Character casting

[EscafilDevice]

During the TV series I noticed that Jake (Shawn Ashmore) plays the evil him brilliantly. Now that he is older they should bring him back as Tom. Although the results will be extremly variable as there are some who remeber him as Jake (or more likely as Iceman).

I think that the supporting roles (Visser 3, Chapman, Erek, Tom, Visser 1), should be played by big names. Unknowns give the audience a fresh start on the character whereas people already have opinions about well-known actors. Any girl would go to see some Disney Star in a bit role in Animorphs, but having a Jonas Brother play Marco would be disastrous.

Having Shawn Ashmore play Tom would be an interesting fan-service, but he might be too old by then, especially if it were a multiple-movie series. Maybe Chapman? I also don't think he could handle the stark contrast between portraying Tom and Tom's Yeerk.

I also think that if it becomes a franchise and the David story arc is included (which is likely), David would have a much larger role in sheer numbers, so it's important to cast him well too. I'd also say an unknown for David, but it's not as important.

I think a lot of people (not so much on here) want to say "OMG WE SHOULD HAVE BLAKE LIVELY AS RACHEL AND ROB PATTINSON AS JAKE!!1!", but you really can't have famous people in these types of movies other than in smaller roles to draw in viewers. Hello, look at Harry Potter: no name stars, big name supporting characters. It works.

[AlothAssassin]

The animals in Narnia don't even look half real, come on.  It's regular CG, I don't want any Animorphs movie to look like freakin' Narnia.

From a technical aspect, we'll just have to wait and see whether photo-realism is possible after December with Avatar.  That's when we'll know.  Hey, if the technology gets to that stage, I have no problem with a computer-animal movie.

As of now though, we haven't seen any movie where it's done right, where you can't tell the difference.  Aslan looks artificial as hell.

And Narnia wasn't anywhere near as violent as the Animorphs books.  You never see swords connecting, injuries, etc, it's all done in a way that's accessible to kids.  And that's great, that's how Narnia should be.  Animorphs as an entire story relies entirely on the fact that, in war, people get f'ed up.

[Chad32]

I thought the animals looked fine in Narnia. I think an Animorphs series could be done well without hammering in the "war is bad" message nearly as much as KA did. No one would ever be able to market a show to children unless they toned it way down. Adults sure, but adults are not the target demographic. If they included all of that, I doubt they'd get below rated R.

[SarahConnor2]

During the TV series I noticed that Jake (Shawn Ashmore) plays the evil him brilliantly. Now that he is older they should bring him back as Tom. Although the results will be extremly variable as there are some who remeber him as Jake (or more likely as Iceman).

I always thought of Jake as looking as he did in the first few books he was in, with the dark brown hair. So when I watched the series, I was disappointed by Shaun's appearance nd the lack of resemblance.

[AlothAssassin]

No one would ever be able to market a show to children unless they toned it way down.

Look, what's the point of adapting Animorphs if you don't keep the one unique thing about it?

When you think about the general overall concept of Animorphs, it's pretty goofy.  Kids fighting aliens by turning into zoo animals.  That's not what made these books interesting.  The draw has always been that it's a kid's series, yes, but a kid's series that didn't talk down to kids.  It didn't oversimplify, it didn't portray things in a rock 'em sock 'em blockbuster manner.

That means gritty, that means consequences stemming from actions.  

If you play this safe, it automatically becomes another "blahhh" franchise about adolescents with powers saving the world.  That's not interesting in the slightest.  It's not going to stick out from the crowd or maintain its allure.

I'm not saying for a minute that an Animorphs movie of Narnia quality can't be made.  Personally, I just have this supposedly crazy notion of aiming a little higher.  There's actual potential in this series, if someone comes along with the balls to make it right, and actually challenge people.  Just because the main characters are thirteen, doesn't mean it has to be a dumb summer feelgood movie.

Absolute necessities with this would be: a) casting all unknowns for the primary characters, b) having a hard PG-13 tone (grittier than superhero movies, but not quite Rambo), and c) actually having the guts to adapt this more or less page for page.  Any idiot can chicken out and give us Power Rangers With Animals, or a teenage Fantastic Four.  It's a little trickier to maintain the courage Katherine and Michael showed in not babying their audience.  

[Chad32]

It would be great if they can push it as far as a PG13 rating will allow, but I'm saying people have higher standards for movies and shows than for books. Anyone who tries everything that KA did in the books, and tries to give it a PG13 rating would have media watchdogs and moral guardians kicking down their doors.

Of course this might be why some people around here say a movie wouldn't work out. Because they wouldn't be able to pull the stuff with a movie that KA pulled with the books. Of course I would still go see it. Because I believe the important stuff for the series is not pushing the subtext. I like the text text.

The reason the TV show failed was not because they didn't push the envelope and show scenes like what was described in the books. It was stupid stuff like morphing a tiger in the pool, attacking one guy, then demorphing. Andalite arm wrestling. Visser Three being in Human form at times when there's no reason to be. Aliens looking like crap, and morphs being all wrong.

I really don't think they could make the books into a PG13 movie/series without toning it down. Maybe that means it just wouldn't work. If so, then there's nothing that can be done. You either get a movie or series that's as true as possible to the books that winds up being rated R, or you tone it down a few notched and make do with the hardest core PG13 possible. That's a decision to make before anything else.

[AlothAssassin]

That's the thing though, this series needs that stuff.

It's one thing for kids to read violence, but you can't show it visually without the censors shutting you down.

