Henry Cavill IS Superman: - Part 10

[Krumm]

Originally Posted by Rowsdower!

Yeah, you can build a great rep doing indies if A. you're a good actor and B. the movies themselves are good. People probably never would have taken Joseph Gordon Leavitt seriously as an actor if he hadn't done all those indie films after 3rd Rock from the Sun.

I think Cavill should try to do a mix of larger and smaller films. I'd hate to see him go the way of Worthington and try to only do a string of questionable mainstream action films. However, I also don't think he should do what Reeve did and turn down some really high-profile roles.

A balance is key.

And I think we can all agree that Tarzan is a bad idea.

[Rowsdower!]

Yeah. Projects like that are better left to the Taylor Kitches of the world.

[Krumm]

Originally Posted by Rowsdower!

Yeah. Projects like that are better left to the Taylor Kitches of the world.

And that's a shame because I absolutely love him on Friday Night Lights.

[Rowsdower!]

I guess I do need to break down and watch that show at some point. But I don't know that I can ever forgive him for John Carter. I love that character and Kitsch was terrible in his portrayal of him. Maybe it was more the fault of the director and the script, but Kitsch was awful in the role. A better actor might have made that movie more watchable.

[DaRkVeNgeanCe]

I thought he fit John Carter very very well, its a very underrated film, he did what the script and director needed of him.

[the last son]

I've seen him in Immortals Tristan and Isolde and and have said I think Superman might be too big a role for him because he was just average in Immortals and pretty good in tristan and isolde. Just found The Tudors on Netflix so will give me a better chance to judge him, since people say this is his best work.

[the last son]

God, this show sucks. Maybe I'll try Blood Creek.

[Krumm]

Originally Posted by the last son

God, this show sucks. Maybe I'll try Blood Creek.

It just stared!

[hopefuldreamer]

He's okay in Blood Creek, but it's an odd film.

I really liked him in Woody Allen's 'Whatever Works', but he didn't have much screentime.

I have to admit tho, i've seen nothing from him that made me think he is a great actor. So i'm not sure what indie stuff would be a good idea for him.

I'd prefer him to take a similar route to Hemsworth really.

[Panthro]

Originally Posted by Rowsdower!

Yeah, you can build a great rep doing indies if A. you're a good actor and B. the movies themselves are good. People probably never would have taken Joseph Gordon Leavitt seriously as an actor if he hadn't done all those indie films after 3rd Rock from the Sun.

I think Cavill should try to do a mix of larger and smaller films. I'd hate to see him go the way of Worthington and try to only do a string of questionable mainstream action films. However, I also don't think he should do what Reeve did and turn down some really high-profile roles.

Yeah, that sounds about right.

[Showtime]

Originally Posted by flickchick85

Would I pay to see one? Probably not. But a hot guy in a loincloth does have a certain appeal, ya know.

Haha. I can see that.

[Showtime]

Originally Posted by Rust

I'd rather see a film-adaptation of the experiences of Marina Chapman who clamied to have lived in the jungle and having been raised by monkeys.

Other than that I think Greystoke did a fair job, so no, I guess the world doesnt really need a Tarzan-movie.

Wow. I wasn't even aware of that story, I had a similar idea of how to approach a Tarzan film...it was in a similar manner.

I just don't think it's a viable franchise film, and my advice to Cavill would be to fly away from it.

[the last son]

Originally Posted by hopefuldreamer

He's okay in Blood Creek, but it's an odd film.

I really liked him in Woody Allen's 'Whatever Works', but he didn't have much screentime.

I have to admit tho, i've seen nothing from him that made me think he is a great actor. So i'm not sure what indie stuff would be a good idea for him.

I'd prefer him to take a similar route to Hemsworth really.

This has been my opinion all day long. I've seen nothing from Cavill to assume he is just as average as average gets. Never good never bad just average. That's why I'm confused when people say Cavill is a slam dunk for Superman. I'll wait and see. I think Hemsworth is average too but he is a better actor than Cavill. But that guy can't drop his thor voice for nothing

[Showtime]

I don't think Cavill is a great actor, nor do I think he is bad. I think we're in the same boat.

However, that doesn't really matter. All he has to be is a good Superman.

