Serving up this steaming pile of
Celebrity Gossip
Gay Politics
Gay News
and Pointless Bitchery
Since 1995

Something I noticed about Henry Cavill

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...

by Anonymousreply 46Last 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 Anonymousreply 107/01/2013

[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 Anonymousreply 207/01/2013

Honey/OP, think Greg Brady aka Johnny Bravo.

He fit the suit.

by Anonymousreply 307/01/2013

Haven't seen the movie but it seems like he'd make a perfect Clark Kent. Dull and stiff.

by Anonymousreply 407/01/2013

The obsession with this man is ridiculous. He'll be forgotten in a year.

by Anonymousreply 507/01/2013

Duh!

by Anonymousreply 607/01/2013

Whereas it didn't take even two months for them to forget about Orlando Bloom.

by Anonymousreply 707/01/2013

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 Anonymousreply 807/01/2013

Orlando who?

I hope to God Cavill turns away anything related to 50 shades of silliness... he's a brand now, that's beneath him.

by Anonymousreply 907/01/2013

At least Orlando Bloom had a personality in interviews and could act.

by Anonymousreply 1007/01/2013

Henry was wonderful! Stop posting ridiculous accusations, OP.

by Anonymousreply 1107/01/2013

Agree, r9...Henry needs to stick to Superman. But, they are offering Henry the role in that Gray movie.

by Anonymousreply 1207/01/2013

Henry was awesome. I still haven't seen the movie.

by Anonymousreply 1307/01/2013

He sure has great big tits.

by Anonymousreply 1407/01/2013

They look like a woman's,R14? If so, in what ways?

by Anonymousreply 1507/02/2013

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 Anonymousreply 1607/02/2013

He got to be in a Woody Allen movie. He was given an easy role and he really sucked.

by Anonymousreply 1707/02/2013

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 Anonymousreply 1807/02/2013

[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 Anonymousreply 1907/02/2013

OP, what else are they supposed to compliment him on?

There is NOTHING else to talk about.

by Anonymousreply 2007/02/2013

For me, Christopher Reeve is Superman.

Cavill has nothing on Reeve in his prime...

by Anonymousreply 2107/02/2013

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 Anonymousreply 2207/03/2013

He looked happier and normal before!

by Anonymousreply 2309/14/2013

R24/R24 = Sad frau

by Anonymousreply 2610/20/2013

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 Anonymousreply 2810/20/2013

R24/R25/R27/R28 You sound like a fanatic.

by Anonymousreply 2910/20/2013

I already said I'm a huge fan @R24. And the word "fan" comes from "fanatic."

by Anonymousreply 3010/20/2013

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 Anonymousreply 3110/20/2013

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 Anonymousreply 3210/20/2013

[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 Anonymousreply 3310/20/2013

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 Anonymousreply 3410/20/2013

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 Anonymousreply 3510/20/2013

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 Anonymousreply 3610/29/2013

Correction: c-struck

by Anonymousreply 3710/29/2013

R36, Pitt improved somewhat as an actor. Perhaps there is limited hope for Cavill

by Anonymousreply 3810/29/2013

Ya think

by Anonymousreply 3903/14/2014

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 Anonymousreply 4003/14/2014

Great scenery is very important

by Anonymousreply 4103/15/2014

i swear to god, henry is the most arrogant guy i've ever seen

by Anonymousreply 4306/24/2015

He was fine in The Tudors. Fine looking and acting was good enough. Very fine looking when younger and not so beefy.

by Anonymousreply 4406/24/2015

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 Anonymousreply 4506/26/2015

[quote] huge tits

Quite big tits.

by Anonymousreply 46Last Saturday at 12:29 AM
Loading
Need more help? Click Here.