Comments on: Henry Cavill: The Most Overlooked Man In Hollywood, Still Just Half A Step From Stardom

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 09 Sep 2009 21:38:43 +0000

Patience to those who wait. Henry should be the next 007. Getting a younger James Bond would actually help the James Bond Movies. As of now mostly the 007 fans are 35 and older. Henry in the movie I bet you get the younger fans and specially women of all ages. Can't wait for Henry's turn.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 19:38:21 +0000

Sam Worthington is one of the "3 biggest action stars in the world?" Are you serious? O.K., so he's going to be in "Clash of the Titans" and also in the high-profile, eagerly anticipated "Avatar," but let's be honest, his only notable action-film role of any prominence thus far has been in "Terminator Salvation," a critically-savaged, expensive dud. Aren't you getting a bit ahead of yourself?

By: Ruth M

Ruth M — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 17:35:16 +0000

Forgot to add my comments about the Bond role. I think in a few years, when Craig's contract is up, Henry should be seriously re-considered for the role. He's tall, British, and he'll be the right age to play Bond then. Sure he needs to work on that Bond 'edge' that Connery/Craig have in droves, but he's definitely got potential.

Check out his Bond-like Dunhill commercial:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JKqFMxdN3Pc

By: Ruth M

Ruth M — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 17:21:58 +0000

I was thisclose to write a post about him on my blog! I've been watching his career for a while and wish he'd hit his big break soon! Henry is definitely an underrated actor despite his devastating good looks, which is too bad because if you've seen The Tudors, you know this guy can act! But hey, my fave actor Gerard Butler also didn't get into the acting business until his late 20s, so hopefully Henry's time is just around the corner. Thanks for recognizing such a talent!

By: Paul Clarke

Paul Clarke — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 16:29:17 +0000

In the novels Bond is perpetually in his mid to late 30s, so Cavill being too young for the part makes sense. After Craig steps down, Cavill would probably be ready to do it. Judging by his performance in The Tudors, he projects the charisma and toughness to pull it off.

By: Elizabeth

Elizabeth — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 11:58:44 +0000

This story illustrates Hollywood's double standard regarding age. I look at Daniel Craig's age and see a drawback–he's 40 and has only made two Bond films. In a few years, his sex appeal for women under 30 will plummet, but the producers don't seem concerned about that. Instead they were concerned Cavill was "too young" to play James Bond. I'm pretty sure MI6 and the CIA recruit people in their 20s, so we're not going for realism here…instead it's the continuing penchant for Hollywood producers for pairing middle-aged men with young women, illustrating their own fantasies and not the audience's.

By: former neck model

former neck model — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 04:17:03 +0000

I agree with everything you've said. It's not like he's some wannabe who just goes out for every role out there, which is a charge I've heard leveled against him. If he was we'd never hear about it. He'd be the perennial #567 or something, rather than consistently being in the top 10. When will the suits wake up and go for the real thing instead of the flavor of the moment?

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 13 Jul 2009 18:44:19 +0000

Although some may disagree, he should probably go out and prove some acting chops first. The Tudors was not exactly a break out role, and if you look at all the leads of movies like Batman, Spiderman, Ironman, (really any "man" movies), plus Bond, they all proved they could act first. The only exception to this is Superman, and that kind of proves my point.

I'm not saying he's just a pretty face, but go take an indie movie and show us what you can do.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 13 Jul 2009 18:06:07 +0000

He's only 26, his time will come

By: Cory

Cory — Mon, 13 Jul 2009 16:08:46 +0000

Tudors is showtime. 😉