[Project862006]

^exactly also look what snyder did with butler

butler sure as hell is no great actor yet he was an awesome Leonidas which was pretty much an iconic role for him that got him noticed in hollywood

[Showtime]

Good point.

[Rowsdower!]

Originally Posted by DaRkVeNgeanCe

I thought he fit John Carter very very well, its a very underrated film, he did what the script and director needed of him.

Well, you're entitled to your opinion, but aside from a few moments where he managed to emote, all I saw him do in that movie was grunt and stare at things. And the film is far from underrated. It's a disjointed mess, and it deserved to bomb like it did.

[Rust]

Originally Posted by Showtime

All he has to be is a good Superman.

A good Superman and a good Clark, and those are some pretty demanding characters if they really wanna explore their full potential. Which I'd really prefer this time.

[BH/HHH]

Why don't we just wait to see some actual footage showing Cavill's acting i.e. dialogue etc before saying if he'll suck or not.

[hopefuldreamer]

It's weird, cause while i don't see some massive talent in Cavill yet, i don't worry about his ability to play Superman at all.

It's not that i think Superman's an easy character to play. Quite the opposite. It's really rare to find someone who has that natural air about them. But I don't think it's something that being a master in the craft of acting is neccessarily going to improve.

[Rust]

Originally Posted by hopefuldreamer

But I don't think it's something that being a master in the craft of acting is neccessarily going to improve.

I really dont understand how it wouldnt.

[hopefuldreamer]

Originally Posted by Rust

I really dont understand how it wouldnt.

Because there is almost something of an advantage in being a novice sometimes; being a bit fresh, having that energy you only get from being nervous and having something to prove, and not bringing any baggage or preconceptions to the role.

[Rust]

Originally Posted by hopefuldreamer

Because there is almost something of an advantage in being a novice sometimes; being a bit fresh, having that energy you only get from being nervous and having something to prove, and not bringing any baggage or preconceptions to the role.

I think you're talking about something else now. There's nothing wrong with being a rookie with little or no experience. That can definitely be an advantage.

I'm talking about the talent itself whether it comes from the soul or from a book. The ability of acting in all its simplicity, disregarding experience and training.
It's crucial to parts like this, especially in this case where there are multiple characters to portray.

[G.Godfrey]

Originally Posted by hopefuldreamer

It's weird, cause while i don't see some massive talent in Cavill yet, i don't worry about his ability to play Superman at all.

It's not that i think Superman's an easy character to play. Quite the opposite. It's really rare to find someone who has that natural air about them. But I don't think it's something that being a master in the craft of acting is neccessarily going to improve.

I agree. As I said in one of my previous posts in another topic, I believe an actor portraying Superman needs a certain amount and a mix of charm, charisma (they are not one and the same although they often intervene) - even certain type of it because it's different flavors - and a particular presence. And the thing about this is, you either have it or you don't. You need sufficient acting talent to portray that on screen but you can't truly act those qualities if you don't posses them naturally. And from all I've seen from Cavill he has that and it is indeed rare. And coupled with his look (Not since Christopher Reeve has anyone had the look down so much, I'd even say Cavill is slightly more resembling to the character than Reeve) it's even more rare. That's why I think he's the best choice for the role. I don't know every actor in Hollywood but I know most choices for Superman and nobody has it seemingly all down like Cavill.

But despite all that, I remain a bit doubtful and skeptical. Which is imo the right attitude. High expectations lead to great disappointments. I just hope Snyder did a great job of directing Cavill.

[G.Godfrey]

Originally Posted by Rust

A good Superman and a good Clark, and those are some pretty demanding characters if they really wanna explore their full potential. Which I'd really prefer this time.

I really don't think Clark is that hard of a character to portray. Yes, even the pre-Superman/Daily Planet Clark. It's not an easy role for sure but it's not something that would require Oscar caliber acting even if the character was to be explored to the fullest potential. I don't know. I'd like to think that if Cavill did such a great job in the audition that everyone including Nolan was so impressed then he must have something going for him in the acting department. I think the casting was a bit more careful this time around and they even had to wait for Robinov to view the tapes and approve the choice.

Perhaps this discussion will be more interesting a month from now. Hopefully the trailer features some good snippets of Cavill's acting to chew on.