When I think of celebrities and their “branding,” I mostly think of true-blue movie stars and international celebrities. Like, Jennifer Lopez is a brand. Taylor Swift is a brand. Tom Cruise is a brand. Is Tom Hiddleston a brand though? I can’t decide. He’s been in some big movies, but I tend to believe he’s mostly internet-famous more than anything else. I suspect that most casual consumers of gossip and entertainment know him mostly as “that guy who plays Loki” and “that guy who wore the ‘I Heart T.S.’ t-shirt.” If you’re really analyzing the Hiddles-brand, perhaps you could say that his brand is dorky uncoolness, being extra, and providing buckets of cringes no matter what. Well, in the wake of Tom’s ridiculous – and ridiculously amusing – GQ interview, the BBC spoke to some PR consultants about whether Tom’s “brand” will survive the Tiddlesbanging, not to mention the angst-ridden GQ interview in which Tom dissected the Tiddlesbanging. Not to mention Tom’s terrible Golden Globes speech too.
Have Tom Hiddleston’s off-screen actions since done damage to his brand?
“Some of the recent headlines have been unhelpful,” admits Mark Borkowski, a strategic PR consultant. “There are events that happen and they’re not thought through properly, and the nature of being caught up with Taylor Swift’s gang and not thinking it through strategically has undone him. Sometimes people don’t recognise the power of their brand, and often you can’t conduct yourself in the way you think you can.”
But Steven Gaydos, vice-president and executive editor of Variety, thinks Hiddleston is still a hot property, despite his recent PR mishaps.
“I don’t think anything he’s done to date has put any serious dent into his career,” he told the BBC. “He’s a fantastic actor doing fantastic work. He has a fanbase and he’s delivering the goods. These are just missteps – somebody doing something that causes chatter. In this case Tom Hiddleston made a speech and people thought it was silly, or he dated a woman and people thought it was a little bogus. He’s not going to be hauled in front of the courts for any of this.”
So is this latest interview simply damage limitation? “Absolutely,” says Mark Borkowski. “I don’t think Tom Hiddleston knew at the time just how big a brand he was. Now he does know that and has to think carefully. This GQ interview is an example of putting the record straight and trying to get a narrative together to try and recover from some poorly judged moments. There’s a beautiful naivety about Tom Hiddleston that is projected through this interview where he’s trying to talk directly to his fans. This is material you put there for them.”
Gaydos has a lot of sympathy for the 36-year-old on the Taylor Swift front: “Imagine you just met someone and you’re having a relationship and the whole world is watching. It’s like snakes all around you,” he says. “I’d hate to to live in a fish bowl and have every move analysed, with people saying you’re a fraud, your relationship is a fraud, everything you’re doing is insincere and fake.”
Hiddleston has two films coming out later this year – Thor: Ragnarok and Kong: Skull Island. Gaydos says the film studios won’t be particularly worried about Hiddleston’s off-screen actions.
“They’re worrying about the tracking. If the trailer goes out for Kong and the response isn’t strong or the awareness of the movie isn’t high, that’s what they’re really concerned about,” he says. “Tom has not ventured anywhere near the space where we’ve seen stars screw up their careers and really damage their star wattage.”
What do you think about this analysis? I think these guys are sort of right, in that it’s not as if Tom did anything criminal or truly wrong. His worst offense is that he seems to care too much about what people think, and he cares too much about how he’s perceived. It will be interesting to see Tom’s next moves as he really starts promoting Kong: Skull Island over the next month. He’s appearing on The Graham Norton Show on Friday, plus he’ll have to give more interviews and do a full press tour. I’m assuming he’ll go to LA for the Oscars too, just because PLEASE LET THAT HAPPEN. So, basically, we’ll see. If you believe the Tiddlesbanging did long-term damage to the Hiddles-brand, then you were already hyper-aware of him in the first place, you know? Now Tom needs to build his audience… which he’s not going to do if he keeps behaving this way.
Also, I almost missed it, but Tom Hiddleston did go to the BAFTAs last night. He didn’t walk the red carpet, but he presented.
Photos courtesy of WENN.
Yes.
