Drama, Musicals, Original Wopatizations

Tom Wopat in: Walk the Line 2 (An Original Wopatization… sort of)

as: Johnny Cash

Johnny Cash is one of the most influential and enduring figures in American music. His distinctive voice and outlaw image made him popular with fans of all music genres, and he remains one of the best-selling recording artists in country music, year in and year out, over a decade after his death. Walk the Line, a film based on Cash’s early life and relationship with fellow singer June Carter was released in 2005 to much critical and commercial success.

But, as the Man in Black’s recording career spanned more than five decades, Walk the Line really only told part of the story. So much more happened in Cash’s life that a sequel, covering his later years, could easily contain enough drama and excitement to bring moviegoers back for more.

While Joaquin Phoenix did a fantastic job as the young, rebellious Cash in the original Walk the Line (earning an Oscar nomination in the process), a more seasoned actor would be needed to portray the older, wiser, but still plenty rebellious, Johnny Cash in a sequel. And we think no one could be better than Tom Wopat.

cash

Why Wopat?

Unlike Phoenix, who had to learn to play guitar specifically for the role, Tom Wopat already has plenty of six-string experience. He’s also an accomplished singer and songwriter, with multiple albums under his belt. (It should be noted that Phoenix did perform all his own vocals in Walk the Line 1.)

At an even six-foot-tall, Wopat is just a couple of inches shorter than the long and lanky Cash. (Phoenix is only 5’8”.) Height doesn’t really matter than much in a movie, but Cash was famously taller than most of his contemporaries, and a little authenticity can go a long way.

Two of the most interesting (and film-ready) tales from Cash’s first autobiography, Man in Black, were left out of Walk the Line 1, as they occurred after the events depicted in the film. Both would be perfect showcases for Wopat’s skills.

The first saw Cash, jazzed on pills of some kind, bail out of his speeding Cadillac as he rounded a curve on a mountain road. He was hauling a propane tank for his camper in the back of the car, and smelled a leak. Rather than pull over and deal with it as a rational person would, the hopped-up Cash dove from the moving car. It crashed into a tree and exploded; the ensuing fireball singed Cash’s face and sent him to hospital with superficial but scary burns.

The second anecdote involved Cash, again under the influence of illicit drugs, tearing through the desert in an old Army Jeep he had bought. He was ostensibly headed out for a solo camping trip, but got so loopy that he lost control of the truck as he drove down a mountainside and wound up barreling out of control through the dunes. In this instance, too, Cash crashed his vehicle into a tree. (A mesquite, maybe? What kind of tree grows in the desert?) He was in it this time, though he wasn’t injured in any significant way.

Both of these scenes would allow Wopat to use the stunt-driving skills he honed during his Dukes of Hazzard days. They would also present a unique showcase for his acting chops, as they could be played for equal parts comedy and tragedy—visually, they could be very, very funny if done right, while Wopat/Cash’s realization of how his drug use is starting to affect his life could be the stuff of an awards show highlight reel.

Photo credit: mrflip via Foter.com / CC BY-SA

Action and/or Adventure, Science Fiction and/or Fantasy, Television

Tom Wopat in: Quantum Leap

as: Dr. Sam Beckett

Quantum Leap

Quantum Leap was one of the most interesting network shows of the early 1990s. In it, Dr. Sam Beckett travels willy-nilly through time, taking the place of ordinary people at crucial times in their lives and hoping to “put right what once went wrong.” On his missions, if you can call them that, Sam appears to everyone else as the person whose place he’s taken; to viewers at home, he looked like Scott Bakula. Over five seasons and 90-something episodes, Sam saved people’s lives, fought mobsters, flew through the Bermuda Triangle, explored Ancient Egyptian tombs, and was, briefly, a chimp.

Bakula did quite well in the role, scoring four Emmy nominations and a Golden Globe win. However, we feel there’s an actor who would’ve done even better and scored five Emmy wins, five Golden Globe wins, and, somehow, five Academy Awards for his work, with a Tony and a Grammy thrown in for EGOT purposes. That actor, of course, is Thomas Steven Wopat.

Why Not Wopat?

Quantum Leap debuted at the tail end of the 1988-1989 television season, a good four years after the end of The Dukes of Hazzard. Wopat would’ve been in prime position for a solid return to the boob tube—enough time had passed that he wouldn’t’ve automatically been “Luke Duke” to every viewer who saw him, but it also wasn’t so long ago that he’d’ve been forgotten.

