I Just Found Out Gene Hackman Wasn’t The First Choice For The Firm, And It’s Blowing My Mind Who He Replaced

by

Okay, I’ll admit it – I’m a big fan of the movie The Firm. I enjoyed the John Grisham novel it’s based on, and I thought the movie did a really good job of bringing the story to life. Adaptations always involve some changes, and some work better than others, but I think the casting in this movie was particularly excellent.

Gene Hackman is particularly memorable as Avery Toler, the tough, ethically questionable partner at the law firm where Mitch (Tom Cruise) takes a job in Memphis. Interestingly, the character was originally envisioned as a woman, with Meryl Streep considered for the part. While I admire Streep, I think the filmmakers made the right choice going with Hackman instead.

I’m Sure Meryl Streep Could Have Been Amazing, But…

Let me be clear: this isn’t about criticizing Meryl Streep. That would be ridiculous – she’s a phenomenal actress and rightly admired. While she would have likely excelled in the role, the character of Avery Toler is fundamentally flawed – a lawyer who’s unfaithful and lacks strong ethics. It’s not that a woman couldn’t play a morally ambiguous character, but changing the gender would have drastically altered the entire story and, more importantly, the conversation surrounding the film. Instead of focusing on the legal thriller aspect, the discussion would have centered on a female character exhibiting traits typically associated with men. Considering this was 1993, that kind of conversation would have been far more controversial than it might be today. What’s acceptable now wasn’t necessarily acceptable over 30 years ago.

Only a year after the movie The Firm came out, another adaptation, Disclosure, hit theaters and actually performed better than many recall. This film flipped traditional power dynamics by featuring a female CEO, played by Demi Moore, who sexually harasses her male employee, played by Michael Douglas. Both the movie and the book aimed to challenge societal norms and expectations surrounding gender roles. If The Firm had similarly reversed the gender of a key character, it likely would have sparked a similar, but potentially premature, conversation. At the time, society simply wasn’t prepared for that kind of discussion.

One of the things I appreciate about The Firm is its simplicity. It tells a direct story without trying to be overly political or make a big cultural impact—and that’s perfectly fine. While art should often challenge and evolve cultural ideas, not every movie or book needs to make a grand statement. Changing the protagonist’s gender in The Firm would have inevitably sparked that kind of discussion, potentially overshadowing the story itself. We explored that conversation thoroughly with Disclosure, and I’m glad The Firm remained focused on its core narrative.

Besides, Hackman Was Fantastic

Gene Hackman was a truly exceptional actor, consistently delivering fantastic performances. I consider him one of the greatest American actors of all time, alongside Meryl Streep. He was particularly brilliant in The Firm, perfectly portraying the most untrustworthy lawyer in a firm full of shady characters. He played the role with such skill that he was both captivating and repulsive, making for a truly memorable performance.

I don’t think the story would have resonated with me as strongly if the character had been a woman, particularly back then. At the time, like many viewers, I would have likely questioned how realistic it would be for a woman to be seduced and diverted by someone like Toler, given his attraction to Mitch’s wife (Jeanne Tripplehorn). That would have been a distraction from the story itself and wouldn’t have served the movie, the book, or audiences in 1993 well.

If someone decided to remake The Firm again today, I’d definitely watch! In the meantime, you can stream the original on Paramount+ and see how a new version might compare.

Read More

2025-11-25 04:09