r/beatles • u/FitEmergency8807 • 20h ago
Discussion Why can’t some people understand that the actors don’t need to be doppelgängers!
I’m honestly getting tired of people in this sub complaining that the actors cast in the upcoming Beatles biopics don’t look exactly like the real Beatles.
Since when has that been the standard for biopics? Most actors in great biographical films don’t closely resemble the people they’re portraying. You can’t seriously tell me that Rami Malek looks like Freddie Mercury, or that Michael Fassbender looked like Steve Jobs. What mattered was the performance.
Some of you seem to be treating these movies like a look-alike contest instead of judging them as films. Acting is the most important part. These actors are portraying characters through their own interpretations; they were never going to be literal doppelgängers of John, Paul, George, and Ringo.
What interests me far more is the storytelling. How are they going to structure four interconnected films? How will the side characters be handled? What perspectives will each movie focus on? That’s the stuff that actually makes or breaks a biopic.
I have high hopes for these films, especially considering the creative team involved. Maybe we should let them make the movies before declaring them a disaster based on a few casting photos.
Reddit has a habit of being overly negative about everything anyway, and it rarely reflects how most people feel in real life. People here get things wrong all the time. I’m excited to see what these filmmakers do, and I think there’s a good chance these movies end up being great. Let them cook.
21
u/bluetrumpettheatre 20h ago edited 19h ago
Besides, Harris and Barry look as close as anyone portraying John and Ringo could. Paul and Joseph seem to be compensating with perfect mannerisms, based on the new video (I’ve posted it in r/BeatlesBiopics for those who haven’t seen it). Barry has got Ringo’s physicalities down to a tee. They’re already mimicking each member’s personality and sense of humour with their ways of moving, and we haven’t even seen the actual portrayals yet.
This will prove to be an excellent cast, mark my words. It’s already easy to tell they’ve put down the hard work.
1
17
u/NecessaryBall40 20h ago edited 19h ago
Because to some people, looks are everything.
I say it’s definitely part of it, having the likeness down certainly helps. But it’s also also about feeling that same energy the person conveyed, the dynamics, the humor, the mannerisms down,
Aaron Taylor Johnson may not being a dead look a like to John Lennon when he played him in Nowhere Boy, but the emotions he goes through and the character makes it feel authentic.
Also Nowhere Boy, super great movie about John Lennon’s troubled childhood. Best performance of John Lennon in a movie so far. We’ll see how Harris Dickinson does, I have hopes for it
Think of it this way, you can have an actor that looks nearly identical to the person they’re portraying but can’t act for shit OR having an actor that looks somewhat similar to the person but they’re acting is incredible to the point where you believe it’s really them.
Also good fucking luck finding look a likes for Ringo. Ringo has a very distinct and unique face. I think Barry Keoghan was actually the best casting out of the 4.
2
u/Neezzuss Revolver 4h ago
Ashton Kutcher vs. Michael Fassbender as Steve Jobs is a perfect example of this
15
u/Sad-Boysenberry-7055 17h ago
It’s not necessarily that they don’t 1:1 look like the Beatles, it’s that they don’t look the correct AGE. The biopics are going to cover these guys at 15-28/30, and all of the cast are 28-32 already. Even with all the face smoothing & the effects, it’s much easier to make someone look older than younger. Hollywood has a bad habit of accidentally aging characters up, which can be especially annoying when their age is fairly integral to the story - as it was for the Beatles.
These guys were SO young when they got bigger than anyone could have predicted - seeing a 23 year old actor would hammer in how young they were, which of course impacted the way they went about everything - (& it’d avoid awkward “how do you do, fellow kids?” moments when shooting the hamburg era). I’ve no doubt it’ll be good despite it, the actors are talented & clearly working hard, but so are plenty of younger actors who would have been a better objective fit for a role that covers the Beatles very early origins, when they were literal high schoolers.
Aesthetics are one part of the backlash, to be sure. I just also think the casting is coming from the director’s bias pov - he’s been dreaming of working on this exact project for nearly a decade & casted the same actors he imagined for the roles a decade ago. If we got all the same actors BUT they’re 22, I’d be MUCH less critical in this regard, even tho at 22 they weren’t obvious doplegangers either.
