Both their track and yours lead to good questions.
Able to? Sure. They cast Stuart Townsend, moderately known back then (and now), and he didn't work out. They considered Daniel Day-Lewis, rather better known, who turned down the role. I think Mortensen would still be considered, all other factors remaining the same.
Would he have wanted to? No idea. But then until he got the phone call, he didn't know of the production; he didn't know of the book. And yet he said yes because his son said Strider was cool, among other things. I remember reading in an interview---"by that point my career had reached that comfortable point where it wasn't going anywhere much, and I didn't care." I have a feeling that now that he is a household name, he still doesn't care. So, 60% gut feeling yes. But who knows.
rimrunner once characterized Mortensen's general performance style as "modest", and I tend to agree. And after comparing the characterization of Aragorn in the book with that in the movie, anyone not giving a modest---read: Quiet, understated, not pushing to the foreground---performance would have messed up with that characterization difference muchly. (Short illustrative case: The scene when the Three Hunters meet the Riders of Rohan, book vs. movie; apply separately for discussion of plot-driven reasons for said characterization difference as it's getting off-topic.)
So, forex, Mel Gibson as Aragorn would have been OWOWMYBRAINMYEYES OK won't think about that any more. Moving right along.
Based on the ten minutes of Viggo presence in the sadly [1] utterly forgettable movie Daylight, though, I'll answer the last question as "His performance would probably not have changed." His character in said movie is an egotistical irritating celebrity, and his performance demonstrates that he can act that way when he wants/chooses to. (I would have been more irritated, except the movie was so painfully predictable that he might as well have been wearing a T-shirt that said "Won't survive past the first few minutes of $COMING_DISASTER due to own stupid arrogance" (Yes, I am in fact spoiling bits of the movie, so that you won't watch it).) Without taking LotR into account, there is enough of a contrast between his characters in Daylight and, say, Crimson Tide [2] that you can see he's got the range.
Of course, how "range" applies to secondary characters vs. the title character of one-third of the movie is debatable. Other things, like intensity of prolonged performance and the whole bigger responsibility thing crop up. The obvious answer to that is "He can, as he has."
Still, good questions, but considering, I'll just go on thinking "but for the grace of God... " and "thankfully..."
[1] Sadly, because the premise was OK if you like disaster movies, and it was made to be dedicated to/create more public awareness of the plight of fire and rescue personnel in general, but it squandered its premise and probably failed in its purpose as not being executed well at all. Why did I watch it? Because I was in a disaster movie mood, and had a fangirl moment when I noticed his name on the back cover while browsing in the video store. [2] Which, by contrast, is a good movie.
Actually, I consider "Able to" to be two questions. One is the one you addressed, "Would PJ have considered him for the role/offered it to him/cast him?" The second is "Would he, having had what would probably have been a significantly different career, feel capable of playing that role? Or maybe, would he feel it beneath him?" Some roles just catapault an actor into playing certain types of other roles, and John Dunbar could have been one of those for Viggo. If you see what I mean.
Crimson Tide [2] [2] Which, by contrast, is a good movie.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
Re: Not quite where I was going
Date: 2004-09-29 01:06 pm (UTC)Able to? Sure. They cast Stuart Townsend, moderately known back then (and now), and he didn't work out. They considered Daniel Day-Lewis, rather better known, who turned down the role. I think Mortensen would still be considered, all other factors remaining the same.
Would he have wanted to? No idea. But then until he got the phone call, he didn't know of the production; he didn't know of the book. And yet he said yes because his son said Strider was cool, among other things. I remember reading in an interview---"by that point my career had reached that comfortable point where it wasn't going anywhere much, and I didn't care." I have a feeling that now that he is a household name, he still doesn't care. So, 60% gut feeling yes. But who knows.
So, forex, Mel Gibson as Aragorn would have been OWOWMYBRAINMYEYES OK won't think about that any more. Moving right along.
Based on the ten minutes of Viggo presence in the sadly [1] utterly forgettable movie Daylight, though, I'll answer the last question as "His performance would probably not have changed." His character in said movie is an egotistical irritating celebrity, and his performance demonstrates that he can act that way when he wants/chooses to. (I would have been more irritated, except the movie was so painfully predictable that he might as well have been wearing a T-shirt that said "Won't survive past the first few minutes of $COMING_DISASTER due to own stupid arrogance" (Yes, I am in fact spoiling bits of the movie, so that you won't watch it).) Without taking LotR into account, there is enough of a contrast between his characters in Daylight and, say, Crimson Tide [2] that you can see he's got the range.
Of course, how "range" applies to secondary characters vs. the title character of one-third of the movie is debatable. Other things, like intensity of prolonged performance and the whole bigger responsibility thing crop up. The obvious answer to that is "He can, as he has."
Still, good questions, but considering, I'll just go on thinking "but for the grace of God... " and "thankfully..."
[1] Sadly, because the premise was OK if you like disaster movies, and it was made to be dedicated to/create more public awareness of the plight of fire and rescue personnel in general, but it squandered its premise and probably failed in its purpose as not being executed well at all. Why did I watch it? Because I was in a disaster movie mood, and had a fangirl moment when I noticed his name on the back cover while browsing in the video store.
[2] Which, by contrast, is a good movie.
Re: Not quite where I was going
Date: 2004-09-29 01:22 pm (UTC)Actually, I consider "Able to" to be two questions. One is the one you addressed, "Would PJ have considered him for the role/offered it to him/cast him?" The second is "Would he, having had what would probably have been a significantly different career, feel capable of playing that role? Or maybe, would he feel it beneath him?" Some roles just catapault an actor into playing certain types of other roles, and John Dunbar could have been one of those for Viggo. If you see what I mean.
Crimson Tide [2]
[2] Which, by contrast, is a good movie.
Totally agree, *very* good movie.
Re: Not quite where I was going
Date: 2004-09-29 02:16 pm (UTC)