Was Dooku miscast?

In the essay "Moral Ambiguity in a Black and White Universe" [Star Wars and Philosophy, edited by Kevin S. Becker and Jason T. Eberl, p. 47-8], Kevin Dees asserts that

Dooku, as it turns out, is not morally ambiguous at all; he's simply a subtle instrument of evil. The movies thus miss the opportunity to teach an important moral lesson: sincere people can honestly disagree about the correct moral course.

The more I've thought about this, the more I realize that there's a germ of truth here...but It's not qutie what Dees is saying.

My interpretation of his essay is that Dooku would be a better, more "morally ambiguous" character if he simply weren't connected with Sidious at all. That is, if his "idealism" was honest, and he really was preparing a genuinely opposing army, but this army inadvertently led to the rise of the Empire, then we'd have a character who fit alongside Qui-Gon, Yoda, and Obi-Wan as a "sincerely flawed" Jedi, and thus added to the discussion the movies already give about moral choices.

However, I think this read on the character, within the context of the overall six-part story is wrong, and may well have been written prior to the release of Episode III. Clearly, Dooku must be in league with Sidious--and, indeed, must be his apprentice--for the basic story of the Prequels to work.

But what Dees does correctly identify, I feel, is the fact that Dooku is never seriously ambigious at any time in AOTC. You never get the sense that he's anything but the villain. And the thing is, when you read the script, you don't get that impression. The lines themselves do not particularly reveal Dooku is an enemy in the scenes up to and including his dialogue with Obi-Wan. In fact, you can certainly imagine that even as late as the time of the end lightsaber battle, he's still pursuing his vision of the future, which doesn't necessarily include involvement with Sidious. Consequently, the reveal at the end of the film works much better as a surprise, on paper, than it does as filmed.

When I think about why this is, I come to one conclusion: Christopher Lee is horribly miscast. With his long history of playing villains, there's no way to put him in this role and not automatically assume that he's "up to something".

I very much like Christopher Lee as an actor and I enjoy all the scenes he's in now that the secret is spoiled for me, anyway. But I wonder if there are others out there who think that Lee should never have been cast in this role that depended so much on concealing the fact that he had fallen to the Dark Side? Wouldn't it have made better sense to have used an unknown actor so that the audience didn't project their own feelings about the actor onto the role? I wonder, too, if anyone here has a friend or a relative unfamiliar with Christopher Lee's work who was actually surprised by Dooku's meeting with Sidious at the end of the film?

 

Dooku, as it turns out, is not morally ambiguous at all; he's simply a subtle instrument of evil.

I fundamentally disagree with this quote. This person doesn't know what he's talking about.

 

Could you elaborate as to why you disagree?

 

1. A lot of people do not know who Christopher Lee is. He is known among film fans, but among the general public, especially younger audiences, I think you'll find that he is not widely known.

2. I knew prior to seeing AOTC that Christopher Lee would be playing a villain, but I never suspected he was a Sith. This was primarily because of his name: Count Dooku. All prior Sith were called "Darth ____". In addition, all prior Sith were very obviously Sith. Dooku does not have the physical appearance of a Sith. As a result, I expected Dooku to be a political villain.

3. I would say that I was somewhat surprised when Dooku turned out to be a Sith. I wasn't certain until he pulled out the red lightsaber in the hangar.

4. Christopher Lee is a great actor and delivers one of his finest performances as Count Dooku. I see your point but I don't believe he was miscast at all. I doubt you could have found a better actor to play Dooku.

 

Oh, I could've found plenty of people. Denzel Washington. Tom Hanks. Judi Dench. Sara Kestleman. Jayne Seymour. Dennis Miller. A complete unknown.

Understand, I'm not saying "anyone but Lee--I hate him". I'm not even saying I dislike the performance now. There's really a LOT I appreciate about it. I particularly enjoy him in Episode III. It's just that, for me, like the author of the quote that started this discussion, the ambiguity in the character is a little different than what's implied on the page, Because the actor involved is so identified with evil, there was little surprise the first time I saw Episode II that he turned out to be Darth Tyranus. For me, the question his performance brings up more the questions of "This guy was a Jedi? How's THAT possible?" rather than the intended "This guy's a Sith? No way...." In the sense, I think the actor turns the script on its head and gives us something indeed interesting, but somehow unsatsifying.

 

I do agree that having Lee play the role might have given away the villain side of his character too easily by outside assumption - however, it has much more to do with Lucas's character writing than anything else. Dooku, from the get-go, was the villain: it was obvious, regardless of the actor; and if Lucas expected us to be suprised then he was dead wrong. Would have made more sense to have Dooku play some part in TPM as a Jedi on the verge of falling or leaving the Order, and then, in AotC, have him reappear as a violent idealist not necessarily tied to the Emperor but answering to his own philosophies.

"I fundamentally disagree with this quote. This person doesn't know what he's talking about."

Enlighten us.

 

Hmm, interesting point about including him in Episode I. However, I do disagree that the words themselves necessarily convey evil intent, especially in the Dooku/Obi-Wan scene. They don't have to be read with the level of menace that Lee gives them.