I think yes too…..To all the people that were saying “they were kinda perfect for each other”….just no. He’s posh and from the most elite schools and drama conservatories in Britain. She’s kind of ‘common’ pop schlock. (That’s cool too – I begrudgingly like some of her trashy songs), but it doesn’t really mix AT all! And the way the British hierarchical establishment views these follies is with great disdain. (Though I suppose we’re talking about his ‘penetration’ into the US market which is something else entirely).
“He’s posh and from the most elite schools and drama conservatories in Britain. She’s kind of ‘common’ pop schlock.”
Wow, such bitchy snobbery!
It doesn’t mix at all? Says whom?? Remember, HE believed she was Ok for him, but then what does he know? He clearly made the mistake of dating without asking his ‘fans’ what they thought first.
Look, TH became a laughing stock because of HOW he conducted himself within that ‘relationship’ not because of WHO he was dating or which side of the elitist divide she came from. Her family aren’t exactly uneducated and poor!
As for him being posh, well…….he’s hidden that very well hasn’t he?!
I don’t agree with the specifics but I do agree with the spirit.
He was chugging along with the image of ‘talented actor in serious movies with just enough low culture to make him appeal to dorks’………. and then shoots that nerd appeal in the foot by being associated with someone whose image is basically ‘immature teenybopper antics’ and ‘media manipulator’.
But it won’t actually do any long-term damage to his image, he’s rather better at playing the media in this than Jake Gyllenhaal was.
I concur @WTF. They were simply two divergent “brands,” and Hollywood being what it is – I am surprised their respective sides did not delve further into the long-term ramifications of this coupling.
@Teacakes, as much as I loved TH, he doesn’t have Jake Gyllenhaal’s talent.
“He’s posh and from the most elite schools and drama conservatories in Britain. She’s kind of ‘common’ pop schlock.”
How last century to be so obsessed with “class.” Didn’t Taffy insist in the GQ piece that he was strictly middle class (I thought he was upper middle) but his parents made sure he went to the best schools? But the redundancy of the class status of these two just highlights the fact that she’s so much more famous than he is and that’s why he was so happy to play along with her – fame is the currency here, not class.
I think he’s very self-absorbed, as deep as a puddle intellectually, and obsessed with fame. He must know Taylor used him for publicity and on some level must be admitting to himself that he loved the prospect of becoming a “power couple” with her, so is he naive or dishonest or both?
Throw in the earnestness and eagerness and it’s quite off-putting. Harmless but likeability counts if you’re in his industry.
@teacakes ‘immature teenybopper antics’ is the best and most accurate description of Taylor Swift I have ever heard
@DahliaDee – I agree re: Jake vs Tom – the former is way more talented. And the Swifty antics still did a fair bit of damage to his image at the time, which I thought was ridiculous.
@squee – haha thanks, but I really thought it was just stating the obvious!
@Bluer: middle class in the UK is not the same as middle class in the US. In the UK it is posh, only not part of the aristocracy. Most go to private schools, some to the best schools.
Agreed. Absolutley 100% yes.
I’d never have known he was a thirsty, insecure, stunt queen had he not gotten mixed up with the HSIC (Head Succubus in Charge), Taylor Swift. Her brand is geared towards gullible kids and he was firmly in the adult category. Her team played him majorly by getting his team to even agree to that foolery. But ultimately, it only highlighted her cynical, PR stunty ways as well.
It was an ill advised fail on both their parts.
Geez, this is getting ridiculous. I’m sure it hurt his rep a bit, but overall he’ll be fine. If Hugh Grant can survive the whole getting caught with a prostitute eons ago, then I think Tom can survive a fling (however ill-conceived) with TSwifty and a poorly worded Golden Globes award speech. His major crime is caring a bit too much about what other people think of him…hang the man. As the PR person said, all anyone cares about is bums on seats. If anything Tom will bring in a fair number of his fans who wouldn’t have otherwise been interested in Kong and those that are there for a monkey movie aren’t going to care about his “follies.”
not being hugh grant maybe the source of his problem….
the success and the ultimate snob heartthrob status…
i don’t care for him at all,but i loved the taylor snake drama.
Far too sensible!
Yes, yes and yes.
He totally emasculated himself.
