When it comes to casting decisions in Hollywood, few choices are as bold and unapologetic as the selection of Kurt Russell for the role of Colonel Jack O'Neil in the 1994 sci-fi classic Stargate. But here's where it gets controversial: was Russell truly the only actor who could bring this character to life, or was there something more to this seemingly one-sided decision? Let’s dive in.
Directors Roland Emmerich and Dean Devlin had a singular vision for their film, and at the heart of it was Kurt Russell. There was no Plan B, no backup option—just an unwavering belief that Russell was the perfect fit. But why? Colonel Jack O’Neil is a no-nonsense military man, a straight-laced foil to James Spader’s eccentric Dr. Daniel Jackson. And this is the part most people miss: the role required someone who could embody charisma without overshadowing the dynamic between the two leads. Russell, with his undeniable star power and universal appeal, was the ideal candidate.
Stargate, while a solid B-movie with impressive production values, owes much of its charm to the chemistry between Russell and Spader. Despite some on-set tensions, both actors delivered performances that elevated the film. But what’s truly fascinating is the story behind Russell’s casting. In a 2016 GQ profile, Russell revealed that Emmerich and Devlin had conducted a global questionnaire to find an actor with 'zero unlikability.' And guess who topped the list? Kurt Russell. Bold claim, right? But it’s one that Russell himself found baffling—and slightly amusing.
'They said, 'Oh, well, we ran a questionnaire around the world. They wanted to rate actors on their unlikability. And they said, 'You know the only star out there who has zero unlikability?' 'Kurt Russell.' Zero unlikability!' [Laughs] Now, that was a long time ago. That number may have changed significantly.'
While Russell’s performance in Stargate allowed him to stretch his acting muscles, it wasn’t a radical departure from his previous roles. From the laconic Snake Plissken in Escape from New York to the stoic MacReady in The Thing, Russell had already mastered the art of playing gruff, authoritative figures. So, what made Stargate different? Perhaps it was the way Russell balanced toughness with relatability, making O’Neil a character audiences couldn’t help but root for.
Here’s where it gets even more intriguing: Russell initially turned down the role multiple times, only agreeing when Emmerich and Devlin offered him double his market value. But even then, he was puzzled by their insistence. As he reflected in the GQ interview, 'Inherent likability, or inherent dislikability, is something I think we all carry with us.' Yet, he couldn’t deny the impact of his persona, even if he humbly downplayed it: 'There’s millions of people who can’t stand the f***ing sight of you!'
But let’s be honest—how many of us can say we’ve met someone who doesn’t light up at the mention of a Kurt Russell movie? From Big Trouble in Little China to The Hateful Eight, Russell has cemented his status as the king of rewatchable, dad-friendly cinema. So, here’s the question: Was Kurt Russell truly the only choice for Colonel Jack O’Neil, or did Emmerich and Devlin simply recognize the undeniable magic he brings to every role? And more importantly, has his 'zero unlikability' stood the test of time? Let’s hear your thoughts in the comments—agree or disagree, the debate is open!
