He's lucky to have Spider-Man, the guy has no talent in picking project. Too many bombs and critical disasters.
Tom Holland said he somewhat regrets the way he played Nathan Drake
- Thread starter ClickyCal'
- Start date
The casting made no sense from the get go IMO so I'm not surprised he also had no idea how to play the role. A Drake that needs to be "stoic" and look good for the camera does not fit with the games at all. I understand the Nathon Fillion shtick might have seemed desperate but he knew exactly what the character was and would have played the Drake from the games perfectly. What worries me is Sony seemingly not wanting Drake to be the Drake from the games and that's why Holland had this stylistic choice but either way this has disaster written all over it. Games are basically long ass movies anyway and I loved them so I don't care too much but it's a shame a wider audience won't get an authentic Uncharted experience with the movies
That's most actors. You're only hot for so long and a big check is a big check.
Well if he was playing his part 'incorrectly' it's up to the director to tell him, isn't it? So if the director was happy with it then it's on them rather than Tom.
Late reply but casting lead action stars that look as young as Holland do is the exception not the norm. I mean Ford was 39 when Raiders was filmed. Downey was arguably the most popular actor in the MCU and was 42 when the first Iron Man came out. Tom Cruise is ancient and is still cranking out MI movies. Damon with Bourne, Craig with Bond...you get the picture. For a not totally Boomer level series of examples even Pratt looked quite a bit older, more rugged than Holland in the first GOTG/Jurassic World.
But again the age isn't the thing, Holland looks super young and was a weird casting choice for the character.
I'm just confused how this movie ended up with an apparently stoic Drake...like wasn't one of the reasons this project languished for so long because Naughty Dog kept rejecting scripts? Either that was a false memory of mine or something changed and somewhere along the way ND brass just said fuck it and went completely hands off. After seeing the credits of the screenwriters I have little hope for this being anything but a shell of what made the games' characters so charming and beloved. I do think Wahlberg could be a decent Sully so maybe all hope isn't lost.
If this turns out to be a flaming turd at least we have the Druckmann supervised TLOU series to look forward to.
Oh man, is this going to be another Scott Pilgrim, where everyone's constantly distracted by how much the actor doesn't fit the main character lol
I think in general Tom just isn't a very good actor. He's definitely charming in Spider-Man and real life, but every more serious role I've seen him in he just falls flat on his face.
I strongly doubt this will even be an ounce as good as Scott Pilgrim though.
I strongly doubt this will even be an ounce as good as Scott Pilgrim though.
Yes, one of the worst movies of last year IMO and Tom Holland was a big reason why. He was just embarrassingly bad.
Not that he could've saved the movie anyway, ugh.
Funny how different opinions can be. I really liked this Movie and Tom Holland was a reason to it.
More like he's trying get out of the.... SPUMC (ugh) & just be part of the MCU.
Everyone is focusing on the word stoic but honestly "My character is supposed to be a fucking action hero in this moment." is such a horribly poor misinterpretation of Nathan Drake and his appeal that I have lost what little to no faith I previously had.
The comparison to Mark Whalberg really doesnt give me faith in Sully's portrayal either.
The comparison to Mark Whalberg really doesnt give me faith in Sully's portrayal either.
I think i can hold my ground.
Doing things Nathan Drake does, climbing and stuff.
Possibly, but here he's really criticizing himself and the fact that it seemed like he was focused on the ego part of trying to portray this character, rather than portraying him more naturally. I'm not sure that he'll hurt his career by having an honest breakdown of what he didn't think works about his performances. Actors do that all the time. They tend to do that after the movie has been out for a while though.
I think as long as he doesn't end up saying anything bad about a studio or director he'll be OK.
Weak, Tom Holland literally climbs up vertical buildings in a costume with no safety harnessesI think i can hold my ground.
Doing things Nathan Drake does, climbing and stuff.
You know it's not just him having a baby face but him playing Drake doing all this shooting and fighting will be something else.
I really don't get this argument. Almost all the huge blockbuster Hollywood stars right now are around their fourties, at least most of the male stars anyway. The MCU is completely full of old men leads.
If anything, Holland's casting in this movie is the exception to the trend.
Max Payne is near the top of video game adaptations for me. Mind you that list is cursed to hell and back but it is what it is. And I don't think Wahlberg's some great actor but he'll run circles around Holland, who honestly, sucks.
I thought they picked Holland because he could the light hearted sincerity. It's a bummer hearing he didn't go in that direction.
The problem with adapting games that are cinematic. I'm sure this will continue the tradition of terrible movies based on games. Although nothing will come close to how bad Assassin's Creed is. Probably the worst movie I've ever seen.
"Very tough, very stoic guy" ?
Granted I haven't played Uncharted 4, but that's not the type of character I associate with Drake.
What? Max Payne is terrible and Holland is a far better actor than Marky Mark.
I have nothing against Holland but after all the delays, I was expecting an actor that doesn't look like a teeneger. Horrible decision imho.
I don't want to live in a universe where people consider the Max Payne movie watchable. T_T
Sam Lake, what have they done to your writing....