He is either strongly willful and ignored advice.
That, or his P.R team HATE him.
He gives me the creeps now. Ugh.
Pretty much agree with the article; only his fans, and maybe those who read gossip sites, think he’s hurt his brand.
Does anyone know what happened last night? Apparently he didn’t arrive until 8pm, which is why he wasn’t on the rc (the show started at 7).
Yeah….but his brand is chicks who like him on gossip sites, so what they think is his brand and is what matters. It’s not like he’s a household name.
I actually meant his non-fans, who may only know him as Loki and the gossip/tabloid press he got last year, as well as established fans.
Say those who post here or dlisted, who didn’t know much about him until he was papped with Taylor Swift, and therefore made have a negative or indifferent view of him.
As for his fans, not all of them read gossip sites, some post online elsewhere (like tumblr).
He also had a huge profile boost in the UK after the Night Manager was broadcast, which is why he kept getting DM write-ups (esp with the Bond rumours).
I just watched The Night Manager. He was really good. And hot. There, I said it. Never once, while watching TNM, did I think about Taylor Swift. I think his “brand” will recover.
Really? I think he was the weak link in that show.
I don’t necessarily think all his ridiculous Taylor stuff will do long time damage but it’s really about how good his movies does. And anyways he can always go back to the BBC he’s their golden boy.
I agree. I’ll say that Tom was good in TNM, but Hugh, Olivia, and Tom Hollander truly knocked it out of the park in all of their scenes.
The nature of his character was not to stand out, but to play the straight guy of sorts. So it will seem like he’s not doing much with it, since it’s not an in-your-face, flashy sort of role. Like that of a villain. It’s the opposite problem with Thor: some complain Hemsworth is not doing much of anything and is just standing there, while Loki sucks up all the attention and the juicier scenes.
@theHord, glad you got it too. His job was to hide his real feelings most of the time. Which he did.
He seems like a character actor who’s really bitter that he’s not a leading man.
Bitter is not a word I would use to describe Tom Hiddleston. Hurt and confused, maybe. Bitter? Nah. But to each, his own.
There’s a learning curve and he’s definitely on it. He’s smart. He’ll get it, in time.
Maybe not bitter, that was more of the Kevin Spacey attitude towards stardom. With Hiddleston it’s more like every action seems to be asking, ‘will you like me NOW?’
My thoughts exactly. He should be focused on supporting parts and leads in small smart films. Thats how Eddie Redmayne did it and look where he is now. The worst that could happen is that he follows this advice and ends up with Matthew Goodes career; thats not a bad way to fail. But this? Going after action franchises like Kong, movies whose failure gets you blacklisted, its beyond dumb.
i am so sad for matthew goode , i love him from match point.him and paul bettany were my favorite hugh grant spot contenders…
the disappearing of this kind of good english cheesy traditional romantic comedy is great loss to me.
hiddles should let other actors in these roles in which he can’t shine.Some eton actors are just overrated, redmayne is among them
Jupiter Ascending
@Lightpurple – Eddie was the villain in Jupiter Ascending! Still a supporting role no matter how you slice it, even if they upped his part in promo circa Oscar buzz.
@teacakes, they buried him in the promos for that film. They even tried to bury the film. They moved it from a July summer blockbuster release date to February, the graveyard month for movies.
@lightpurple – I know they moved it to movie graveyard date, but that was decided months before. But I remember noting that he was doing an unusual amount of press for the film, more than you’d normally expect for the villain – and right around the time he was also doing the awards rounds.
It’s not hard to put two and two together, his increased visibility for Jupiter was absolutely a result of his awards season. I mean, he wasn’t as famous as Channing Tatum or Mila Kunis when they began it, and certainly not as a franchise star.
Well, Matthew Goode is the male equivalent of Katherine Heigl. He talked smack about his lead role in a commercial American movie and his career never quite recovered.
@teacakes, sorry, but Jupiter Ascending was pulled from the summer schedule because, after test screenings, the studio knew it was going to flop. Hard. Not because they planned to ride Eddie Redmayne’s Oscar train, particularly as nobody had seen TTOE when they changed Jupiter Ascending’s release date. And sorry, but I don’t recall much if any PR for that film after it was rescheduled. It ended up being nominated for six Golden Raspberries, with Eddie winning in the category of Worst Supporting Actor.
