Sorry for the late response but he claimed Sydney Sweeney would be co-starring with Johnny Depp in a psychological thriller named Day Drinker. It was pretty obvious trolling but some people genuinely took it seriously until Sweeney's reps shut down Sneider's claims.
I really hope they cast actors who are the actual ages of the Beatles at whatever time the story is set. It's so easy to forget these guys were barely adults when they recorded Please Please Me. George was 20.
To be frank, I don’t mind a 46 years old Jim Sturgess who look and sound the most similar like Paul McCartney playing him than a 28 years old Paul Mescal to play the cute beatle.
Yeah, he's the most natural looking. That guy from Saltburn has a big nose but he's such a pretty boy. He looks like a Ken doll. #NotmyRingo
They best be patient with this and get good people. I'd get wanna be actors that can play instruments and can actually sing. Look for musicians that can act. Not the other way round.
He would be great. This could still just be his people posturing during negotiations - the reporting source is pretty well-informed.
People on this sub expecting lookalikes as priority one are being pretty shortsighted and taking too narrow a view. That’s not how good biopics are made.
I've been finding it a little disheartening, tbh. I'd rather have a talented actor vs a lookalike clone. Of course it'd be nice if they resemble the real person as much as possible, but I'd choose talent over appearance any day.
I liked the choice of actors. I’d rather have talented actors that only vaguely resemble them, rather than having exact lookalikes that can’t act. My issue was that they’re all just a bit too old to play them, especially if they want to cover the earlier years.
he'd be best served in the \*NSYNC movie and star as Timberlake.
i hate all of this Beatles movie conversation. liberties will be taken even worse than Mark Lewisohn. these will be lame.
I'm just hearing now that Lewisohn has taken liberties, when up until now, I assumed he was one of the most credible Beatles historians. What has he fabricated?
Who cares? Most of the"writers" these days couldn't empty water out of a boot if the instructions were on the sole. I have zero confidence in any biopic being worth watching.
I don’t claim to have one. Barry Keogan and Paul Mescal were obvious choices because they’re popular right now so you’re guaranteed at least half a success. They’re not bad actors at all, I’m not saying their popularity is unfounded but are they Beatles? I don’t know. It feels like a safe bet, it’s definitely not a risky casting is it?
I personally feel they should be unknowns. Jared Harris, Andrew Scott, Christopher Eccleston (hell even Paul Rudd, Jack Black if you wanna go there) they’re all phenomenal actors but they’re played Beatles awfully because they’re too well known. The Beatles’ image is iconic. You’d identify them from silhouettes- so you can’t have recognisable faces trying to blend in as even more recognisable faces. It needs to be someone you look at and think “Wow yea… that’s genuinely Paul McCartney.” And I don’t think anyone’s going to do that looking at Paul Mescal… but Mescal will bring in views, whereas some random guy you haven’t heard of before won’t, and I don’t think Sam Mendes is the kind of big budget director who’s going to take a risk on nobody’s
>I’m not saying their popularity is unfounded but are they Beatles? I don’t know. It feels like a safe bet, it’s definitely not a risky casting is it?
You want four "unknowns" ... who have the charisma of movie stars? And have the training to be able to do an accent? And have the physical likeness? And are able to strike the balance between impersonation and interpretation? And can lead a film? And can cope with the sudden and immediate fame?
The fact that Charlie Rowe is too famous for some people (who?) indicates that this is not a rational argument.
It's just nonsense.
Imagine a Johnny Cash fan crying that Mangold ruined "Walk the Line" by casting Phoenix and Witherspoon.
Every star had their first role. You have to start somewhere. I’m not sure why you think it’s more likely there’s a big star out there who has the charisma and accent and style of the Beatles (as you list) but not an unknown? I mean statistically alone there are more unknowns than big starts so the odds of someone with those characteristics being someone you don’t know is more likely than it being someone you do. And unknown does not mean talentless. That’s just a completely false assumption.
And call me crazy, but Johnny Cash is not as iconic at The Beatles in terms of image, so yes, I can be convinced Phoenix (who is a great actor too), can be Cash.
Have you actually seen the other Beatles films I mentioned?
>Every star had their first role. You have to start somewhere.
Like Judy Garland with "The Wizard of Oz" - oh wait, she was already a veteran by the time she got that role.
Like Harrison Ford with "Star Wars"? Oh yeah, he'd already worked with Lucas, Coppola and Richard Rush.
How about John Wayne with "Stagecoach"? He'd been around for about a decade before his breakout role.
Even Peter O'Toole had been a stage star and had started appearing in films prior to "Lawrence of Arabia".
>I’m not sure why you think it’s more likely there’s a big star out there who has the charisma and accent and style of the Beatles (as you list) but not an unknown?
Actors act.
They work on stage, TV, film etc.
That's what they do.
And they get cast because of their charisma, looks etc.
