The entire point of a movie called "Jack Reacher" about the character from the novels is to APPEAL to those who are fans of the original character. Given that wouldn't featuring a character as described in the book be kind of important.
No. The point of a movie called "Jack Reacher" is to be an entertaining film. The film was intended to be accessible to a much wider audience than simply those who had read the books. Only to a few who expect a film adaptation to be slavishly adherent to the book in every way. But it can't, because films and books are different media. Film adaptations routinely change things from their source books. Characters are added or deleted, plots are simplified or elaborated, dialog is changed. If the character's height (or hair style or eye color) were crucial to the story, I could see how changing it might impact the story. But, as far as the film goes, it isn't. It seems awfully picayune to me for someone to watch the movie and say "Yeah, it was a decent actioner...but I just couldn't get past the lead actor not being 6'4"." It really doesn't matter at all in the story.
I don't think it's being "slavishly adherent to the book in every way." to have the main character resemble--to some degree--how he's characterized in the books.
In the Ian Fleming book "Casino Royale," Bond is described as looking like Hoagy Carmichael. So, I guess we should hate Casino Royale because Daniel Craig looks nothing like that.
No interest in the books. (Or any fiction written after I was born ) It's a bloody good film however.
I'm trying to see where anyone besides you even mentions the hair and eye colour thing? Seems the casting criticism is based on the character being a 6'5, 250 lb linebacker while the actor playing him claims to be 5'7" (and we all add 2"-in 1988 he claimed 5'9") and maybe weighs in around 150.
that's just silly. Hair color has nothing to do with being ABLE to DO the thing the character is described as doing. You want an analogy, what if Bond had been cast as a woman, an elderly man, or a handicapped person? wouldn't work. In the case of Reacher, you could have cast a black actor if he was the right one and I wouldn't have wispered a word of protest. (By the way, I was one of those who hated the idea of Michael Keaton playing Batman. He gave a fine performance and I enjoyed the movie overall but he was not right for the part)
I mention them because they're just as silly as height. Cruise is NOT 5'7". He's average height, 5'9"-5'10" and pretty solidly built (I'd guess around 180). But even so, WHY does height matter so critically when other attributes do not? If the film's story is similar to the books, nothing the character does relies on him being 6'5". Although I see your point, it's difficult to see how any of Fleming's novels could've been made at all. The character attributes you name (gender, age, physical disability) inevitably would change the story. You couldn't, for instance, change Bond to a woman without either changing all the Bond girls to men or explaining that Bond was a lesbian. We'd have problems believing that the British Secret Service would employ an elderly person, or that an old man would be getting all those young women in the sack. And a handicapped person? Same as the previous, with the added complication that every action sequence would need to be changed radically. See, the things you named matter. Height doesn't. It COULD. If were telling the story of a professional basketball player, it might. Or if the plot somehow turned on the character's height. But it doesn't. Again, I haven't read One Shot. But the film Jack Reacher has nothing in it to suggest that a taller character was necessary. I found the character believable and nowhere found myself saying "You know, they shoulda got someone taller..." Are we sure this particular gripe isn't really about Cruise? Neither would I, although I'd argue that's a far more substantial change from the character's height. I, too, hated the idea of Keaton playing the part and I was dead wrong; he was great in the role, particularly playing the "damaged" side of the character, Bruce Wayne.
10 seconds of google fu 1 2 3 second one points out he wears shoelifts, but also say he's a bit over 5'7 (172 cm) while the first one says 5'7 (170cm). which would be the variation in a normal pair of shoes. Weight's a little harder to call on sight, but the prevailing numbers are around 150. If someone asks what kind of car you drive, do you usually answer them with "A blue one."? That's what casting Tom Cruise qualifies as here.
I don't think Cruise is 5'7". Cameron Diaz is 5'9" and here WITH HEELS, she's not quite as tall as he is. In any event, what difference does it make? The actor is not the character.
Speaking as a married man who has two fashion-conscious daughters, those heels aren't very tall. Cruise is also wearing "heels", too. Plus, as turkey points out, Cruise apparently wears lifts, as well.
In the photo on the left, Katie looks to be wearing flat sandals, which also helps Tom look taller. Thanks to my wife and kids, I know more about women's shoes that most straight guys do.
Which, I assume, means the script was sufficiently tailored to Cruise to eliminate that concern - as one would expect. In general, I have no problem with Cruise. I do fault Hollywood for thinking (seemingly) EVERY action film has to have either Cruise or Will Smith in the lead. And I love Will Smith. I'd much rather watch Cruise in non-action films, but I have no specific beef with him. (I'm gonna have to grab a stream of this movie and compare it to the book)
all other factors aside, i don't fault the guy AT ALL for any subtle trickery he can do to appear taller. Not one bit of difference between that and, say, a push-up bra. I don't fault them if they can make him appear to be 6' or more (convincingly) on screen. I would just be bothered if the CHARACTER came off as too small to be the guy I had read about.
Well, someone who likes the books is going to have to give the film a watch and see. But it seems like a lot of the books' fans won't even give the film a chance.
I've read the entire series and was deeply disappointed in the casting of Tom Cruise. That said I liked the movie. Cruise did a good job. My only problem was at the end he asks some stupid questions anyone in the military should know the answer to just to explain what Duvals character is doing to the audience. Which to me is a bigger slight on the Reacher character because more than just being an unstoppable force of badassedness Reacher has a keen analytical mind. He's not just a brute but also one hell of an investigator. Either way I wouldn't mind if they made another one.
Having just finished it... Yeah, Cruise nailed the personality, the taciturn attitude, all of it...but there were still times where I thought his physical dominance of all commers was too "Hollywood" for a guy who didn't have a decided physical advantage. Yet, I acknowledge that various martial artist built a whole career on exactly that sort of thing. Still, it was an enjoyable enough film. Herbalist is right about the scene with the Gunny late in the movie though, it was a weakness in the script to frame that as a question and answer exchange rather than two great tactical minds comparing notes. but that's a minor flaw. Also, I must comment...how is it such a...endowed...lead actress is someone who's name I've never heard before?
There's a journalist in the UK called Michael Parkinson, who hosted an interview show for decades. They're worth looking for on YouTube, especially those from the seventies with the likes of Ali, Richard Burton and Orson Welles. Anyway, Cruise was on to promote The Last Samurai. He did so alongside Billy Connolly who I think is about 6'. He's tiny. However a few weeks later Russell Crowe, Cate Blanchett and Kylie Minogue appeared. All Aussies, so you'd think they would prove to be a good mix. That didn't happen. As Parkinson later revealed, Crowe was so paranoid about his lack of height being apparent that not only did he insist on being interviewed alone, but he also refused to walk on to the stage, lest his height be obvious next to Parkinson's. Cruise cops far too much grief, for his height and his bullshit beliefs. But he never dials it in, and while not always starring in great films, he's not made a truly bad film since Far & Away. Also in Oblivion, which we got a week early there was no issue with his height being disguised as both Morgan Freeman and Jamie Lannister tower over him.
That's Rosamund Pike. She's been in quite a few things the last 10 years or so... She was in the Bond film Die Another Day: ...the film Barney's Version (here playing the older version of her character): ..and the Anthony Hopkins thriller Fracture: She's ordinarily quite petite but apparently was pregnant during the filming of Jack Reacher, and her breasts swelled to truly magnificent proportions. I think she's gorgeous, absolutely radiant. I wouldn't mind the pillows staying inflated, either.
Saw it. Decent film. Didn't like the ending with Barr. Wanted to see him get off even though he was not such a good guy from his time in Iraq.