@lightpurple – I thought I stated quite clearly that the release date had nothing to do with Eddie’s Oscar run/ My point, right from my first comment, was that the amount of PROMOTION they had him do for it once that release date was near, most definitely was.
Nowhere have I said anything implying that the release date had to do with Eddie, not sure why you’re under the impression that is what I said.
I think Tom Hiddleston desperately aspires to be a leading man and hasn’t quite accepted that he’s trapped in an adorkable nerd body.
He’s kind of like an inverse of Chris Helmsworth, who is surprisingly funny/dorky but trapped in a leading man body.
If Hollywood (and the public) didn’t typecast by appearance quite so ruthlessly, I think they’d both have careers that fit their strengths a little better.
I don’t necessarily believe that if you think his reputation was damaged, you were always hyper aware of him. I only knew Tom from this site, and I still have yet to see anything with him in it. And while I don’t think his career is ruined, it was definitely damaged. I wasn’t a fan before, but now I’m completely turned off by him. I would say a lot of people feel that way.
It’s not necessarily fans he needs to worry about. He’s probably concerned that the Hollywood decision makers think he’s less leading man material at this point. What would George Clooney have done? Not Taylor Swift, that’s for sure. LOL
And I’m not implying Tay Tay and Tom actually did the deed. I think it was a pure PR stunt that failed.
At 36, Clooney signed on for Batman & Robin.
@lightpurple
That was a meh career choice (he really should have been able to rock it), not a wtf publicity stunt with a womanchild. Very different, imo.
Well, to continue with your “What would Clooney do?” line. Dump a long time girlfriend and then enter into a series of two year contract relationships with a rather odd assortment of women to counter rumors that he’s gay. How’s that?
@ lightpurple
That’s a better comparison. But again, none of Clooney’s “contract” girlfriends were high profile arrested adolescents. If Tom had fake dated a waitress, that would have probably gone off without a hitch and also earned him points because “regular” woman.
Again, I really think it was a terrible choice of stunt that I really would have thought was beneath him…until he went and did it.
His ability to carry a movie as a leading man requires a certain persona- -powerful, manly, confident. These are clearly not his strong suits and at age 36 that ship has sailed. It’s difficult to get over a grown man cavorting in the ocean in a I ❤️ TS tank top. ( Leaving Taylor Swift completely out of it. It could have been any girl’s initials.) His GQ explanation was that he wore the tank to protect a scratch from the sun. Hmmmm. Image is not improving. His bumbling story at GG was also cringeworthy.
He seems like a nice, earnest fellow that can have a great character acting career. But shooting for leading man just does not suit him.
It should be something to find out your opinion on men, who are actually older than that, that not only wear silly t-shirts but, *gulp*, even cosplay. In public. And get their pictures taken while at it.
I was talking specifically about Hiddleston, leading man roles, his missteps and resulting awkwardness. I didn’t mean to imply anything negative about men in general just having fun doing whatever they enjoy.
I agree LadyT. Very much doubt he will ever be Bond now unless he has a major image overhaul PR wise. It should be Idris anyway!
I’m speaking this as a huge Bond fan who follows the news. Hiddleston won’t be Bond because he was never considered for it. Even he himself talked about it before the TS romance, how it was not true (and I was relieved because I don’t think he’d be good for the role). It was the media and the gossipers who insisted he was considered for it because of The Night Manager, and after the Swift romance wondered if he now won’t be Bond. He himself knew he wasn’t in the running.
This would be a non-story if people didn’t bring it up as some sort of proof for the disastrous Swift effect, which it is really not because it was never happening in the first place.
It also gives an impression that Taylor Swift has a bizarre amount of power she does not really have.
I second Idris! Definitely need to see more of him and he has that supercool James Bond edge.
I have mixed feeling about Idris. I’d love him as Bond but he’s getting a bit old. He could definitely do two or maybe three (depending on how fast they’d follow each other), but not sure if any more. Although we did have older Bonds, so perhaps it would work. But seriously, get to it fast!
