MovieChat Forums > The Hateful Eight (2015) Discussion > Why Is He Still Casting Madsen??

Why Is He Still Casting Madsen??

posted 8 years ago by punish77
25 replies | jump to latest

QT can get literally any actor in the world to work in his movies! And there are so many great, hungry actors out there. For example, I am happy that he is using Goggins now, who is a great actor! But why is he still using Madsen, of all actors. Granted Madsen was good in Reservoir Dogs, but that was 1992. Moreover, Madsen has literally phoned in every performance for the last 10 to 15 years. He is basically a lazy, one note, straight to video actor at this point. His performances seemed so lazy and uninspired. Why does QT still bother with him? And please, do not give me the typical IMDB answer that Madsen, like every other famous actor, is a great actor.

[–] DoctorShemp 8 years ago

He fit the character, meaning that he was so obviously out-of-place and suspect. It worked, the character didnt warrant a brilliant actor/performance

[–] matt21-690-602571 8 years ago

I agree. I'm not sure if it was the character, or Madsen, that was so awful. In another post I basically asked the same question- why is MM even there. I kind of felt the same way about Bruce Dern, but his character actually had a purpose...so the old man that never even got out of his seat (other than to get shot) actually had more depth and presence than Madsen.

Regarding "inspired work" from Madsen, check out Lumberjack Man. Truly D+ work.

[–] BilboTheDefiler 8 years ago

because they are friends, duh. :)

[–] punish77 8 years ago

"because they are friends, duh. :)"

It does not usually work that way. Ron Howard is best friends with Henry Winkler, but he does not cast him in any of his recent movies.

[–] PreachCaleb 8 years ago

Tarantino is not the usual director.

Seize the moment, 'cause tomorrow you might be dead.

[–] punish77 8 years ago

"Tarantino is not the usual director."

But what is the purpose of it. To revive the career of a good actor down on his luck, like Michael Keaton with Birdman, is one thing. Keaton gave a great performance in Bridman. He then followed that up with strong performances in Spotlight and the Founder. Madsen did not give a great performance. Instead, he gave the same bad performance that he gave in Sin City. And in both situations, i.e, after Sin City and after Hateful Eight, he followed up those movies with the same straight to video garbage. So why bother with him. He is a bad, lazy actor that does not care. Moreover, by casting him you are hurting the quality of the movie.

[–] PreachCaleb 8 years ago

The purpose is Tarantino enjoys working with him and vice versa.

Tarantino is very indulgent in his filmmaking. If he wants to bring in an acting buddy, he'll do it for no reason other than he wants to.

Plus, Madsen didn't hurt the quality of the movie. He was hired to be a scrupulous tough. And he did his job.

Besides, what madsen does after is out of Tarantino's hands.

[–] punish77 8 years ago

"Plus, Madsen didn't hurt the quality of the movie. He was hired to be a scrupulous tough. And he did his job."

Disagree, at this point, Madsen hurts the quality of any movie. He just does not care. But in any event, are you telling me that actors like Michael Shannon or Liev Schreiber could not have done a much better job playing a tough guy than Madsen's typical one note performance. Those are real actors, with real talent, who actually care and who have done a lot of quality work. Why not cast them? Again QT could probably get almost any actor within reason.

"Besides, what madsen does after is out of Tarantino's hands."

That is where you and I seriously disagree. I would rather cast an actor doing quality work than a straight to video actor for many reasons. By consistently doing straight to video work for 10-15 years, whatever skills and work habits Madsen (or any straight to video actor) may have once had are long gone and atrophied. Moreover, whenever QT casts a real actor it creates a certain buzz for the movie. People wanted to see Basterds to see Pitt in a QT movie. People wanted to see Kurt Russell in a QT movie. And people would love to see QT work with other hot actors, including someone like Shannon or Jake.

[–] PreachCaleb 8 years ago

But in any event, are you telling me that actors like Michael Shannon or Liev Schreiber could not have done a much better job playing a tough guy than Madsen's typical one note performance.

Why not cast them? Were they passed up for the role in favor of Michael Madsen?

I'm not comparing him to those guys. I'm saying he came and did a job. He was a surly, suspicious character. And he did it well. His low raspy voice gives him the air of an old timey gunslinger. A good fit for the character.

