For me it's "Terminator 2". Edward Furlong was 14 when he played John Connor and his character is 10. Throughout the movie, there isn't a single moment where I felt he was 10 years old.
Funny you mention, Edward Furlong, his voice broke during filming, I feel like he could have past for 12 at some points in the movie, definitely not 10 though!
Yeah in the desert scenes he looks and sounds young though but yeah its a bit ridiculous to think a 10yo is going to ride around on a dirt bike like that!
Most wars through human history have been run by grown men and fought by borderline boys, or actual boys, and even during WWII Hollywood didn't want to show 18-20 year olds at war. They'd show actors in their 20s, 30s, 40s, or 50s, men too old to be in combat duty, because the truth of who was actually fighting would be too much for audiences.
My husband and I visited Normandy during the 55th anniversary of the invasion. It was when we visited the American cemetery and looking at the tombstones, that it hit me just how young those guys were.
I feel like that worked for the character and the plot though.
Chris volunteered for that whole mess, he was idealistic and probably immature and jumped headlong into a situation he was not prepared for. Chris gets winged by a 7.62 AK round in the neck during his first patrol…it’s a very alarming scene, it easily could have been a death sentence, but it only left a scar.
I doubt most of those young men even knew where the hell on a map Vietnam was when they were drafted or signed on.
Great movie, one of the best war movies ever because it portrays the arson, the casual killing, the senseless madness of it all….the material and human wreckage left behind is really sad to see.
It at least works because people tended to look older back then and even though she certainly looked her age and not 19, she played the part very well so it's excusable in my book.
They really did have to cast an actress older than 19 for Elinor, because in the early 19th century a 19-year-old of her class would be considered a borderline old maid, but to us, a 19-year-old is too young to seriously consider marriage! So they had to cast someone who read as being of "she'd better hurry" age, thirty-ish or so. Close enough. And Thompson is such a terrific actress that I'm willing to give her all sorts of leeway.
But that's true of almost all historical romances, that the characters are played by actors who are older than written. Take "The Great Gatsby", where the main characters are played by actors in their thirties or forties... and in the book they were maybe late twenties! These are people who married young, many girls married in their teens, and like Daisy, their marriages were going south by the time they were 25.
A borderline old maid would be more considered in her late twenties, but yes at the young age of 19 a young woman would be typically rushed into marriage
Yes Alan Rickman was a strange choice for Colonel Brandon. A very good actor but way too old as a love interest for a 17 year old girl. I guess he was a friend of Emma Thompson. But as well as the handful of questionable casting choices there were many good ones and I thoroughly enjoyed the film overall.
I agree, and think the film is perfect despite this age issue. The actors are so talented and make up for all the age gaps with their spot on character portrayals.