I've been watching MOS interviews. And I noticed that in every one of his interviews, his co-stars all compliment his looks and that's it. It makes me wonder if he was picked for the role of Superman based on his looks alone...
Something I noticed about Henry Cavill
|by Anonymous||reply 46||Last Saturday at 12:29 AM|
Wow OP, you are a sharp one, figured that out all by yourself?
Did you even see MOS? Most of theacting was given to his coworkers, his job was to look gorgeous and superman-ly, which he does well.
|by Anonymous||reply 1||07/01/2013|
[quote]And I noticed that in every one of his interviews, his co-stars all compliment his looks and that's it.
What else are they going to compliment him on? His outgoing personality? His sense of humor? His wonderful acting abilities?
|by Anonymous||reply 2||07/01/2013|
Honey/OP, think Greg Brady aka Johnny Bravo.
He fit the suit.
|by Anonymous||reply 3||07/01/2013|
Haven't seen the movie but it seems like he'd make a perfect Clark Kent. Dull and stiff.
|by Anonymous||reply 4||07/01/2013|
The obsession with this man is ridiculous. He'll be forgotten in a year.
|by Anonymous||reply 5||07/01/2013|
|by Anonymous||reply 6||07/01/2013|
Whereas it didn't take even two months for them to forget about Orlando Bloom.
|by Anonymous||reply 7||07/01/2013|
I have a feeling he'll get the Christian Grey role in 50 shades movie.
(That is, if Warner's will allow him to do a really sexual role like that.)
|by Anonymous||reply 8||07/01/2013|
I hope to God Cavill turns away anything related to 50 shades of silliness... he's a brand now, that's beneath him.
|by Anonymous||reply 9||07/01/2013|
At least Orlando Bloom had a personality in interviews and could act.
|by Anonymous||reply 10||07/01/2013|
Henry was wonderful! Stop posting ridiculous accusations, OP.
|by Anonymous||reply 11||07/01/2013|
Agree, r9...Henry needs to stick to Superman. But, they are offering Henry the role in that Gray movie.
|by Anonymous||reply 12||07/01/2013|
Henry was awesome. I still haven't seen the movie.
|by Anonymous||reply 13||07/01/2013|
He sure has great big tits.
|by Anonymous||reply 14||07/01/2013|
They look like a woman's,R14? If so, in what ways?
|by Anonymous||reply 15||07/02/2013|
I saw Man of Steel. Let me just say, this was the biggest piece of shit I've seen in decades.
Oh my god, it was all over the place! No character development at all. The only characters I thought were fleshed out were Kevin Costner's and Russell Crowe's.
The movie made huge leaps in the story and just expected you to accept the glaring problems. It was too long.
And Henry Cavill may look good but he sucks. Empty piece of wood.
|by Anonymous||reply 16||07/02/2013|
He got to be in a Woody Allen movie. He was given an easy role and he really sucked.
|by Anonymous||reply 17||07/02/2013|
The best acting job Henry Cavill ever did was in one movie, Castle or something, but that was so long ago and more of a fluke.
Being that, he has turned in one stiff role after another. It's probably the reason why he has been out of work for two years.
He should be lucky that he landed the Superman role.
|by Anonymous||reply 18||07/02/2013|
[quote]And Henry Cavill may look good but he sucks. Empty piece of wood.
I agree. He's done multiple movies now and he's stiff and boring in all of them. Hasn't improved one bit.
He better hold onto his looks as long as he can because once those are gone, so is his career, because he certainly isn't being hired for his acting talent.
|by Anonymous||reply 19||07/02/2013|
OP, what else are they supposed to compliment him on?
There is NOTHING else to talk about.
|by Anonymous||reply 20||07/02/2013|
For me, Christopher Reeve is Superman.
Cavill has nothing on Reeve in his prime...
|by Anonymous||reply 21||07/02/2013|
Christopher Reeve was handsome in his own way. But Henry Cavill really is in a class by himself.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
|by Anonymous||reply 22||07/03/2013|
He looked happier and normal before!
|by Anonymous||reply 23||09/14/2013|
R24/R24 = Sad frau
|by Anonymous||reply 26||10/20/2013|
Henry wants to take on Daniel Craig's role as James Bond. He was passed over for Craig at the casting 8 years ago and will audition again when Craig tires of the role. All the more reason to follow in Craig's footsteps if he wants to be successful like Craig and use his training method - the theater stage.
|by Anonymous||reply 28||10/20/2013|
R24/R25/R27/R28 You sound like a fanatic.
|by Anonymous||reply 29||10/20/2013|
I already said I'm a huge fan @R24. And the word "fan" comes from "fanatic."
|by Anonymous||reply 30||10/20/2013|
Theatre isn't magic. It's an opportunity for actors to exercise and develop some of their skills, but it can't give you more talent than you began with. Some actors are inherently more talented than others, just like some people are more gifted at math than others. If you are born with weak math abilities you can work hard to get better but you'll never be as good as someone born with natural mathematic strength who puts in any decent amount of work. From what I've seen of Henry I would say he is at the low end of the acting talent pool.
