone high enough to put the kibosh on it realizes this isn't the movie they paid for.

Deadpool Coming to theaters 2014.

Suck it, Remake-Funding-Bitches!

I know, right? I'd love it if they were really making the Deadpool movie.

Alas, I don't think we're ever going to see it, though...

 

[Morpheus 02]

That's true for 99.9% of all remakes. Almost always the original version is so much better.
In this case, however... HL1-3 were not all that bad (though imho there was a decline from one movie to the next), but as far as 4 and 5 - Endgame & The Source - are concerned, any remake couldn't possibly get worse than the original.

I have to say, the decline of which you speak works differently that you describe here. HL2 was horrible and not redeemable. HL3 was positively not bad by comparison.

Also, I borderline take offense to Endgame being put into the same catagory as The Source. Endgame is the second best film in the Highlander franchise IMHO, The Source was even worse than The Quickening.

i'd agree that Endgame is fairly good (compared to the rest--definitely NOT the same level as Highlander 2) ...it gives you the similarities & differences with Connor & Duncan, and gives a reasonable death for Connor (as Mr. Lambert is definitely NOT impportal). What i would have loved for Endgame though, would be that the Duncan vs. Connor battle would have been AFTER Connor kills Kell (and we see it in a quickening-induced flashback), so that Duncan would be under the impression he had to kill Connor to beat a living Kell, he would really be killing a depressed Connor, who might succumb to Kell's evil influence.

 

[M'rk son of Mogh]

^^^
Wow, I actually really like the idea of that little twist!
That would have really hit home the differences between the two heroes.

But, then, on the other hand, it might have really hurt Connor's character even more. Suicide for no reason as opposed a more noble sacrifice that we saw.

Still, a cool little twist.

 

[Reverend]

Am I the only one who thinks all this complaining about unconvincing accents in an as-yet unmade remake of Highlander to be enormously ironic?

I mean did any of you *see* the original? Sean Connery and an ancient Egyptian living in 16th century Spain? Christopher Lambert as a Scott?! Clancy Brown you can let slide since who the hell knows what the actual Kurgans sounded like, plus he was already two and a half thousand years old when we first see him. Still, bad accents are practically a Highlander tradition!

 

[Admiral James Kirk]

Am I the only one who thinks all this complaining about unconvincing accents in an as-yet unmade remake of Highlander to be enormously ironic?

I mean did any of you *see* the original? Sean Connery and an ancient Egyptian living in 16th century Spain? Christopher Lambert as a Scott?!

I believe I made an offhanded reference to that in the original post.

 

[Captaindemotion]

Am I the only one who thinks all this complaining about unconvincing accents in an as-yet unmade remake of Highlander to be enormously ironic?

I mean did any of you *see* the original? Sean Connery and an ancient Egyptian living in 16th century Spain? Christopher Lambert as a Scott?! Clancy Brown you can let slide since who the hell knows what the actual Kurgans sounded like, plus he was already two and a half thousand years old when we first see him. Still, bad accents are practically a Highlander tradition!

Yes, I'm pretty sure that this has been referenced more than a few times during the thread.