Initially, the show struggled a bit in the ratings. At the time, Scott Bakula was a quintessential “that guy” on television and in movies. With a more established star like Tom Wopat in the lead role, Quantum Leap would almost certainly been a bigger hit from the get-go.

Like the show itself was fond of pointing out, one small change in the past can have a big impact on the future: if Wopat brought better ratings for the first season, the subsequent second season would’ve been given a bigger budget, which would’ve led to overall better-quality episodes, which would almost certainly translated to larger viewership and higher ratings, which starts the whole “bigger budget” cycle all over again.

Instead of running “just” five seasons, a higher-rated Quantum Leap could’ve continued to air new episodes for many more years. Someone put Donald P. Bellisario in the show’s time machine and have him put right the casting choice that once went… not wrong, exactly, because Bakula was pretty great… hmm… how about, “put right the casting choice that could’ve been even better”? That works.

Photo credit: cdrummbks via Source / CC BY

Comedy, Musicals, Television

Tom Wopat in: Flight of the Conchords

as: World Music Jam MC

Flight of the Conchords was one of HBO’s funniest shows, and though it lasted just two seasons (at the insistence of its stars/creators, not due to poor ratings), it left a lasting impression on many viewers thanks to its brilliantly funny songs and dry yet surreal sense of humor. And, it paved way for Bret McKenzie, one half of the titular duo, to win an Academy Award for his songwriting in The Muppets.

conchords

In the tenth episode of the show’s first season, “New Fans,” the Conchords perform at a “World Music Jam.” The host and MC of said jam is Daryl Hall of Rock & Roll Hall of Famers Hall & Oates. It’s a small and fairly insignificant role, but that doesn’t mean it wouldn’t benefit from Wopatization.

Key Changes

It’s never pointed out in “New Fans” that it is, in fact, Hall as the MC. He’s essentially playing himself, but no one ever says, “Hey, it’s Daryl Hall from Hall & Oates,” and, in fact, this viewer had to check the end credits to be sure it was him. Part of the brilliance of the cameo is that it’s just so random.

Having Tom Wopat in the role would arguably be even more random, and therefore funnier. After all, Daryl Hall is primarily known for his musical career, so it makes some sense that he’d be hosting a mini-music festival, low-rent though it may be. Wopat is known mostly as an actor, of course, so his appearance would seem totally out of left field. “Wait, why is Luke Duke there?”

After his brief appearance at the World Music Jam, in which he quickly ushers Flight of the Conchords offstage after just a few notes of their first song, Hall’s MC is never seen again. However, with Wopat’s far more considerable acting chops, we think that the role could’ve expanded. Later in the episode, the band’s new fans (hence the episode title) try to convince Bret and Jermaine to partake in some typically rock and roll bedroom shenanigans, which the guys refuse.

In our Wopatized version of the ‘sode, the Conchords would find out that Tom Wopat took the ladies up on the offer their stead. Some sort of humorous cutaway gag  would be involved there, but we’re not comedy writers, so you’ll have to use your imagination on that one.

Photo credit: Thoth, God of Knowledge via Foter.com / CC BY

Action and/or Adventure

Tom Wopat in: The Living Daylights & License to Kill

as: James Bond 007

Fifty-plus years and 24 movies (and counting) into the series, the James Bond films are still going strong. Six different actors have played the lead roles over the years, the “bad guys” constantly change to reflect the sociopolitical landscape of the real world, and the overall quality of the films has varied greatly (put Moonraker up against Skyfall, for example), but one thing has remained a constant: James Bond is the man.

007

A half-dozen actors have portrayed James Bond over the years, and speculation abounds every time the role is to be recast. Of the six Bonds so far, two have been very, very good (Pierce Brosnan and Daniel Craig), but only one has been truly irreplaceable—Sean Connery, the original and still the best. With this in mind, we set out to recast one of the more forgettable Bonds with Tom Wopat. Timothy Dalton’s run seemed like the best fit.

Key Changes

First and foremost, Tom Wopat would’ve been the first American James Bond. It’s impossible to say if the filmmakers would’ve asked Wopat to feign a British accent for the role, or if his natural American voice would’ve been used. Other actors in the role have had non-British accents (Connery’s was Scottish, George Lazenby’s Australian), so perhaps the accent is not a requirement. However, if it had been, we’ve no doubt that Wopat would’ve totally nailed it.