Also, a poor actor risks a damaged reputation and an ego blow if they try theatre and stink at it. Movies directors can piece together the best bits from takes of badly performed scenes to make a weak lead actor look less crappy than he is. In theatre the audience just gets a single long "take" from the actor, so if he's a weak or unreliable performer it's more glaringly obvious.
|by Anonymous||reply 31||10/20/2013|
Well, that and the fact that Zach Snyder wanted to fuck him, whether he knows it or not. I can't believe that man is straight. The film (along with The Watchmen and especially 300) is just one long phallic image after another.
|by Anonymous||reply 32||10/20/2013|
[quote]Henry should seriously consider doing the same.
Except, he can't act. Seriously, the guy is a terrible actor which is fine for a film like Superman, but he needs to bring more than a chiseled jaw and blue eyes to a role.
|by Anonymous||reply 33||10/20/2013|
Totally disagree with 31, acting is a craft and hard work and coaching improves your performance. There is no genetic code for acting. Being attractive contributes only by half to an actors success. Henry Cavill can improve his performance if he wishes by careful study & practice of his craft. If he coasts on his looks and can't pull off a decent performance, he will be out of work as soon as those looks fade.
|by Anonymous||reply 34||10/20/2013|
Acting involves art and craft. r34 what you said about the possibility of improvement does not conflict with what I said. I said that one can get better by putting in hard work. However, people are not a bunch of empty identical robots all waiting for programming. When we start a pursuit we bring with us an inherent set of aptitudes and weaknesses. There is such a thing as acting talent, just like there is such a thing as sporting talent and mathematic talent. I can study and practice hard at tennis, painting or physics but that does not mean I will necessarily have what it takes to become a master in those areas or compete their finest practitioners.
He can become better at using what he's got, but there will be some people who have more talent to work at honing and they will have a natural advantage. That's not a reason not to try, but it does bear consideration.
Henry Cavill is not a kid. He's 30. It doesn't say much for his work ethic or any genuine interest in the craft of acting that he hasn't made serious effort to hone his skills before now. And it would not be easy or quick to catch up with people like the ones r24 has been naming who would be years ahead of Henry at putting in hard graft, especially when all evidence suggests they began with greater natural talent and charisma that Henry has.
Good looks aren't necessarily all that either. There are distinctive looking and memorable ugly guys like Steve Buscemi who have casting appeal based on appearance. Ugly guys are likely to get supporting roles not lead, but conventionally good looking hunks can be easily interchangeable in comparison.
|by Anonymous||reply 35||10/20/2013|
I know I'm way late to the game, but I finally saw this movie and though I wouldn't go so far as to say it was the biggest piece of shit in decades, I agree with most of what R16 wrote. It was mediocre.
No character development was my biggest problem with it. It also seems like while everyone else was handed a script, Cavill had his dialogue written on a cocktail napkin (which would make sense considering his affinity for drinking). He barely had any lines, which would be fine if he could at least emote better.
The ones who defend his performance (particularly the fraus) are doing everything in their power to convince the rest of us they aren't essentially c-stuck. It wasn't a good movie, mostly due to the terrible script. Cavill is visual perfection, but not a very good actor. Still, he's young enough that he can improve... hopefully.
|by Anonymous||reply 36||10/29/2013|
|by Anonymous||reply 37||10/29/2013|
R36, Pitt improved somewhat as an actor. Perhaps there is limited hope for Cavill
|by Anonymous||reply 38||10/29/2013|
|by Anonymous||reply 39||03/14/2014|
Cavill was very wooden in MOS, but his dialogue was also uninspired. That being said, Diane Lane did leaps and bounds more with the shitty lines she was given. Cavill was scenery dressing in that film (which was enough for me).
|by Anonymous||reply 40||03/14/2014|
Great scenery is very important
|by Anonymous||reply 41||03/15/2014|
i swear to god, henry is the most arrogant guy i've ever seen
|by Anonymous||reply 43||06/24/2015|
He was fine in The Tudors. Fine looking and acting was good enough. Very fine looking when younger and not so beefy.
|by Anonymous||reply 44||06/24/2015|
he's a good superman, not great but good, huge tits, not so cute but, very good looking but his hairline is a disaster and smirky smile, yuk
|by Anonymous||reply 45||06/26/2015|
[quote] huge tits
Quite big tits.
|by Anonymous||reply 46||Last Saturday at 12:29 AM|