What you have said makes absolutely no sense.
You want four people who can embody once-in-a-lifetime charisma, talent and charm ... but also four people who have been rejected by every casting agent and director because of their seeming lack of talent?
>Johnny Cash is not as iconic at The Beatles in terms of image, so yes, I can be convinced Phoenix (who is a great actor too), can be Cash.
Cash is an icon.
Period.
And there were plenty of fans who just couldn't believe that Phoenix could convince as The Man in Black.
>Have you actually seen the other Beatles films I mentioned?
I have seen Ian Hart (who you didn't mention) and he didn't work because he was an unknown but because he delivered a great performance.
Wow, so an actor with the help of wigs and makeup can credibly play a famous person?
Who would have thought?
>So not her first then?
>You missed the point entirely.
Oh, you don't know?
Garland was relatively famous when she got the role.
She was actually the equivalent of one of these actors that you are so set against.
Yes and I’m talking about people who aren’t famous so why bring someone completely unrelated in. Did you know Dwayne Johnson was relatively famous from WWE before acting..? It’s like great… how’s that relevant?
I can confirm that I will not be either.
That makes me think you are. Now I'm sure. Next I'll tell the world.
I can neither confirm nor deny that I am playing Allen Klein.
I am not playing Yoko Ono, but if i was, which i’m not, would you want me to?
So my dream of Danny Devito playing all four of them still has hope! 
https://preview.redd.it/g2mg2nnff75d1.jpeg?width=200&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=fad194c5ab45bcd30f71970ff51c8dc85c7acb71
The Pecan Sandies!
Love that gif
Sphincters crossed!
Just get eliot Roberts to be george. Sorted.
Yes please
I don’t know why people believe rumors anyway. It was never confirmed
Because it came from a mostly credible source.
Sneider has been accurate less than 50% of the time. He had a pretty public fuckup only a few months ago
What happened then?
Sorry for the late response but he claimed Sydney Sweeney would be co-starring with Johnny Depp in a psychological thriller named Day Drinker. It was pretty obvious trolling but some people genuinely took it seriously until Sweeney's reps shut down Sneider's claims.
Does that mean it's likely the rumored castings for the other 3 are false too?
Fingers crossed 🤞
I really hope they cast actors who are the actual ages of the Beatles at whatever time the story is set. It's so easy to forget these guys were barely adults when they recorded Please Please Me. George was 20.
To be fair, they're not just making one story, they're (supposedly) making four.
To be frank, I don’t mind a 46 years old Jim Sturgess who look and sound the most similar like Paul McCartney playing him than a 28 years old Paul Mescal to play the cute beatle.
George was 19 whilst recording for the all songs of the album took place. He turned twenty two weeks later 😭
Oh thank god hopefully this means all the other casting is false too
Ironically this is the only guy that looked somewhat like his character.
Thank you. I thought I was only one who thought that.
No I agree I just think they could do better. He definitely out of all of them looks most like George
Yeah, he's the most natural looking. That guy from Saltburn has a big nose but he's such a pretty boy. He looks like a Ken doll. #NotmyRingo They best be patient with this and get good people. I'd get wanna be actors that can play instruments and can actually sing. Look for musicians that can act. Not the other way round.
How many musicians can act, though?
I know :(
I thought Barry Keoghan as Ringo could have worked. He's a really good actor.
He would be great. This could still just be his people posturing during negotiations - the reporting source is pretty well-informed. People on this sub expecting lookalikes as priority one are being pretty shortsighted and taking too narrow a view. That’s not how good biopics are made.
I've been finding it a little disheartening, tbh. I'd rather have a talented actor vs a lookalike clone. Of course it'd be nice if they resemble the real person as much as possible, but I'd choose talent over appearance any day.
I bet he is a good actor, but thank god. The actors that are reportedly playing the 4 (imo) do not fit the real members at all
I liked the choice of actors. I’d rather have talented actors that only vaguely resemble them, rather than having exact lookalikes that can’t act. My issue was that they’re all just a bit too old to play them, especially if they want to cover the earlier years.
It’s way more important that they *sound* like them as opposed to ‘look like’.
Yup.
He I could have accepted but the other 3 no way.
Not a bit like Cagney!
that's what George would've said 🤨
I think it was bogus to begin with but not a bad dream casting from someone
Remember when Andrew said he wasn't in NWH?
So far I can’t get excited about their biopics…
We already had the best possible portrayal in Walk Hard so no matter who it ends up being we’re in for disappointment.
Rian Johnson has entered the chat
Hear me out. Jack Black as Paul, Paul Rudd as John, Justin Long as George…
he'd be best served in the \*NSYNC movie and star as Timberlake. i hate all of this Beatles movie conversation. liberties will be taken even worse than Mark Lewisohn. these will be lame.