Second, Timothy Dalton’s two-film stint as James Bond marked something of a return to form for the character. Dalton (and the producers, directors, and writers) put some of the grimness and morality struggles from Ian Fleming’s source novels back into the character, who, as Roger Moore’s time in the role went on, became more and more cartoonish and superhero-eque. Gone were the “007 in space” plots, in favor of a more realistic approach.

Wopat’s certainly got the acting chops for a more complex Bond, but the natural comic charisma he showed on The Dukes of Hazzard—not exactly a comedy show, but certainly one with a sense of humor—would have no doubt shown through in places. With a little more levity to the proceedings, one of the big criticisms of Dalton’s Bond days (too dour) would’ve been avoided. This, in turn, likely would’ve made these two middling entries in the franchise into the classic installments they very nearly were. It probably wouldn’t have hurt at the box office, either.

Lasting Impact

As mentioned above, Dalton only hung around for two movies before the Bond hat was passed to Brosnan. Had the above scenario come to pass, we predict that Tom Wopat would not only have become the first American James Bond, but also the last James Bond ever. Not because he would’ve sunk the franchise, but because he would be so well-suited to and loved in the role that no one would ever want to replace him. He’d still be going strong, 10 films in, with each one breaking box office records set by the previous installment.

“But wouldn’t he have aged out of the part by now?” you may foolishly ask. Not at all—there’s no reason fictional characters can’t age along with the actors portraying them, and 007 is no exception. By now, at the still relatively young age of 65, Wopat would be playing Bond as an older-and-wiser elder statesman who can still kick @$$ and save the day with the best of them. (Liam Neeson is still convincingly knocking dudes’ heads in at 64.)

Sure, every new Bond adventure at this point would have to begin with scenes of the “James Bond is the only one who can handle this mission” and “please come out of retirement (again), James” nature. But it would be more than worth sitting through that tired routine every two or three years to see Tom Wopat, one of the most iconic actors of this or any generation, in one of the most iconic film roles of all time.

Photo credit: johanoomen via Foter.com / CC BY-SA

Action and/or Adventure, Science Fiction and/or Fantasy

Tom Wopat in: Pirates of the Caribbean

as: Captain Hector Barbossa

Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl was the surprise blockbuster of 2003. Before it was released, I’m pretty sure everyone in the general movie-going public expected a film based on a second-tier Disneyland ride to be a total turd. Shockingly, in addition to raking in several metric butt-tons of cash, it was actually good. The sequels are a matter of diminishing returns, as sequels often are, but there’s no denying that The Curse of the Black Pearl is a dang good flick.

When talking about the Pirates movies, it’s impossible to ignore Johnny Depp’s work as Captain Jack Sparrow. It became Depp’s career-defining role, and rightfully earned the actor an Oscar nomination. Actor and character have become inextricably linked, and there is straight up no way anyone could replace Depp in the role.

That doesn’t mean, however, that some of the other major characters from the franchise couldn’t benefit from being recast. Specifically, we’re talking about Jack Sparrow’s nemesis-turned-comrade Hector Barbossa. Sorry, Geoffrey Rush, but Barbossa is ripe for Wopatization.

...and really bad eggs

…and really bad eggs

Key Changes

For one thing, Tom Wopat is American (obvs), while Geoffrey Rush is some kind of weird foreigner (JK: foreigners are generally pretty great; Rush is Australian). Barbossa’s accent in the Pirates films was one of those “sort of from anywhere, sort of from nowhere” brogues that you hear a lot from movie characters of ambiguous origin. Wopat’s take on the accent would’ve likely been different, perhaps more of a “Colonial American who’s spent years on pirate ship” kind of thing. Pirates in those days really did come from everywhere (as they do now, I suppose), so there’s no reason why Barbossa couldn’t’ve been from the Colonies.

For another, Wopat is the far better looking of the two actors, so it’s doubtful if the filmmakers would’ve buried his visage under the heaps of makeup and crusty facial hair they gave Rush. In fact, it’s more likely that they would’ve played up Wopat Barbossa’s good looks and made him something of a rival in that department to the dashing swashbuckler that is Jack Sparrow. Nothing quite like a lady torn by her growing attraction to two ruggedly handsome, combative pirates, eh?

Third, as the film was a good bit tongue-in-cheek with its humor (though, reportedly, many direct references to the theme park ride were removed from the script prior to shooting), there would have to be some sort of Dukes of Hazzard reference in there somewhere. Since painting a pirate ship Competition Orange and putting a big “01” on the side would be too ridiculous even for a movie where pirates turn into walking skeletons in the moonlight, it would have to be something a bit more subtle.

