Everybody is talking about the New RF with Owen Wilson or VV as Jim.
But, think about it. Patrick Duffy would have been 25 in 1974 not over the hill like Garner. Casting him in that role would have "made" the original show.
Better actor, MUCH hotter younger and with better longevity. Don't get me wrong James Garner was good but Patrick would have made the show a legend.
Nope!
shareDuffy was kinda namby-pamby. Have him stick to being the gill-man.
shareAre you insane? No way Jim Garner was Rockford.
shareI don't mind Duffy but not as Rockford.
Garner often played the the reluctant hero before Rockford and he fitted in the role perfectly.
Surely you jest!
shareI think Jim being in his forties like Garner is what makes his jadedness (word?) such a part of his character. It wouldn't work on a younger man.
"There will be blood. Oh, yes, there WILL be blood."-Jigsaw; "Saw II"
He's cynical - he's seen it all, knows all the con games, knows his way around the law, has the right connections when he needs them. Few younger dudes could have all that.
shareUm, yeah, thats ridiculous. Patrick Duffy?? This has to be a joke.
shareDon't be idiotic. THE WHOLE POINT of Rockford was that he was a little banged and bruised, well-worn, quite a few miles on his tires.
NOT "over the hill" but also not a young whipper snapper either, as Duffy would have been in the early 70s.
During the final season Rockford admitted to being 53.
share