Are there any truly iconic roles anymore?

Looking to the upcoming Star Trek revamp, it strikes me that one of my ongoing arguments about changes in the general moviescape–that actors are comparatively less important in themselves than the characters they play–is really going to be put to the test here.  Surely few parts are so identified with the actors who played them then the original Star Trek crew.

William Shatner is reportedly ‘sad’ that he won’t be doing a cameo as the older Kirk in the Abrams film.  From Abrams standpoint, though, why would he want him to?  He’s attempting to revamp the series for kids who never really had the original actors imprinted upon them, not the folks in their ’40s through ’70s who grew up associating those actors with those parts.  For this audience, Shatner is the old fart in Boston Legal and those campy Priceline commercials.  Abrams wants to cut the chord, and I can’t say he’s wrong.

Certain parts have traditionally been played by different actors, whether the Universal monsters (save Larry Talbot), Sherlock Holmes, James Bond (the critical point being the series’ survival after Sean Connery left), Batman and Dr. Who.  Arguably even Godzilla was ‘different’ as the series progressed, since his look and mien changed from film to film.

The last decade or two, meanwhile, have seen the idea of ‘iconic’ actors increasingly swamped by truly iconic roles.  When it gets down to it, Batman, Spider-Man, Superman et al can be played by any vaguely appropriate actor if the movie around them is solid enough.

Some modern parts, freshly brought to the movie screen, are currently associated with one actor (Tony Stark, Jason Bourne, Jack Sparrow).  Yet if their franchises become popular enough to last, eventually they too will be revamped and played by different actors.  We are seeing this now with the upcoming Nightmare on Elm Street redo, as the once unthinkable occurs and Robert Englund is replaced as Freddy Krueger.

In large part, this is again a generational thing.  Star Trek fans are jealous creatures.  The fact is, however, that they’ve succeeded in championing something that now has become successful enough to go beyond their control.  Many of them won’t accept the new cast as the crew of the Enterprise (I might not myself, and I’m not particularly a Trekkie).  Such concerns are irrelevant, however.  Their beloved series has been culturally assimulated.

  • Joan Crawford’s Evil Twin Brother

    It is futile to resist. Money changes everything . . . even James T. Kirk.

  • By the way, if somebody ever said “I hope I know what you’re doing” to James Kirk, he would never say, “So do I.”

    But again, that’s their father’s James Kirk. And we’re their father.

  • fish eye no miko

    William Shatner is reportedly ’sad’ that he won’t be doing a cameo as the older Kirk in the Abrams film. From Abrams standpoint, though, why would he want him to?

    …especially since Kirk died before he was as old as Shatner is now.

  • Ericb

    “…especially since Kirk died before he was as old as Shatner is now.

    Come on, this is Star Trek we are talking about it. Is there is a show that can dream up an outlandish technobabble explanation to get one of the old characters into a story as readily as Star Trek? Doctor Who maybe but that’s about it.

  • Pilgrim

    Well, Hollywood really brought this on themselves. They’ve been remaking good (and not so good) movies for so long that by now the audience is densensitized to seeing a new face playing an old character.

  • BeckoningChasm

    I associate the roles in ST pretty strongly with the actors, myself, but I’ve heard good things about the new film, so who knows?

    The thing is, there’ve been several versions of Star Trek over the decades with different casts and characters. I’m not sure why they couldn’t have done the same with the new film, except that the publicity certainly increased expectations. (I wonder how the reaction would be to a “Next Generation” film without Patrick Stewart and the others. After all, their films have aged less well than the original crews’.)

    As for iconic characters, hm… Coming soon, Sean Penn IS Dirty Harry. Don’t laugh, it may happen.

  • The Rev. D.D.

    So was that NoES redux already in the works, or did the Ft13th one do well enough to spawn this?

    I think that’s going to be a really hard sell. It’s one thing to have different actors play a mostly emotionless, unstoppable killing machine like Jason or Michael Myers (not that a talented director and actor can’t make them more memorable…Jason’s first appearance was one of his best thanks to Warrington Gillette, and Carptenter and Castle gave us some truly iconic moments that still make my skin crawl). But a character who’s become so invested with one actor is going to be tough. Most people didn’t buy the guy playing Anakin as the man who would become Vader, for example. If they made a Pirates of the Caribbean movie with someone else playing Jack Sparrow, I have a feeling it’d crash and burn even harder than the sequels, which had him in them. To a lesser extent, a Chucky movie without Brad Dourif’s voice wouldn’t be the same, although just replacing a voice can still work out all right (witness Tom Servo).

    Even in the worst of the NoES series, Englund at least entertained me, and at his best he was truly frightening. It would take a hell of an actor and director to give us a new Freddy that would be a worthy successor, and given the way these remakes are going I really can’t see that happening.

  • Hugo

    They’re cutting the ties…

    …by making a film about Kirk, Spock, McCoy (and all the rest) set on a starship called the USS Enterprise?

    Yeah, that’s cutting the ties. I mean, those ties are about as cut as they’re going to get.

  • Edda

    Remember how I posted about whether one could more easily recast “cartoon” character (i.e. PG to PG-13 adventure character) than R-rated adventure film characters? Since Star Trek will undoubtedly get a PG-13, it will represent an example of the former. If and when a Death Wish remake comes out, that will test the latter situation. (As I have noted, of the R-rated adventure film series of the 1970’s and 1980’s, only Death Wish seems in line for a remake in the near future. Shaft does not count, since that continued the 1970’s continuity-Richard Roundtree returned as the Shaft of the 1970’s, the [presumably paternal] uncle of a younger man.)

  • Aussiesmurf

    I think only Anthony Hopkins could play Hannibal Lecter (Although i respect the legitimacy of Brian Cox’s attempt in Manhunter).

    It would also now be extremely tough to have another actor besides Hugh Jackman play Wolverine.

    People may differ, but I think David Suchet is now generally accepted as the definitive Hercule Poirot.

    As far as James Bond is concerned, I still got a shock when someone else besides Lois Maxwell played Miss Moneypenny!

  • Aidan

    Harrison Ford as Indiana Jones. While other actors portrayed Jones at other ages (River Phoenix, the 3 actors in Young Indiana Jones), Indy and Harrison Ford can’t be disconnected from each other.

    Think about it: the role is so closely attached to Jones that 19 years after “Last Crusade,” the 60-something Ford returned for “Crystal Skull,” as now-regrettable as that is.