Perhaps Wopat Barbossa could slide across a section of deck railing to get behind his ship’s wheel, much like Luke slid across the hood of the General Lee in Dukes. Maybe one of the swabbies aboard the Black Pearl would be named Coltrane, as in Roscoe P. I don’t know, I’m no screenwriter. Just a ridiculously over-committed fan of Tom Wopat. If that’s a crime, lock me up.

Photo credit: Tom Simpson via Foter.com / CC BY-NC-ND

Action and/or Adventure, Classics, Drama

Tom Wopat in: Fight Club

as: “Jack” (the Narrator)

Fight Club is one of those brilliant, truly unique movies that you cannot adequately describe to those who haven’t seen it. Ultimately, you end up telling the person, “You just have to see it, man!” Even if you’ve seen it a dozen times, you’ll still likely find something new in each viewing

In the film, the everyman main character is never actually given a name—in the script he was listed as “Jack,” so we’ll use that moniker for our purposes here. Jack was portrayed by Edward Norton, and, opposite Brad Pitt’s Tyler Durden, was one of the founders of the titular group that gave similarly disillusioned men the chance to connect and experience something “real” in their lives by beating the living $#!t out of each other.

While Norton’s performance is predictably excellent, I think that maybe, just maybe, Tom Wopat could’ve done it better.

Key Changes

JSYK: This section will include spoilers. But the movie’s almost 20 years old, so it’s not like you haven’t had the chance to see it. In fact, if you’ve never seen Fight Club, go watch it right now, then come back. Seriously. We’ll wait…

 

 

 

Much like sausage, you don't want to know how the soap is made.

Much like sausage, you don’t want to know how the soap is made.

 

 

 

…and you’re back! Whaddaya think? Good stuff, right?!

The first key change is one of age. Norton was roughly 30 when Fight Club was filmed, which is right in line with the character as depicted in the Chuck Palahniuk novel on which the film is based. He’s a young, uninspired office drone doing thankless work for a company so big they essentially don’t know he exists. Tom Wopat was 48 at the time, so the character could’ve been changed to one that is higher up the ladder in the company, but who still feels that his life is going nowhere.

This would actually have made the character’s decision to leave his old life behind even more powerful. As is, Jack ditches a crappy apartment, crappy job, and crappy life to become someone new; as a higher-ranking, better paid member of the company’s management team, he would be walking away from a big house, fancy car, and comfortable lifestyle.

The age difference between Wopat and Norton would also affect Jack’s relationship with Tyler Durden. Pitt was about 35 when the film came out, so while the dynamic between the two characters could’ve remained largely the same, Wopat would still have been significantly older than his counterpart. When it is ultimately revealed that Jack and Tyler are two disassociated personalities inside the same guy’s head, I think that this would actually have a solid logic to it. Tyler is essentially the better looking, smarter, more adventurous person Jack wishes he were, so it would make sense that he would want to be younger, as well.

Photo credit: VSELLIS via Foter.com / CC BY-SA

Animation, Classics, Comedy, Kids and/or Family

Tom Wopat in: Who Framed Roger Rabbit

as: Eddie Valiant

No movie blew my mind as a kid like Who Framed Roger Rabbit did. The movie’s seamless blend of live action and cell animation achieves a level of awesomeness that has still not been matched. “What about Gollum in the Lord of the Rings movies?” you ask. “Was that not a brilliant blending of the real and animated?” It undeniably was, but that’s kind of the problem—Gollum (and other the fancy high-falutin’ CGI characters that have graced the silver screen since) looks too good, too real for it to really register as animation. In Roger Rabbit, the cartoon characters are supposed to look like cartoon characters interacting with real, live humans in a real, live, Bizzaro version of old-timey Hollywood.

roger-rabbit

A big part of what makes those interactions work is that the live-action cast totally sells it. As the film’s lead (human) character, Bob Hoskins’ Eddie Valiant spends the lion’s share of his screen time with one ink and paint creation or another. And, though the late, great Hoskins turns in a predictably excellent performance, there is another actor who we think could’ve given the part a little something extra. That actor is, of course, Tom Wopat.

Key Changes

In the film, Eddie Valiant is shown to be a washed up has-been, a private detective whose high profile career working on cases around Hollywood and Toon Town (roughly the equivalent of a Little Italy, but with cartoon characters) petered out after his brother Teddy was killed by a rogue ‘toon. Once a strapping, barrel-chested hero, he’s now balding, borderline alcoholic, and more than a little doughy in the midsection. This, of course, was right in Bob Hoskins’ wheelhouse, since that’s what he looked like in real life.