As to an earlier point about Lee not being known by modern, young audiences--there's a slight chance he might have been remembered from, I dunno, LOTR, don't you think?

 

It's long been my standing that count Dooku would have been more interesting and mysterious if it had been instead Countess Dooku. I think having a strong charismatic woman leading the separatist movement really would have made the character far more interesting to see.
Plus it would have done two things.

1. You can agree or disagree, but I think anakin would get pissed that he got his but kicked by a girl!

2. It would have added another level to the scene where Dooku is speaking to Obi-wan while he is imprisoned. There could have been a very subtle level to it where Dooku was not only seducing him to the darkside, but seducing him in general as well, as though she needed Obi-wan to save her. Having a small amount of sexual tension really would have helped that scene out I think. AOTC is a love story in part, and having a dynamic like that might have made the story work out better.

If I had my choice at casting I think I'd pick Jane Seymour.

 

I really couldn't agree more. The reflection of Obi's temptation against Anakin's would've been delicious. Especially if it had been established that the now Countess Dooku actually had some sort of ambiguous relationship with Obi-Wan. "Join me", indeed, Obi-Wan!

 

Dooku's lines don't sound menacing to me, either in themselves or in the way Lee delivers them. Dooku doesn't seem very menacing as a character either, until the duels.



Count Dooku is awesome
/LM

 

Imagine the furor, however, if Lucas had Anakin behead a female character.

 

Imagine the furor, however, if Lucas had Anakin behead a female character.

Is killing a grown woman ,who's leading an opposing army, more horrible than innocent children? I think not.

 

there's a slight chance he might have been remembered from, I dunno, LOTR, don't you think?

Christopher Lee is pretty different in his role as Saruman than he is as Dooku. He looks different, his hair is long vs. short, he wears white vs. brown, even his nose is different, and his voice is different.

I'm sorry, but when Dooku comes on screen in AOTC, I don't think many people were saying "Hey look it's Saruman" -- unless you KNEW the actor.

Plus, Saruman is ONE role. That's not enough to typecast on. And Saruman was ONE movie (when AOTC was out, there was only one LOTR movie released at that point).

So to answer your question: No, I don't think.

 

So many fanciful words!

To get to my point, the point of his essay is to show that Count Dooku sincerly disagrees with what would be right. According to Dooku, the Republic is declining into an Empire, which is a correct foreshadowing of the event in ROTS where Palpatine brings an Imperialistic view and grasp of the Senate, bringing us to the Empire, as shone in A New Hope. I therefore do agree with his argument: Let us destroy the Republic before it turns into an Empire, then establish an uncorrupted version, restoring peace and preventing the downfall of the republic. I think Dooku is the most misunderstanded character in star wars. I think hes on the right track, he just brings about his goal in the wrong way, ultimately making him diddo the one thing he hates: corruption.

 

Mace was miscast.

 

Denzel Washington. Tom Hanks. Judi Dench. Sara Kestleman. Jayne Seymour. Dennis Miller. A complete unknown.

Ugh. Dennis Miller? Why not cast Pauly Shore to be Obi-Wan while we're at it?

Christopher Lee was a fine choice. The man brought a sense of class and sophistication to the role, and ultimately that was what it needed. If he had been in the shadows cackling with an evil grin and tossing out lines like, "Haha! Soon the galaxy will be mine! I'm evil!", he'd be just like every other Sith we see.

In my book, he's a better villain than Vader was, and I think that Christopher Lee's performance played a large part in that. Vader falls because of his own possessiveness and anger; Dooku's fall is spurred by a loss of faith in the Republic due to the very real corruption of the Senate and the Jedi acceptance of serving that corruption. I don't know why, but I find Dooku's fall to be more "real" or tragic. Here's a man who really did want to set things right, and had that used against him. Christopher Lee made that possible simply by what he brings to the role. Now sure, those who know his history as being Dracula and whatnot probably figured it out as soon as they saw him, but with Maul dead, it was kind of a given that Palpy needed another apprentice; Dooku really was the logical choice out of the new characters in AOTC. I don't think that Lee can be declared miscast in a role that many people were going to recognize as the new Sith.

 

I have to agree. Christopher Lee, with Saruman, Dracula, and countless other evil villans on his hands, is not a surprising choice for Dooku. Besides, if i want to destroy the galaxy, am i going to be a secret?

Jedi #1: Hey whats that gigantic evil planet destroyer doing up there?
Jedi #2: I dont know. Its a secret.

Christopher is an excellent choice, and i must compliment Lucas's casting job.

 

Don't get me wrong. Christopher Lee was an excelent choice for where Lucas decided to take the character. My point is that I would have taken a much different route with the character, much like other people would have taken a different route with Anakin.
I think Dooku is one of those character's who works really GREAT on paper, but they don't transition so well on screen. That's just my opinion though.

 

Ugh. Dennis Miller?

Dennis Miller's more serious acting outings reveal a side to his abilities not often seen in his usual "commentator/comedian" persona. But the fact that he comes from a background that's more associated with comedy would've, I think, made the character's turn at the end of the film a lot less predictable. And, though the PT has blurred the lines somewhat on the OT's tried-and-true formula, the fact that he has an American accent would've made him less suspicious from the get-go. With the exception of Obi-Wan, a British accent generally tells you the character's going to be a villain.