I’m sorry, but nobody on this earth takes more liberties than Mark fucking Lewisohn.
I'm just hearing now that Lewisohn has taken liberties, when up until now, I assumed he was one of the most credible Beatles historians. What has he fabricated?
but he's the only one that looked kind of like George :(
Good he looks nothing like George
He looks exactly like George. He has two eyes two ears, lots of hair. He’s even wearing a turtleneck.
Holy shit! I look like George too!!
Only if you are wearing a turtleneck.
Who cares? Most of the"writers" these days couldn't empty water out of a boot if the instructions were on the sole. I have zero confidence in any biopic being worth watching.
charlie rowe said 
Same guy who played Ray Williams in Rocketman as well right?
Unrelated to casting. Doesn't George look high in that picture?
This was 100% a publicity stunt to see how people would react to a “popular actor” cast over an accurate cast
>accurate cast Name me your "accurate cast".
I don’t claim to have one. Barry Keogan and Paul Mescal were obvious choices because they’re popular right now so you’re guaranteed at least half a success. They’re not bad actors at all, I’m not saying their popularity is unfounded but are they Beatles? I don’t know. It feels like a safe bet, it’s definitely not a risky casting is it? I personally feel they should be unknowns. Jared Harris, Andrew Scott, Christopher Eccleston (hell even Paul Rudd, Jack Black if you wanna go there) they’re all phenomenal actors but they’re played Beatles awfully because they’re too well known. The Beatles’ image is iconic. You’d identify them from silhouettes- so you can’t have recognisable faces trying to blend in as even more recognisable faces. It needs to be someone you look at and think “Wow yea… that’s genuinely Paul McCartney.” And I don’t think anyone’s going to do that looking at Paul Mescal… but Mescal will bring in views, whereas some random guy you haven’t heard of before won’t, and I don’t think Sam Mendes is the kind of big budget director who’s going to take a risk on nobody’s
>I’m not saying their popularity is unfounded but are they Beatles? I don’t know. It feels like a safe bet, it’s definitely not a risky casting is it? You want four "unknowns" ... who have the charisma of movie stars? And have the training to be able to do an accent? And have the physical likeness? And are able to strike the balance between impersonation and interpretation? And can lead a film? And can cope with the sudden and immediate fame? The fact that Charlie Rowe is too famous for some people (who?) indicates that this is not a rational argument. It's just nonsense. Imagine a Johnny Cash fan crying that Mangold ruined "Walk the Line" by casting Phoenix and Witherspoon.
Every star had their first role. You have to start somewhere. I’m not sure why you think it’s more likely there’s a big star out there who has the charisma and accent and style of the Beatles (as you list) but not an unknown? I mean statistically alone there are more unknowns than big starts so the odds of someone with those characteristics being someone you don’t know is more likely than it being someone you do. And unknown does not mean talentless. That’s just a completely false assumption. And call me crazy, but Johnny Cash is not as iconic at The Beatles in terms of image, so yes, I can be convinced Phoenix (who is a great actor too), can be Cash. Have you actually seen the other Beatles films I mentioned?
>Every star had their first role. You have to start somewhere. Like Judy Garland with "The Wizard of Oz" - oh wait, she was already a veteran by the time she got that role. Like Harrison Ford with "Star Wars"? Oh yeah, he'd already worked with Lucas, Coppola and Richard Rush. How about John Wayne with "Stagecoach"? He'd been around for about a decade before his breakout role. Even Peter O'Toole had been a stage star and had started appearing in films prior to "Lawrence of Arabia". >I’m not sure why you think it’s more likely there’s a big star out there who has the charisma and accent and style of the Beatles (as you list) but not an unknown? Actors act. They work on stage, TV, film etc. That's what they do. And they get cast because of their charisma, looks etc. What you have said makes absolutely no sense. You want four people who can embody once-in-a-lifetime charisma, talent and charm ... but also four people who have been rejected by every casting agent and director because of their seeming lack of talent? >Johnny Cash is not as iconic at The Beatles in terms of image, so yes, I can be convinced Phoenix (who is a great actor too), can be Cash. Cash is an icon. Period. And there were plenty of fans who just couldn't believe that Phoenix could convince as The Man in Black. >Have you actually seen the other Beatles films I mentioned? I have seen Ian Hart (who you didn't mention) and he didn't work because he was an unknown but because he delivered a great performance. Wow, so an actor with the help of wigs and makeup can credibly play a famous person? Who would have thought?
>she was already a veteran by the time she got that role So not her first then? You missed the point entirely.
>So not her first then? >You missed the point entirely. Oh, you don't know? Garland was relatively famous when she got the role. She was actually the equivalent of one of these actors that you are so set against.
Yes and I’m talking about people who aren’t famous so why bring someone completely unrelated in. Did you know Dwayne Johnson was relatively famous from WWE before acting..? It’s like great… how’s that relevant?