With Tom Wopat in the role, however, we’d have to alter Eddie’s character a little bit. He’d still be a down on his luck sad-sack, and still something of a drunk. But, instead of letting himself go all soft, he’s dedicated himself to staying fit. This would not only fit Wopat’s physique better (especially back in 1988 when the movie was made—he was but 37 then), but would allow for scenes in a 1940s-style gym, where boxing is the main draw.

Really, we’re just looking for an excuse for old-timey gym trunks, the kind with a build-in belt and that come up well past a fella’s belly button. Those are always funny.

Also, it would allow for a scene recreating some of the finest slapstick comedy in the history of the Looney Tunes: the kangaroo boxing short starring Sylvester the cat (titled “Pop ‘im Pop”). Instead of Sylvester, it would, of course, be Eddie Wopat in the ring with a cartoon kangaroo. If the thought of a live-action actor getting slapped around by an animated kangaroo doesn’t make you at least crack a smile, then I’m afraid there’s no hope for you, sir or madam.

Photo credit: Castles, Capes & Clones via Foter.com / CC BY-ND

Classics, Comedy, Musicals

Tom Wopat in: This is Spinal Tap

as: David St. Hubbins

This is Spinal Tap is the greatest movie ever made about rock and roll. The titular band is one huge, perfectly executed pastiche of ‘70s and ‘80s rock star excess, hubris, and stupidity, and the mockumentary format is so well done that, upon the film’s release in 1984, many viewers left theaters believing that Spinal Tap was a real band.

Spinal Tap

As that band, actors Christopher Guest (as lead guitarist Nigel Tufnel), Harry Shearer (as bassist Derek Smalls), and Michael McKean (as singer/guitarist David St. Hubbins) work cinematic magic, playing dumb like only true geniuses can. However, nigh perfect though the main cast is, there’s no reason it couldn’t be improved. And if you know anything about this stupid blog of ours, you know what’s coming next…

Why Wopat?

Like McKean, Tom Wopat is a talented musician in addition to his acting skills. Both play guitar more than well enough for the purposes of the film, so there would be no decline in musical quality. (Despite having some of the [intentionally] stupidest lyrics in rock music history, all the songs played in Spinal Tap are performed exceptionally well, which makes the whole affair that much more convincing.)

The main advantage of having Wopat in the role of David St. Hubbins is an aesthetic one—not to say that McKean is some kind of hideous CHUD or anything, but few would deny that Wopat is the far better looking actor. And, playing as Spinal Tap does into every rock and roll stereotype, having the lead singer be the good looking one in the band—and him dang well knowing it—would open up numerous other avenues for parody.

There’s a scene in Almost Famous (the second greatest movie ever made about rock and roll) where Stillwater lead singer Jeff Beebe (played by Jason Lee) angrily tells guitarist Russell Hammond (Billy Crudup), “Your [good] looks have become a problem!”

A similar sentiment would fit perfectly in the dysfunctional musical brotherhood of Spinal Tap. We envision a running joke throughout the film that has Tufnel repeatedly referencing St. Hubbins’ good looks as a way to solve any problem. It would start out innocently enough, with Wopat St. Hubbins successfully using his handsomeness and charm to get the band preferential treatment from a female concert promoter. By the end of the film, after numerous iterations of the ploy provide diminishing returns, and it eventually stops working altogether, Tufnel would state something to the effect of, “Why don’t you just handsome your way through this one, mate?”

This would have led to the inclusion of a song on the fake band’s real follow up album, Break Like the Wind, titled “Handsome My Way Through.” In our heads, we hear the track being a faux-inspirational, take-the-bull-by-the-horns-and-persevere rock ballad which ultimately places all the credit for the singer/narrator’s success on his good looks.

