A full out attack article on Cabin Fever & Hostel director Eli Roth by blogger Melissa Lafsky is pretty much a waste of time because it misses a glaringly obvious p.o.v.
I mean, in essence – I understand what Melissa is saying and I will agree with this part as found by Jeff Wells;
“The bulk of the rest of Roth’s career — and even the success of Hostel – has rested on the unbelievably lucky move of becoming Quentin Tarantino‘s shoulder monkey,
But to write an article which calls Roth “indefensible” for appearing in the film, well I simply have to take issue with it. Surely the blame should rest with Quentin for hiring him for a part he was never going to be able to carry, you can’t really blame Roth for his lack of talent in front of the camera.
Sure, you point out he doesn’t have it, but to blame him for someone else hiring him, just sounds wrong. Look, we all know he can’t act for shit, and Roth himself knows it too, or at least is starting to get the idea now.
Remember when Quentin saw himself as an actor in the 90′s and only realised after he tested himself in From Dusk Till Dawn that he just didn’t actually have what it takes and he subsequently reduced his own screentime in his movies (outside of a brief cameo in Death Proof - he hasn’t appeared in the four other movies he has directed since Dawn).
I imagine that this feeling has hit Roth after Inglourious Basterds.
But let’s be clear and fair about this. I don’t blame Roth for weakning the Bear Jew character in the Nazi revenge flick and neither should you, I blame Quentin. Like sometimes happens with Quentin, he put friendship and personal relations above what his head told him, and so the casting of Roth for a part he wasn’t capable of getting across is his mistake.
Put it this way, and if you were Eli Roth – a director with a small niche audience who gets offered a MAJOR cool role in a Quentin Tarantino movie, which includes a moment when you put thousands of bullets into the body of Adolf Hitler – wouldn’t you take the part on?
Of course you would.
Want to write about this topic and have your work read by thousands every day? Click here to become a contributor to WhatCulture.








13 Comments
Tarantino’s biggest problem now is that he’s a victim of his own stature and success. What he needs is someone checking him for his overindulgences, not a crowd of slathering yes-men (like the pitiful Roth) egging him on and further inflating his ego.
All great artists need conflict to produce great works. Without it you just get self-indulgence, which is why Tarantino hasn’t made a good film since Jackie Brown.
I think Melissa Lafsky should say how she really feels! What an impassioned rant!
“Shoulder Monkey” is a wonderful phrase too.
I agree that Roth wasn’t great but have to agree with you Matt that Tarantino has responsibility over casting.
Reading between the lines I think Melissa is ranting not just against Roth himself but also the nepotism virus which coarses throughout the film industry.
Unfortunately “nepotism” is rife in ALL businesses and yet another symptom of how unjust the world is. Ultimately, it’s always better to be on a moving train pissing out the window than trying to piss in!
Obviously Roth cannot act but he doesn’t ruin INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS as great movie entertainment. And there’s been worst casting down the years in movies, hasn’t there?
To be fair Tarantino was an alright actor, especially in Pulp Fiction and Desperado. Eli Roth is just plain shite.
To be fair to Tarantino he didnt really have a long time to put this together after announcing at cannes that he will have it ready for the following years cannes. With this in mind i think he did a helluva job bringing IB together. Cast in all.
Mark,
I know what your saying and the casting is remarkable considering how quickly he had to put it together (literally weeks), and indeed he lost out on a few people he wanted because of this.
Those we know…
Simon Pegg (Fassbender’s role), Nastassja Kinski (for Bridget Von Hammersmark part). Though it’s hard to believe either would have been as good as who ended up with the role.
As I said before Tim Roth and Adam Sandler. But come on, this is a Tarantino picture.
There will have been dozens of very capable actors who would have dropped everything for this role.
I dont why he couldnt carry this role its not like theres a ton of lines really he’s just in a few scenes most with very little diaouge.
@Matt:This is absolutely besides the point, but I was sure that Simon Pegg was lined up for the cameo part filled by Mike Myers? I certainly can’t imagine Pegg passing for an SS officer in any version of reality…
This article just reminds me of the shit performance QT pulled off in Planet Terror.
But the biggest problem with Eli Roth is, he’s just too damn distracting. And so was Mike Myers and the dude from the Office, BJ Novak. QT casting process is odd at best. I mean, why Mike Myers? It reminded me of the retarded casting of Kal Penn in Superman Returns. Roth was actually better than I had expected. Of coarse I was expecting total shit. My FaceBook status at the time was “At least Eli Roth didn’t ruin the movie”. That’s the nicest thing I could think to say about his performance.
But really, QT is really really bad in Planet Terror. I’m sure if they would have casted anyone else for that role, it would have been funnier and more memorable.
Is it possible that QT believed Roth could pull the roll off better than he actually did, simply because it was not a demanding character???? He was just supposed to be a big crazy goon, with only a handful of lines and a ton of ass kicking. He barely had any dialogue and he still fucked it up!
Or maybe Roth’s character had more scenes and more dialogue when it filmed, then QT saw that the acting was subpar and decided to scale down his roll to make him talk less and fight more.
I guess Im just trying to look at it from as many different perspectives as I can because I don’t want to believe QT would hire an actor as poor as Roth just cause they are homies.
I would love to hear what others think about my theories
I don’t see why everyone is making such a big deal. I didn’t even take him into account in my first impression of the film (there was so much going on, his role wasn’t that memorable to me), and to say he “destroyed the film” is a ridiculous exaggeration. After watching it a few times, I’d say if anything his acting is mediocre, not the apocalyptic tragedy Melissa Lafsky makes it out to be. I see what he was doing. Of course, I was so blown away by Christoph Waltz maybe I had blinders on.
Was Simon Pegg really up for Fassbender’s role? I think Simon Pegg is an excellent comic writer and performer but does not have the depth for such a dramatic role. The scene in the basement bar was a real stand-up scene full of tension and sly humour.
Fassbender brought so much to that scene and is clearly going to have fantastic success in big dramatic roles. For some reason I haven’t seen HUNGER yet so need to rectify that immediately.
Paul L…
Pegg was down right offered the part. He has some of the best friends in the industry. Abrams’ friendship got him Star Trek role and the shooting schedule on that movie stopped him from appearing in a Tarantino movie.
http://www.obsessedwithfilm.com/movie-news/brad-pitt-is-officially-a-bastard.php
The more I think about Tim Roth, and given his history as Mr. Orange – another character whose job it was to infiltrate with deception and lies – I have to believe it was this role Roth wanted him for also.
Good luck to Simon Pegg! I really liked his work in SPACED, SHAUN OF THE DEAD and HOT FUZZ! Not so much in STAR TREK – but then again he was introduced pretty late to have an impact.
Roth would’ve been good.
But having watched IB 4 times now, I think Fassbender’s performance gets better with every viewing. I thought he was a bit ‘stereotypical’ at first as the stiff upper lip Brit! But in the basement scene there is real nuance to his acting.
And what is great about that scene is you genuinely do not know which way it is going to go.
Diane Krueger’s performance gets better and better too!
Unfortunately, Eli Roth’s doesn’t.