The entire concept of casting younger actors was to eliminate the casting of other actors to play the younger selves. The book takes place over half a century, and it's much easier to make actors look older than younger.

Remember, Sally Jupiter is 16 when we see her meeting Dr. Manhattan
There's a young, young Comedian who rapes her mother.
We see a lot of a young Dan Dreiberg.
And Adrien Veidt?

The book has almost two plot lines, several years apart.

The only reason why Rorschach is age appropriate is because we see Rorschach as a child (not going to cast that young), a young crime fighter, and an older, delusional vigilante. However, we only see him as a child and an older man without the mask.
Osterman is also seen as a child fixing a watch, and then as a man perhaps 30 years old. Billy Crudup looks that age.

And as far as acting goes, they're solid. Again, I don't know how Akerman will do, I've only seen her in comedic roles. However, she might be a Streep in the making! We don't know.

Oh, and saying this cast reflects budget cuts is ridiculous. I'm glad they're casting actors regardless of star power. Although Goode and Akerman are both young and very attractive, neither are really stars. Crudup's really as close as we come.

Anthony, you are clearly a idiot. the cast more likely reflects a desire to keep artistic integrity to which hiring a-list stars' would be counter productive.

holybrady,

Firstly, calling the author an idiot based on his article above is, quite frankly, incredibly stupid. It also seems that you have not read the article. Anthony makes little to no comment on the film having to have A-List stars.

In my opinion he is right. In keeping with your view on artistic integrity, yes, I would prefer the film to have less known actors, but from reading the graphic novel I can say that I find it incredibly difficult to strike any comparison between cast and characters. Don't forget that the characters are retired masked vigilantes, for the most part, and would be early forties or late thirties. Ozymandias, especially, seems far too young for the role.

But to be perfectly honest, the actors look very little like the characters. It not just keeps artistic integrity to hire lesser known actors; hiring actors and actresses that looked like the characters they are meant to be portraying also helps.

I won't give my opinion on Akerman, as I feel the author has summarised my opinion perfectly.

Carla Guigino was cast as Sally Jupiter. Malin Akerman is playing Laurie Jupiter, who is not married to Doc Manhattan (though they've been in a long term relationship for awhile as of 1985). Laurie is also younger than the rest of the heroes, so casting a younger actress isn't as out there as Matthew Goode's age. In fact Jennifer Connolly or Rachel Weisz would probably be too old.

Also, Laurie is a very sexual character in the book. Not an "oversexed superbabe", but someone who initiates sex with her male partners, flirts openly, and is definitely considered to be strikingly hot in the world she exists in (she self-references that when she talks about her costume). I don't know about Malin Akerman's acting abilities, but I don't think your reasons for disliking her casting make much sense in the context of the actual story.

Plus, now that we've seen actual footage, and reviews are coming in (from actual comic fans), I think it looks like Snyder did a good job. I agree that the casting was the big question mark in this, but I'll wait until I see it until I decide.

I dont even give a fuck, Malin Akerman is so hot and her nipples are the best.

But...The glowing blue penis floating across the screen every 5 minutes ruined the movie.