MovieChat Forums > Escape from L.A. (1996) Discussion > Why no Charles Cyphers or Tom Atkins?

Why no Charles Cyphers or Tom Atkins?

posted 11 years ago by Enigmatic-Ocean
3 replies | jump to latest

As bad as this film was I actually think that if Carpenter had had those two reprise their roles from the original that this film would have been a bit better. I remember watching it (for the first time) and thinking to myself where is everyone from the first film? Too bad Donald Pleasence was already gone. It would have been amazing to have had him reprise his role. Perhaps he could have made the film better just by his presence.

Memories, you're talking about memories.

[–] tenantennae 11 years ago

Ha, Snake got a real glimmer in his eye at the end, when he said maybe he'd kill Hauk later. Perhaps he made good on the threat, and killed those two as well :)

[–] YankeeDood 11 years ago

I think this was a good sequel.
They didn't choose those actors because they were too old, everyone has to retire at some point, dude. I think an an all white-haired cast would not be too appealing.

[–] AdmiralTugBenson 11 years ago

They were already rehashing the plot of the first movie, the only way they were able to pull it off was to change the faces and places. I'm not sure how Donald's President character would fit in, but I guess you could have had Cyphers or Atkins reprise their role and replace Keach, having been Hauk's protege led to one of them being tapped to run L.A. But I think we needed a new group of cops/officials for Snake to be dealing with, because I don't think anybody from New York would trust Snake at all after what he did. And I think both Cyphers and Atkins are too likable to be the arrogant, overly "moral" authority figures from this movie. Keach does a good job of being unlikable, of making you want to punch him in the face in this movie, when I see Tom Atkins I just want to take him out for a Miller High Life at The Buccaneer.

"See you guys at the 10 year prison reunion" - Ben Richards