Discussion Pretend you are JJ Abrams, who would you cast from LOST ?

So many good actors and actresses were in it over the it's run. Who would you pick ?

Evangeline Lilly would be my choice for actress's not sure what role.

Josh Holloway would make a good Talon Karrde type.

JJ knows these people and what they can do, so I wonder if any of them will get a chance, I bet those without work have already been in contact with him.

 

Terry O'Quinn would make either a great sage jedi or a great villain. Cast him. Now.

 

None.

 

How about who I can cast from the Star Trek movie...in that case it would be Benedict Cumberbatch and ONLY him *not that I dont love the rest of the cast but....cheekbones and voice! I need that for Star wars. *
As for Lost....IDK.

 

Jorge Garcia

 

While a HUGE fan of LOST -- currently re-watching the entire series and finishing S6 -- I'm NOT sure I'd cast anyone. Don't get me wrong -- loved everyone associated with LOST for the most part, but they're so iconic to the hardcore fans like me it would be difficult for me to separate them. Everytime I see a LOST actor in something I always call them by their LOST name.

However, just for kicks I would say Holloway, O'Quinn, deRavin and perhaps Carnonelle. Holloway would make an excellent scoundrel type (but type-cast). O'Quinn as a Jedi master or Dark Jedi. Carbonelle could play any number of good guy roles or bad guy roles. And I think Emilie would make an excellent daughter of Luke Skywalker. I also think maggie Grace would be a good choice as well.

Honestly, I don't think we'll be seeing any of the major cast, but I wouldn't rule out seeing some of the LOST supporting actors involved in some way.

 

Josh Holloway- Han Solo's son.

I don't care if its cliche. I wanna see it. Think of the snarkfests those two would have...

 

This question is based entirely on the general notion that directors like to keep certain actors in their stable, actors whom they tend to like working with and who know how to work with them in turn. A LOT of directors do that: Martin Scorsese had Robert de Niro; James Cameron has Bill Paxton; Akira Kurosawa had Toshiro Mifune; the list goes on. George Lucas was somewhat different than this: he tended to not want to assemble what other directors would call a "stock company of players," which is one reason why he was so hesitant to hire Harrison Ford for Han Solo right after he'd just done a role in American Grafitti; as for Abrams, who now has to fill Lucas' shoes, what's better for this project: to go with fresh faces or to go with actors he's trusted before? Has he demonstrated an inclination to keep using certain actors in more than one of his films? If he hasn't, it's rather fruitless to ask if he'll be culling the cast of Lost for actors.

Given that Star Wars usually followed the pattern of hiring unknown or not-well-known actors for major roles, backed by experienced name actors for supporting roles, I'd say Abrams is best sticking with that formula. With some exceptions, I'd have to say that the cast of Lost would yield little in the way of fresh faces, simply because it's so famous now, but it could indeed supply experienced supporting actors. As long as it's not Jorge Garcia for some comedy relief role, I'll be fine.

Finding actors will not be Abrams' problem; finding the right actors will be. One of the flaws of the PT was the casting (I'm looking at YOU, Jake Lloyd and Hayden Christensen and Natalie Portman and, well, anyone other than Ian McDiarmid!). Abrams and Kennedy will have to be VERY careful in casting younger roles this time around. They will HAVE to be able to hold their own against more established supporting actors, to say nothing of the Big Three, and they will have to be able to master the "faster and more intense" style of acting that certain actors, such as Sam Witwer (who is quite adept in this acting style in his own right), have spoken of at great length. All that in an era when the very style of acting has changed so dramatically that intense is actually the OPPOSITE of what is often sought in actors these days: they prefer actors who can emote subtly for close-ups, not actors who can emote intensely for wide shots. Abrams will have his pick of young talent; carefully vetting them to see which ones can fit the unique acting requirements of a Star Wars movie is going to be the real test.

But while you're on the subject, Darth Claire, I'd be all for Benedict Cumberbatch myself if he hadn't just been in Abrams' last film (but then, I just cited the Harrison Ford example, and that turned out just fine); Cumberbatch has the look, the voice, and the gravitas to fit perfectly in a Star Wars film, and he's compelling to watch even in the brief Trek trailer footage I've seen.

 

I'd honestly look more towards Star Trek than LOST. He only had an early role in directing the episodes of LOST IIRC.

 

Mark Pellegrino (Jacob) would be an excellent Sith/Dark Jedi or Bounty Hunter

 

I think there were a lot of really good actors in the PT the problem was that they were being directed by Lucas. If you took those same groups of actors and put them under the wing of a better director and writer the acting in the PT could have been a lot better.

As far as Lost actors go though I don't see that happening. Those actors are pretty much married to their Lost characters now so it would be hard for the audience not to look at O'quinn and think of Locke or Holloway and think of Sawyer....etc...etc...

 

Oh dear lord, I could never do such a thing. That'd be like saying, "pretend you're the director and purposely trying to sabotage the greatest movie potential of all time." Not to say they're all horrid actors or anything, but that kind of inbreeding wouldn't be healthy.