Photo credit: 7th Street Theatre via Source / CC BY

Classics, Comedy

Tom Wopat in: Office Space

as: Peter Gibbons

Office Space is one of cinema’s greatest cult classics—I’m not the only one who thinks so. However, it will never be mistaken for a timeless classic like The Godfather or Bill & Ted’s Excellent Adventure. Office Space is about as 1998 as anything is, was, or ever will be. Part of it is the nature of the movie—it’s set in the present, so it looks like the present of the year it was filmed, 1998. But part of it is the lead actor, Ron Livingston as Peter Gibbons. He’s a great actor, but he’s also a very ‘90s guy; one of those actors that you’re certain played someone’s boyfriend on like three episodes of Friends.*

We’d like to replace Livingston with an actor who’s a little more timeless, and we think Office Space would be all the better for it. That actor, of course, is Tom Wopat.

red-swingline

Key Changes

Ron Livingston and Tom Wopat actually look rather a lot alike, but something about Wopat** makes him seem more “classic,” if you will. The biggest difference betwixt the two is their age: at the time Office Space was release, Livingston was 32, whilst Wopat was 48. Ergo, with Wopat in the role, it wouldn’t work for Peter Gibbons to be a flailing, doesn’t-know-what-to-do-with-his-life young man he is in the OG flick. Instead, Peter Wopat would be a more successful businessman, one of the upper middle managers the original film’s Peter railed against, fed up with the company and in need of a major life change.

A good portion of the movie could remain the same. Peter Wopat would be stirred to action by the same event (a hypnotherapist who keels over dead while hypnotizing Peter). It would still result in Peter deciding to more or less do whatever he wants at work. And, he’d still start pulling pranks around the office. But, instead of low-key stuff like OG Peter perpetrated, Peter Wopat would use his management resources, and the company spending account, to stage some doozies.

One night, after his coworkers have all gone home, Peter backs a few trucks up to the office, and with a small crew of burly mechanic types, gets to work unloading. They take everything out of the office, down to the carpet, and including removing the suspended ceiling. The only thing left are the walls and the lights. Wopat and crew haul in and install a whole mess of modular two story offices, filling the entire space with cubicle just like the ones they took out, but now stacked on top of each other. Everyone has twice as much space!***

I’m sure a professional copywriter could probably come up with something much better, honestly. But you get the idea. They’d be Jim’s pranks on Dwight on The Office, but turned up to 11.

Jen Aniston would still probably have been cast as Peter’s girlfriend, because Hollywood is stupid like that. The ending would stay more or less the same, because the ending is great. But with Wopat in the lead, Office Space would have been much more than a cult classic—it would’ve been the most successful motion picture of all time.

* Believe it or not, Ron Livingston never appeared on Friends
**
It’s The Dukes of Hazzard
*** Though they also have low ceilings and an upstairs or downstairs cubicle neighbor

Photo credit: JD Hancock via Foter.com / CC BY

Action and/or Adventure, Classics, Drama

Tom Wopat in: Vanishing Point

as: Kowalski

The 1971 counterculture cult classic Vanishing Point is one of those movies that you either absolutely love or completely hate. It doesn’t really have a story, exactly; the ending is a source of debate to this day—among fans and detractors alike; and the acting across the board is dismal, at best. But it’s a pretty great film. Or is it?

To push Vanishing Point from “cult classic” to just plain “classic”, one simple change is required. We’re 99% certain you know where we’re going with this.

Be Wise—Wopatize

Reportedly, director Richard C. Sarafian wanted Gene Hackman for the role of Kowalski, but studio executives insisted on casting an unknown actor. You can’t get much more unknown than Barry Newman, who was ultimately given the part and didn’t do much with it.

Pictured: Basically the entire set of Vanishing Point

Pictured: Basically the entire set of Vanishing Point.

Newman’s acting, as mentioned above, is not the best, and his on-screen charisma is practically non-existent. Alternatively, it could be argued that Kowalski only seems like a human tree branch because he’s so calm and Zen. Whichever way it was intended, Tom Wopat’s legitimate acting chops and natural charisma would’ve given the character a much-needed boost of likeability.

Wopat would’ve been only 19 years old when Vanishing Point was filmed, so we’ll just imagine it was made six or seven years later. This may have reduced the impact of the film’s social commentary on America’s post-Woodstock era; others would argue that same social commentary is hamfisted and clichéd, even for a film made at the dawn of said era.

Make the flick a few years later—1977 sounds about right—and the filmmakers would’ve had more perspective on early ‘70s America, and could’ve made a more compelling argument in their film; or, they would’ve wised up and let it out completely.

Though ’77 was still two years before Wopat became famous for driving a hot rodded Dodge, his skill behind the wheel in The Dukes of Hazzard suggests a natural aptitude that would’ve been perfect for the role of Kowalski. Both Wopat and John Schneider did a good deal of their own stunt driving on Dukes, as did Newman in Vanishing Point.

Photo credit: Daxis via Foter.com / CC BY-ND