Mcoffey said:
Except Avengers, Firefly, and Doctor Horrible remained good even in the scenes those actors weren't in.
I'm not going to dive in to a prolonged debate about the merits of Joss Whedon. He's either for you or he isn't, IMO, and that's more or less that. I thought almost every Firefly scene that didn't directly involve Nathan Fillion or Alan Tudyk was excruciating, and I chalked it up to a combination of Whedon's writing and actors who weren't charismatic enough to overcome said writing.
The man knows his talent, to be sure, but he writes well and directs well. He wouldn't be the pop culture icon he is now if that weren't true. There's a reason people think of Nathan Fillian as Mal first, and not as Castle.
I think of him as that crutch Whedon stood an entire series on I KID I KID but I do think casting has a lot more to do with Whedon's success than the objective quality of his writing or directing. At the same time, he's so far beyond what passes for Summer Blockbuster Hollywood fare that he lands on top of that world without breaking a sweat. Sort of a backhanded compliment, but good god could we do worse than Whedon - and we usually do.
And as much as I love Fillion, the man is too old to play Drake. Maybe he could play Sully, but I cant realistically see Nathan Fillion jumping around at the age and the shape he's in now.
On the flip side, how much jumping around does anyone do in movies anymore? The last Indy was 75% CGI, give or take. I'd imagine any UC movie to at least meet that mark if not exceed it. Old man Fillion can stand in front of a green screen with the best of 'em!