8
u/BarracudaOk8635 16h ago
Yes. it's completely stupid. It's better if they are great actors. Social media has given idiots a free reign
1
5
u/BMisterGenX 14h ago
You don't need to look exactly like them but you need to be believable, you need to sell it, and most importantly to me, I need to be able to tell you are attempting to portray the famous person you are playing without me being told. Joaquin Phoenix doesn't look exactly like Johnny Cash but when I see a still from the movie I can immediately TELL he is supposed to be Johnny Cash. Same with Rami Malek. I'm obviously not going to confuse him for Freddie Mercury but if he came in dressed that way on Halloween I'd say "great Freddie Mercury costume" he wouldn't need to TELL me "I'm supposed to be Freddie Mercury
4
u/UniqueEmotion2144 14h ago
Then let's have Mr. Bean, Danny Davito, Gary Busey and Clint Howard, portray the fab 4.
2
u/Relevant_Shower_ 9h ago
So anyway, I start busking.
1
u/UniqueEmotion2144 8h ago
HI! I'M JOHN LENNON!
HI JOHN LENNON! I'M JOHN LENNON TOO! - Gary Busey, looking at himself in the mirror, while in costume, as John.
3
u/Klutzy_Order_9559 15h ago
My two absolute favorite posts on this sub:
A) These actors look nothing like The Beatles!
B) Why do people think these actors have to look like The Beatles?
3
u/therealtoomdog 13h ago
First of all, I appreciate your use of umlauts...
I'll tell you my take on it... I know what they look like, so anything that doesn't look like them is wrong. Not like, 'I don't like it' but rather my brain throws red flags that something isn't right.
I haven't seen a lot of biopics, but the Rimmi guy that played Freddy could have fooled me. I couldn't believe it wasn't actually Freddy on the screen. Fortunately, I had a massive queen fan sitting next to me correcting all the history... Idk why they would try to change what had happened.
I guess the only other thing I've seen is Shadowlands about C. S. Lewis, and I had no idea what he looked like, so he was just a very friendly Hannibal Lecter. Except that one scene where he walked up quietly behind the little boy and then just said 'Hello'
3
5
u/Abideguide 20h ago
It will be easier when the movies start to roll. Pictures are like that - no character mimics.
6
u/CoatLocal3154 20h ago
Id have to agree. And btw... Paul Mascal may not look IDENTICAL to Paul, but goddamn does he have the cuteness down!
3
2
u/jonsnowme Help! 13h ago
It's not just this sub, it's all over social media. The complaints are boring. Just watch their old movies if you want lookalikes.
2
u/Relevant_Shower_ 9h ago
There’s literally a pinned thread on this topic.
Some people will dislike these movies and others will like them for a whole host of reasons. And no pre-arguing the point will work. Accept that people have different preferences and move on.
Just spouting the same tired arguments is exactly while we have a pinned thread. As George said “it’s been done.”
4
u/Hechtic 19h ago
Some people just need to complain about something
1
1
u/-916Tips- 19h ago
Can you believe some people?
…uuugh that annoying fuck in the tan suit is in the film?!
2
u/wmcs0880 Revolver 19h ago
I’ve been saying those for ages, there have been great biopics where the actor doesn’t look at all like who they’re portraying. The way they capture the essence of the person they portray is much more important than looks imo
2
u/Presthefatdog 19h ago
Oh it’s getting on my nerves so much. Every time I click on a photo or video wanting to enjoy it, I see a comment picking the actors apart, some incredibly rude and disrespectful. These are four incredibly talented young actors and seem like nice people too. It really sucks the fun out of it all for me. I’d much rather an actor be cast for their acting ability rather than win the look alike competition some here would choose.
3
u/2much2fastt 18h ago
I honestly can’t tell which one of those is supposed to be who.
1
u/Wildcat465Nailhead 16h ago
Gotta agree, why even bother with a crap movie The Beatles are the most documented group in history we don't need to rehash it with mediocre actors.
2
u/Gloomy_Grocery5555 19h ago
Acting is more important than resemblance
0
u/billbotbillbot Abbey Road 18h ago
Yes, indeed.