This series, without the "reality of war" aspect, just becomes completely average.  It blends in, it's "meh", it doesn't offer anything worthwhile when you begin to make it for young teens, instead of for everyone while still being accessible to them.

If you can't get across the fact that every one of these kids has taken many lives by the time they're 15, in ways that will screw them up mentally, up close & physical, don't make it at all.  Go make a Teen Titans movie or something with a tone where you don't have to.

Animorphs, basically, should be suburban Vietnam.  With Jake as a teenage guerilla leader, a makeshift Californian Viet-Cong.  You can keep the humor and wit and ridiculous scenarios they find themselves in, but if there's a physical confrontation between a grizzly bear and a Hork-Bajir, you'd better damn give us a bloodbath.

And, again, since anything involving 13 year olds will never be granted that type of ratings freedom, it should just be left well alone.  We have the books, the books work, don't make sacrifices to churn out an inferior movie.

Never compromise.  That quote holds merit.

[Chad32]

Comprimising is not inherently bad. It allows some people to meet in the middle and work things out for the better good.

Though just rewriting the series to get rid of some plot holes and retcons, fix some things like Visser Three's villain decay, and add some depth to other groups instead of plot insignificant filler, and it would be fresh and new.

[Sub Visser]

The series was for kids. Period.  To make the movie uber violent and bloody would be flat out stupid.  There are literally hundreds of ways that movies have accomplished the the look of war without showing too much violence.  Besides, I don't want to go see an Animorphs movie and just see two hours of bloody mayhem.

[Galladerotom]

Maybe kids were the targeting audience and the whole advertising campain gave it off as a stupid kid series but the author gets pretty graphic at some points:

"A huge Hork-bajir slashed and cut a bright red line right across my black leather chest. I swung my fist and hit the Hork Bajir hard enough to fold him in two. But another leaped over him and came at me. I blocked his arm but he came at me with his clawed foot. I fell back. I looked down and saw a hole in my stomach. A hole! I could see the gorilla's insides! My insides. My insides!" -Book ten (Applegate 157)

You are under the wrong impression about the "Oh it is just a kid series" View. That's what schoolastic saw it as resulting in a cheesy marketing campain and overtly low budget tv show. Have I made myself clear.

Not uber bloody definatly but you are going to have to face the realities of war action.

[Sub Visser]

I am fully aware of the graphic violence in the books, I am more aware of how to show something without showing it.  Plus, when you're dealing with Shredders and Dracon Beams you get into the lightsaber-esque effects.  Those type of weapons don't make people bleed profusely because they are so hot (Darth Maul anyone?)  Another thing to take in effect is that most of the violence is between animals and aliens, which is still gory, but seen differently in the audiences eyes.  I think people can tolerate more violence when it isn't human vs. human.

[AlothAssassin]

The series was for kids. Period.  To make the movie uber violent and bloody would be flat out stupid.

The books were "uber-violent and bloody", my friend.

Question: what other "intermediate/young adult" books have you ever read that were half this graphic or politically complex?  Dealing in grey areas and moral ambiguity?

That would lead me to believe that, yes, while the core audience was comprised of middle-school readers, Animorphs doesn't fit neatly into that category.  When have you ever seen anything else aimed at 13 year olds where kids their own age are killing people with claws and teeth, and stealing bombs from military bases to blow up an enemy installation?  Or holding a fork to a guy's ear while promising to kill his parents?  Watching a guy turn into a giant predatory monster and bite an alien into little pieces while listening to him scream?  Deal with the after-effects of combat, of war, reflecting on how you sent your cousin and brother to their graves?

You can use that "but it's supposed to be for kids!" thing all you want.  Truth is, though, 90% of parents who ever actually read these books, screening them for their kid before letting them read it, wouldn't be happy to expose their children to most of this stuff.

The honest truth is, Scholastic marketed this to the middle-school crowd, slapped some pretty & colorful covers on the books, and emphasized the "cool funky animals!" aspect while playing down the "stabbing someone in the face with a railspike claw" angle.  So, yes, technically it's a children's series.  And I have no problem with children reading these books, they might learn something, as we did.  They'll be exposed to something a little more lofty and high-brow than the other crap churned out for people that age.  But to lump this in the same category as Goosebumps or Harry Potter, etc, would be a mistake.  As dark as HP is becoming, the darkest stuff in Harry Potter doesn't even scratch the surface of book #1, here.

Facts are facts.  If you adapt this faithfully, you're not going to get past the first stage of MPAA scrutiny.  They wouldn't let kid John Connor in Terminator 2 fire a gun.  What makes you think they're going to let you show kids the same age do what they do in the books?

[SarahConnor2]

The series was for kids. Period.  To make the movie uber violent and bloody would be flat out stupid.  There are literally hundreds of ways that movies have accomplished the the look of war without showing too much violence.  Besides, I don't want to go see an Animorphs movie and just see two hours of bloody mayhem.

I really don't think PG-13 violence would qualify as uber violent and bloody...I'd picture it as showing violence but only flashes of it, so they'd have it in there, but not focus in on it and elaborate a lot on the gore. The movie, as I would imagine it, should be just fine for the fans of the Animorphs. They should understand why the "bloody mayhem" is existent.

[EscafilDevice]

^What Aloth said.

Does anyone else think they should up the ages a bit of the actors?

Make them start the war at 15 and end at 18, I guess. It might be a little easier to cast: it's easier to get a woman in her 20's play a high-school kid vs a late middle-school kid.

[Chad32]

I wouldn't mind seeing them a few years older.