That is where you and I seriously disagree.

I'm sorry, but it's not a matter of disagreement. Tarantino is not Madsen's agent nor his handler. It really is out of his hands what Madsen does when he's not working with QT. Tarantino is not in charge of Madsen's career.

In any case, as I've said, it all comes down to one thing. Tarantino likes working with Madsen. Sure, there are no doubt countless actors who are better. That doesn't matter in this case. Tarantino wanted to work with his friend.

Seize the moment, 'cause tomorrow you might be dead.

[–] 8 years ago

[deleted]

[–] jplatten 8 years ago

Tarantino is the script writer, not just the director... I suspect he imagines his mates in the parts when he writes, including the way they will look and the way they will talk - making any discussion of casting absolute nonsense. It was always Madsen sat lolling (yes lazily) at the back in the haberdashery from the outset!

[–] reverbz 8 years ago

Madsen is awesome in Tarantino's movies

[–] hatr 8 years ago

Madsen is fine in this movie.

[–] AC-United 8 years ago

Some seem to not care for his acting too much and would like to see that he is no longer cast. However, I suppose, a bastard's work is never done.

[–] urbgirl 8 years ago

I like Madsen but I would've preferred Travolta in this role.

[–] drtturner 8 years ago

I prefer Madsen or Shannon over Travolta. 8 is a stand out and stand alone film that did not need to be turned into a chess Pulp reunion of sorts. No thanks.

[–] indy-39 8 years ago

I still believe Madsen gets up every morning and thanks Mickey Rourke for f---ing up his career so badly.

[–] fiero-49251 8 years ago

Add Tom Sizemore to the mix; another waste of talent! Talk about given chance after chance! I thought the same would happen with Downey, Jr., but he finally straightened out his act and is now ICONIC!  

- - http://www.childrenofrassilon.com/fiero425.html - - homepage

[–] ecarle (14979) 7 years ago

I think QT always felt a little bad that, after using Madsen so memorably in Reservoir Dogs, he ended up giving away the role of Vince Vega(at one time intended for Madsen) to Travolta. Travolta's career was revived...Madsen headed off to decline.

So bring him back this one time, 23 years after Reservoir Dogs -- with Tim Roth even(also from Reservoir Dogs, and evidently here in a role that Chris Walz turned down.)

Given that both "The Hateful Eight" and "Reservoir Dogs" are largely about violent characters cooped up in one location...Madsen and Roth provide nostalgia.

[–] Knish (1721) 7 years ago

He was also in kill bill 2 so I don’t think that’s it. It was also Madsen his own fault that he couldn’t do pulp fiction since he committed to wyatt earp. Tarantino didn’t give away anything.

[–] ecarle (14979) 7 years ago

He was also in kill bill 2 so I don’t think that’s it.

---

That's right. And he was really good in that! I loved the scene where as a strip club bouncer he had to take a load of "mean boss crap" about being late from his mean boss(Joey Bishop's son, excellent here) -- saying "I'm a bouncer, but there's no one here...to....bounce." The irony is that he sheepishly takes all this crap and he could kill his boss in a second if he wanted to.

---

It was also Madsen his own fault that he couldn’t do pulp fiction since he committed to wyatt earp. Tarantino didn’t give away anything.

---

I did not know that. I guess I read the trivia wrong someplace. "My bad" but -- sometimes there are folks putting out wrong stories.

I end my stay on this thread saying..."oops, guess my guesses were wrong." But also: I like how Michael Madsen sounds, looks, and acts. Right on up through the Hateful Eight. He's a throwback to New York Noir, IMHO.

[–] Knish (1721) 7 years ago

Don’t feel bad. We can all be wrong about things.

[–] ecarle (14979) 7 years ago

Especially me.

"My trade" is tossing out what I think I remembered I read someplace. If I'm corrected well...I learn for next time.

[–] bobbydallas (8525) 4 years ago

Madsen sucked in this one. Roth did too...

I wish they cast other peeps for those roles. Jackson still got it, and Goggins was perfectly dislikable.
Madsen and Roth are just the same old dogs from 1992