John Cleese as a sheriff???
-
uvl — 12 years ago(September 21, 2013 04:29 PM)
@pusterummet, sorry, but there is no "problem" with casting Cleese. Yes, we see the man who engaged in a lot of zany skits prior to this role, but quite frankly, he handles the role with aplomb and carves out a nice little bit of the film for himself. And if you'll notice, this film contains lots of little pieces; this one happened to belong to Cleese, Glover, and Costner.
-
PhillipNoir — 12 years ago(January 03, 2014 02:09 AM)
If we want to enjoy the movie experience, we must suspend all prior knowledge of a famous performer playing a part. Then the actor must work to convince us that he is in character. That's the give and take of the theater.
For instance, John Wayne convinced me that he was John T Chance, Tom Donophan, Rockwell Torrey, Rooster Cogburn, Cole Thornton, and JB Books over a time span of about 15 years. I knew Wayne was in there, but he made these characters live for me. His director contributed to my suspension of belief by making these characters big men of action, and quick moral certainty, who felt a noble generosity toward the town folks he was charged to protect, just like the Duke.
Have you noticed that when we refuse to suspend belief about an actor/actress, or when a major player is poorly cast, we tend not to like the film?
On first seeing John Cleese, I was immediately reminded of Richard Harris playing English Bob in the Eastwood film, albeit Cleese is a comic figure and Bob a tragic one. I felt Cleese was a great western character in this film, as well as English Bob in the Eastwood film Unforgiven. Adding an eccentric English character to the old West has helped to enrich both films.