I'm not saying Dennis Miller would've been my preferred choice by any means, but I do think he'd have been capable of introducing an ambiguity to the role that Lee never did for me.

 

Dennis Miller as Count Dooku!!! You've gotta be ******* kidding! That would have been one of the most unintentionally funny parts of the saga (and there are already enough of those!)

 

Yeah I think Christopher Lee fits great in the Star Wars Galaxy but not as Count Dooku! Being a huge Obi-wan fan I hated how Dooku beats everytime with out breaking a sweat! He is like 82 (Lee I'm not sure how old Dooku is supposed to be) and he always has a stunt double doing the saber duels. I like the character a little more everytime I watch episode II and recently III but I still hate that last duel in AOTC!

 

Christopher Lee is perfect for the films. Dooku wasn't miscast, the writer of that quote is mistaken. Dooku is very much shrouded in the gray area between black and white. It is never really known what his intentions are, besides working for Sidious. He is also shown not to understand the full picture, a man that is used and then disposed of. The novel for ROTS adds a lot about how the Count didn't even know he was going to be killed. He believed in his distorted mind that the Sith Order would be a good thing.

-Seldon

 

Dennis Miller=vomit

And I am strongly opposed to the Countess Dooku for the purpose of "adding sexual tension to the interrogation scene." There's quite enough rape/S&M fantasy stuff in the world without any of this. I think it would be disappointing if one of the (what would hen be 3) major women in the whole saga was portrayed as someone so mindlessly horny that she wanted her greatest enemy (the Jedi) as sexual partners.


I agree that Dooku was never really ambiguous, though. I'm not sure what Lucas could've done about it. Don't think Lee's casting was the problem. But then I'd never really heard of the guy until AOTC, and haven't heard much of him since (except ROTS).

 

And I am strongly opposed to the Countess Dooku for the purpose of "adding sexual tension to the interrogation scene." There's quite enough rape/S&M fantasy stuff in the world without any of this. I think it would be disappointing if one of the (what would hen be 3) major women in the whole saga was portrayed as someone so mindlessly horny that she wanted her greatest enemy (the Jedi) as sexual partners.

Um....what? Where the heck are you getting rape or S&M fantasy out of the possibility that Dooku might've been better played by a woman? You might need to seek some therapy if you believe that the addition of sexual chemistry means that rape is comin' up next.

And I suppose I would be disappointed, as well, if this proposed Countess Dooku were portrayed as mindlessly horny. Far better for her to know completely well what she's doing.

 

And I am strongly opposed to the Countess Dooku for the purpose of "adding sexual tension to the interrogation scene." There's quite enough rape/S&M fantasy stuff in the world without any of this. I think it would be disappointing if one of the (what would hen be 3) major women in the whole saga was portrayed as someone so mindlessly horny that she wanted her greatest enemy (the Jedi) as sexual partners.

HOLD ON A MINUTE! Where the heck did you get that from! I wasn't talking about sexual interogation or anything like that! And I wasn't even talking about anything blatantly obvious by saying that she needs him sexually. I was talking about a very subtle level which could almost be ignored. What I meant was something more along the lines like this.

Everything plays the same up until the issue about the sith is raised.

Dooku: Obi-wan...please. I need your help.

Obi-wan: Countess, my duty is to the republic and to the Jedi order. I will not betray either of them.

Dooku: The republic has already betrayed you, as will the order, as it betrayed me.

Obi-wan: (Curious) What do you mean.

Dooku: The Golden age of the republic is over, it has been over for nearly a decade! For the longest time Qui-gon and I suspected that the Sith had returned but we could have never imagined...

(pause)

Dooku: What if I was to tell you that the republic was now under the control of the Dark Lord of the Sith?

Obi-wan: No that's not possible, the Jedi would've detected it.

Dooku: The Darkside has clouded there vision obi-wan. They are blind, and worse they will not admit it! Tell me, how did the council react when Qui-gon returned from his first encounter with the sith lord on tatooine?

Obi-wan: They were skeptical, they could not be sure-

Dooku: They were fools! My apprentice was lost because they would not take action wheb they should have!!! If they had only listened, to him, to us... It would have been so different.

(pause she turns towards him with a look of sadness)

Dooku: You know...I see quite a bit of him in you. He was very much like you were when he was young. Eager, able, he wanted nothing more than to please the council as much as he could.

(obi-wan looks surprised, this does not sound like the master he knew. The countess approaches him, and lays a hand on his chest.)

Dooku: But people change, times change. We were both naive, don't make the mistakes we did! Learn from me, learn from your master.
(desperately) I cannot do this alone Obi-wan! Were Qui-gon here.... He was your master, my student, search your feelings, he would want this! Please, you must help me. Join me, and together we will destroy the sith!

Obi-wan: (with resolve)I will never join you Countess.

(very quickly her seemingly helpless look is replaced by a cold stare)

Dooku: It may be difficult to secure your release.
(she leaves)