MovieChat Forums > The Usual Suspects (1995) Discussion > Stephen Baldwin was miscast.

Stephen Baldwin was miscast.

posted 10 years ago by brokedickdog7
20 replies | jump to latest

Stephen Baldwin does not look intelligent and is not a very good actor. Fenster was in Verbal's narrative words "A smart man".

Why is a smart man teamed up in crime with an 80 I.Q. thug?

Also- the makeup on the actors was poorly done. This is true of all of the actors. Especially Chazz Palminteri who was clearly wearing red lipstick. The facial makeup was poor in this film.

Otherwise it was a great movie. I think it deserves a vote of 8 out of 10. It would be higher except for the faults I listed.



[–] Stratego 10 years ago

Why is a smart man teamed up in crime with an 80 I.Q. thug?

Fenster is the brains and McManus the muscles (and supposedly has the right connections)? I don't see why McManus had to be smart just because Fenster was. Maybe Fenster and McManus just trusted each other completely. Maybe they grew up together, maybe they were gay lovers, who knows.

I agree Baldwin has a dumb look on his face, but I doubt he has an I.Q. of 80. I also agree he's not a very good actor, but this role was not very demanding and kinda crazy, so I think he fit it. And he was entertaining, in my opnion.

Also- the makeup on the actors was poorly done. This is true of all of the actors. Especially Chazz Palminteri who was clearly wearing red lipstick. The facial makeup was poor in this film.

I've never noticed the make-up. Now I'll admit I'm no expert on movie make-up artistry, so you may be right about it not being up to standard, but I think you're kind of exaggerating.

It would be higher except for the faults I listed.

No problem with your rating, but you really let it be affected by things like make-up and Stephen Baldwin looking too dumb?

[–] brokedickdog7 10 years ago

"No problem with your rating, but you really let it be affected by things like make-up and Stephen Baldwin looking too dumb?"

Yes. Minor details perhaps but they influenced my estimation of the film.

It is a great movie in some ways. A magnificent screenplay and great performances by most of the ensemble cast.

I don't like to cast aspersions but I do not like Stephen Baldwin. He was helped by nepotism. If he did not have 2 successful older brother actors he never would have had a career. This may be the best role he ever played but he was not good.

[–] Stratego 10 years ago

Yes. Minor details perhaps but they influenced my estimation of the film.

Okay. Personally I would never factor make-up into the rating unless it's really distracting. Totally understandable that Baldwin's performance would have an influence, but I disagree with you that he looked too dumb for the part.

He was helped by nepotism. If he did not have 2 successful older brother actors he never would have had a career.

I agree with that.

[–] therealman 10 years ago

I thought Baldwin did a fine job. This was by far his best role.

[–] ConsumeConformSubmitObey 10 years ago

Well you obviously never saw Bio-Dome.

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] DracTarashV 10 years ago

I honestly thought he was quite impressive in this film (at least compared to his work in lesser-known masterpieces).

Hey there, Johnny Boy, I hope you fry!

[–] SausagePourVous 10 years ago

Agreed. In 1995,this badass was clearly a role for Michael Madsen. Baldwin just look so dumb,his voice is too cool for his duh-face. Pollack can be funny but not believable as a criminal,this was obviously a role Joe"Memento,Matrix"Pantoliano shouldvé played. The script betrays Byrne a bit,making Keaton too much of an enigma,confessing to murder wth a smirk,then unable to put down Berg. I like Byrne but he said he was going through personal problems at the time and I believe him. Del Toro and Spacey were perfect cast.

And Verbal refers to Fenster as a smart man,since he was the only one who knew Soze was real. He died like the rest but didn´t do Sozes dirtywork like them.

[–] brokedickdog7 10 years ago

"Agreed. In 1995,this badass was clearly a role for Michael Madsen. Baldwin just look so dumb,his voice is too cool for his duh-face. Pollack can be funny but not believable as a criminal,this was obviously a role Joe "Memento,Matrix" Pantoliano shouldvé played."

Excellent suggestions.

Those 2 cast choices would have made this a great film.

[–] brokedickdog7 10 years ago

"Agreed. In 1995,this badass was clearly a role for Michael Madsen. Baldwin just look so dumb,his voice is too cool for his duh-face. Pollack can be funny but not believable as a criminal, this was obviously a role Joe "Memento, Matrix" Pantoliano should've played."

Yes!

2 great casting choices! I totally agree SausagePourVous

Had they been cast this film would be up there with Pulp Fiction.

"Aerial says we are cut off..."

[–] Chester (223) 2 years ago

The script betrays Byrne a bit,making Keaton too much of an enigma,confessing to murder wth a smirk,then unable to put down Berg.

Very good observation, although these inconsistencies could be deliberate, especially since these events all occur in Verbal’s BS story.

[–] Nikon11 10 years ago

I have absolutely no problem with the cast for this movie.

I agree, Baldwin is usually pretty crappy, and he seemed like a dope whenever I've heard him speak outside of this. But this, to me, is one of the times that everything worked right in a film.

[–] dirjj 9 years ago

All this hate for Baldwin is because he's "Right of Center"

[–] gottaluvafriend 8 years ago

Why do you think Stephen Baldwin's not a "very good actor"? Are you saying that he's an actual "thug" in real life, or that he portrays one in the movie, and if the latter is true then he must've done a good job convincing you. Are you sure you don't have a bias against Stephen Baldwin? Just in the interest of being fair and truthful.

[–] brokedickdog7 8 years ago

Why do you think Stephen Baldwin's not a "very good actor"? Are you saying that he's an actual "thug" in real life, or that he portrays one in the movie, and if the latter is true then he must've done a good job convincing you. Are you sure you don't have a bias against Stephen Baldwin? Just in the interest of being fair and truthful.

Just in the interest of being fair and truthful- were you sober when you sent this post?

Reread my thread. I explain why he was miscast.

[–] gottaluvafriend 8 years ago

You didn't explain why you think Baldwin is not a very good actor. That's my question, but since you're rude person whatever your response to me now is I will ignore it. Bye.

[–] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Chester (223) 2 years ago

Very wrong and dumb opinion. Steven Baldwin was perfectly cast in this and delivered a pitch-perfect performance.

The whole cast is excellent and the Suspects complement each other brilliantly.

[–] ByTheVineyard (544) a year ago

I agree, he was good in this film, he performed a genuine, unpretended criminal