Michael Reeves did not want the great Vincent Price to portray that wonderful old Matthew Hopkins. He wanted Donald Pleasence. He thought that Price was too old.
Hopkins died aged about 30, and Price in 1973 was 62.
But Pleasence was 52! Still way too old.
So who should have played Hopkins?
I think Terence Stamp was the fellow - everything was right!
I thought Vincent Price was perfect, I can't imagine anyone else playing the role of Matthew Hopkins.
shareIf you say he was perfect then good luck to you. I don't know enough about Matthew Hopkins's personality to be able to say that.
I only know that Hopkins died aged about 30 and Vincent Price was 62 when the he portrayed Hopkins on film.
I'm not bothered about an accurate portrayal of the historical figure Matthew Hopkins, it's just a movie.The film is hardly historically accurate anyway, in reality Hopkins died in his bed, not hacked to death by an axe wielding husband intent on revenge for the rape of his wife and the murder of her uncle.Hopkins never burnt any witches either, they were all hanged.
shareI don't know enough about Matthew Hopkins's personality to be able to say thatI know this is an old thread but if you feel this why then why ask who should have played him in the first place? A younger actor wouldn't necessarily have a better angle than Price when it comes to the historical Hopkin's actual character. Price was excellent as the character as written for the film. Whether or not he actually captured Hopkins' as he was in life no one can know, but the same would be true if he was played by Terence Stamp. I give Price the props for a cold, unnerving, unforgettable performance.
An old thread I know, but I think Oliver Reed would have been perfect as Hopkins.
The Long Walk stops every year, just once.
I think Vincent Price did a fabulous job in the role. He did a perfect job at making him evil, sleazy, and contemptible. But if they had to choose a younger actor I think Ralph Bates would've done a great job.
share