nijimeijer Wrote:I kind of thought the same thing after seeing House of Sand and Fog (which was horrible, but in a good way--it made you feel absolutely horrible the whole time); but I think he's a bit on the older side.

Bluesman Mike Lindner Wrote:Nij, let me be the first to welcome you to the exalted ranks of the few, the proud, the...the...uh...=driven=! But remember always: "With great power comes great responsibility."

nijimeijer Wrote:I *am* a Senior Member now, aren't I!

Oh wait, I'm Puerto Rican. Let's change that to Senor Member.

Ken Valentine Wrote:I don't know Mike. 'Bout the only facial description I can recall is Jack's crooked smile, and in THE TOMB, where Jack looks in the mirror and notes that his teeth could be a bit whiter and straighter.

Jack is recognizable, which is why he takes pains not to be noticed.

Jim's photo says "Jack" to me.

And for a movie, Jack would have to have an image that you could imagine Gia would find attractive. They would have to look like they fit together.

Ken V.

Bluesman Mike Lindner Wrote:You probably right, Ken. I'm posting from Westport, CT this morning and I don't have the books. But don't Jack's customers in every novel think how ordinary he looks?

Quote: A Generic White Male? And as far as the beautiful Gia being with him, haven't all us guys seen a stunning woman with an hombre whose face only his mother could love, and thought, "Damn!--there's hope for us all!"? Women are funny that way... I just hope the actor who plays Jack does himself proud fitting into the part. That's the most important thing, to my mind.

Ken Valentine Wrote:Yes, but ordinary doesn't mean homely. RJ shouldn't look like Carey Grant, but he shouldn't look like Barney Fife either.

What struck me was how everyone from Alicia Clayton on has the expectation that Jack would be some kind of great hulking brute. The surprise comes when they discover that he's just a regular kinda guy. Not a pretty boy, not a homely goof, not a tough guy, not dashingly handsome, not a fright, just an ordinary nice looking guy.



No argument Mike. But, in order to be successful, the movie has to appeal to women as well. You don't want the wonderful half of the species to walk out of the theater shaking their heads and thinking to themselves, "GAWD! What incredibly lousy taste Gia has!"
In my view, Jack should look like the kind of guy that the women in the audience wouldn't turn up their noses to if he asked them for a date. They don't have to swoon over him, but you don't want them to say , "Oooh . . . YUK!" either. Just a nice, ordinary looking guy.

I'm sure we both agree that we want this movie to be a stunning financial success.

Right?

'Cuz if it is, there will be sequels made:

Repairman Jack II -- Legacies

Repairman Jack III -- Conspiracies

Repairman Jack IV -- All The Rage

And so on.

The only criticism I have of Jim's new contender is that his sideburns are too long. They will have to be surgically shortened.

Ken V.

Ken Valentine Wrote:'Cuz if it is, there will be sequels made:

Repairman Jack II -- Legacies

Repairman Jack III -- Conspiracies

Repairman Jack IV -- All The Rage

nijimeijer Wrote:You bring up an interesting question; FPW has mentioned that Beacon hopest his will be a franchise series of movies. Are they really bound that closely to the books that any sequels would definitely be the book order?

In other words; if they were to make, say, three of these, all told, which books do you think are most likely to be adapted? Beacon might even do away with the "Otherness" explanations, and simply have all the weird be X-Files like spookiness--it gives them leeway to skip books and therefore skip explanations.

Dave Wrote:All The Rage would definately be suitable for a sequel without too much detouring into the Otherness stuff, as would Legacies (although this may not be 'weird' enough).

Dave