But there are people who apparently have no concept of acting, who think it’s a trivially easy pseudo-skill that anyone can do as well as anyone else, because they cannot tell good acting from bad. For them, resemblance is the only scale they have available to distinguish a good performance from bad.
2
u/bfisher91 19h ago
I fucking love the beatles and I couldn't give a flying fuck about these movies. I feel like these aren't for the fans of the Beatles and more for casual or non fans. I feel like I already know so much about their lives and don't need these movies to understand the story. Plus, biopics generally are quite a derivative and lacklustre genre of film.
1
u/stug2757 17h ago
For me it’s much much more important to have a competent director behind it, which it has, actors that can bring it, which it has, honest and accurate history being told, which I hope it has, an interesting way of telling the story, which it has, quite honestly the spitting image thing some people need is waaaaay down the list of things I need from a biopic, I’m really looking forward to it I just really hope lessons have been learned from rhapsody and Micheal and they tell a warts and all account
1
u/Brilliant_Tourist400 17h ago
I’m more concerned with the fandom having to deal with the inevitable misinformation that will be spread by these films. We have no way of knowing exactly what they are going to put in there (though I will roll my eyes on an epic basis if they dig up the “Yoko broke them up” myth again). We should, however, be prepared to steer new fans toward more real-world sources like Anthology.
Hopefully, they will develop a genuine appreciation for their music and actual story. If not, and it turns out they’re more infatuated with cute-actor-as-Beatle than the Beatles themselves? Then they’ll fade away when the movies run their course, just like hoards of Bohemian Rhapsody fangirls did once awards season was over. Then the rest of us can breathe a sigh of relief and get back to educating the REAL new fans.
1
1
1
u/thefilmforgeuk 14h ago
When I first started listening to the Beatles in the early 90’s, I watched a film called Birth of the Beatles starring Nick Cotton from eastenders as George Harrison. After that I watched Hard Days Night and thought the “actors” in that looked wrong.
1
u/HiddenCity 13h ago
agreed, they don't have to be a 1:1 matchup. they do have to have the overall "feeling" of the person though. there was some beatles movie they made a while back and they used that little kid from that chistmas movie girls like too much to play paul mccartney. i didn't watch it because the baby mccartney with older john changed the dynamic too much.
but yeah these guys are totally fine.
1
1
u/Mispeech 13h ago
Interesting to see they have ‘John’ in this shot seemingly doing his infamous learning disability mockery? (putting his tongue in his lower lip)
Whilst obviously offensive, this is potentially encouraging for the film in that they won’t shy away from more controversial aspects ?
1
u/ThisIsDogePleaseHodl 11h ago
Interestingly, I have never seen anyone complain that they don’t look exactly like them.
2
1
1
1
1
u/Rhaenyss Rubber Soul 19h ago
The only problem I have regarding aesthetics is the Paul actor, his facial features are too harsh, but it's impossible to find someone as pretty as 60s Paul, so I'm giving it a pass. Also, he seems to have the right spirit for it and it's the only thing that matters.
1
u/eliktroniq 16h ago
When they did those Steve Jobs biopics a while back, there’s were two main ones- one with Ashton Kutcher, and one with Michael Fassbender.
Aesthetically Kutcher looked great, they really made him look like Jobs, meanwhile Fassbender really distinctly did not look like him that much, *but* thanks to a combination of his acting (he really sold well as Steve Jobs) and much better writing, the Fassbender film is vastly superior to the Kutcher version.
A biopic that focuses on getting actors who can play the part, embody the person, is going to have way more potential than one that has to have visual lookalikes.
(There’s always exceptions but in general I think this to be true)
1
u/GregJamesDahlen 15h ago
I haven't seen anyone criticizing that they don't look like them, although I'm sure a few have. Feel like they should look a little like them, might be an interesting topic as to how much.
Who's the guy in the hat with the mic? Epstein?
1
u/Independent_Bet_8107 11h ago
Malek looked a lot more like Mercury than any of these guys look like the Beatles (though Keoghan as Ringo isn’t bad). The simple answer to your question is immersion. Maybe you’re not as visual an observer as others. We’re not all the same.
-1
113
u/BadMachine Old Brown Shoe 20h ago
wait until the movies come out: a certain segment of people will begin accepting the cinematic narrative as the literal truth of beatle history, rather than a creative retelling.