My two cents worth.
Tom Cruise shouldn't have anything to do with a HD film.
He's been too busy playing himself lately.
And definitely NOT as Michael.  No way.
Nathan Fillion is great but he's not a Michael.
More as one of the wardens or the new FBI guy - Tilly?  Have I that right?
Paul Gross is a good choice for Michael.  Give him a close cropped beard and a shaggier hair style and he'd be good to go.

Other than the bit about Paul Gross, I agree 100 percent. Nathan as Tilly would be awesome but he's just no Michael. And Tom Cruise is way too stuck on himself (even if he does have some cause to be) to play a convincing Michael or Harry. He does well in certain parts (like the fabulous "Knight & Day") but he can't put himself into a humble role to save his life. That cockiness is certainly part of his charm but it also limits what types of roles he can convincingly play. (And I know, Harry is kind of cocky a lot but he is cocky about stuff other than his supreme hotness, which is what Cruise is so cocky about. So its cockiness but its still worlds apart.)

Yeah it is mostly the strong jaw that makes me think of michael

The strong jaw is indeed an important feature of Michael's and to me a dealbreaker for anyone who doesn't have it.

In mine, several of my main characters are really tough thanks to some pseudo-magical swords. The swords, although they aren't technically sentient, have sort of "instincts" and a wreckless mind of their own that leads the characters to take too many chances and lose control. So the characters have the potential to be insanely powerful but the swords provide a natural check to that because if the characters rely on the swords too much could end up killing innocents or getting killed themselves by letting their guard down. So they can be epically tough...until something bad happens. Which means they can never displaying their epic toughness to their utmost, making them awesomely cool but not too powerful in actuality.

Have you watched The Dark Knight? Eckhart's portrayal of Harvey Dent before the scarring is what makes me think of Michael.

Hm. Haven't seen it but I've seen him in three of his other roles (the most heroic being his role in the excellent movie "Never Was") and I just don't think he exudes "Michaelness."

I'm actually a huge fan of Aaron Ekhart but I don't think he comes across with that totally trustworthy strength that Michael has. And as for Emma Stone, to me she seems too cheap to be Molly. (I know - Molly is kind of complicated but she still isn't what I would call cheap.)

hayden's just too..cutesty

Agreed. Cute is right for Murph but "cutesy" indicates a lightness of attitude and/or brains as well, which of course does not apply to Murphy at all.

I love SMG but I'm just not sure she has round enough features to play Murph. I think I've mentioned Julia Stiles before (and I am NOT recommending her for Murphy) but she has the kind of round jaw and features and the cute nose that Murphy needs. I think SMG may be just too lean in her features.

Maybe she's just always gotten more Goth type roles and hasn't had the chance to show her ability to play a tough marial artist type. Granted, I've only seen pics and clips so I'd want to see her do a screen test first but I'm not ready to discount her based on role history.