Lady T. – I agree to a point. Hiddleston could be leading man material but not in projects that seem to interest him. If he were content to do period pieces and romantic comedies, he could do leading man work. But he seems interested in the big-budget action stuff, and his brand, as it were, doesn’t fit with that genre.
Just look at Chris Pratt. I like Pratt and think he’s talented, but I also think a huge reason for his success is that he fits the mold for the action-star actor. Plus, he’s married with a kid, and stuff like the Superbowl antics he and Chris Evans did a couple of years ago certified his place as a guy’s guy.
That’s not Hiddleston – and that’s not a criticism of him – I just think it would be to his benefit to better understand how he’s perceived and stop trying to be someone he’s not.
I agree with everything you wrote, LadyT.
what brand? i do not understand why people keep acting as if this dude is super famous. he’s in a franchise, getting known, and then he dated taylor so he was in the tabloids. he’s still a b/c list at best, even though the internet keeps harping on about him. kit harington is far more famous and recognisable than him for instance, and he’s not that famous either.
Sorry. Hiddleston is a multi-award winning actor. Harrington can’t act his way out of a paper bag. The article from the BBC is a good one because it shows the difference between gossip world and what used to be called the trade papers. Hiddleston definitely has VARIETY, THE HOLLYWOOD REPORTER, AND DEADLINE on his side as an actor. How do people comment on him if they have never seen him act? Leading man vs. character actor? Most actors want to do both. Also, producers do not cast unattractive, unappealing actors in smash hit six hour mini-series in which everyone goes around saying how sexy the character is.
Ell, check with VARIETY, etc. They refer to him as A list. They are the BIBLES of show business.
lmao at his stans. whether kit harington can act or not wasn’t my point, just that tom really isn’t all that famous or well known. in fact, most people got to know him because of taylor and not for his acting, which is still watched by a niche except for his franchise. but that doesn’t make you famous famous, it makes you franchise famous, which is different. emilia clarke and gwendoline christie are also franchise famous, but they’re hardly a list.
and lmao at bibles of show business. ok.
Exactly! What do people think of when they think of “a Tom Hiddleston movie”? Nothing! Because is there is no such thing. He’s been Loki, he’s been in the Crimson Peak flop, and he’s been in a smattering of arthouse movies that were not successful. There’s no thread of continuity here that comprises a “brand”.
When Hugh Grant got caught with the hooker, he had a brand. He was the charming, floppy-haired, stammering, romantic-comedy Englishman. And the hooker thing actually made him seem edgier.
Hiddleston’s mis-steps have not damaged his brand. What they have done is possible destroyed his chance to establish a brand – apart from being a thirsty wanker, of course.
exactly what i was trying to say. i don’t understand why his stans have this delusion of thinking of him as A-list, it’s ridiculous. he’s as famous as, let’s say, riz ahmed e.g. a franchise and a well regarded role in a tv show. none of hiddleston’s lead movies did any good at all.
^^^This!
ell, I am 64. I had to look up IMAO. I am sorry if I came across as rude. My point is that there is a huge difference in how actors are regarded by what used to be called the “trade papers” and how they are regarded on gossip sites. I have not been a fan girl since[ likely] before you were born. I teach a film class at the university where I work and my speciality is the history of Hollywood.
Does Variety refer to him as A list? I always thought A list refers to someone who can “open” a film on name alone (e.g. Pitt, Clooney, Ryan Gosling and Bradley Cooper more recently).
I would’ve thought Tom is a solid B.
This is a reply to Becky Actually they do. this whole A list notion has changed a great deal. It has more to do with being sought after or of the moment. The last example I can think of is when Hiddleston was cast as voice talent in Aardman”s new animated feature. I am not personally arguing this. I just wanted to [politely] point out that he is seen very differently by traditional entertainment publications. Notice the quotes in the BBC article from Stephen Gaydos, an executive editor at VARIETY. I think the reason A list may have changed is that almost no one can consistently open a film any longer. Look at Pitt with ALLIED.
Third Ginger – thanks for the clarification. So it also means in demand, which I guess people in the business would know more about.
I remember there was a definition of A list which included an actor or actress who’s an Academy Award winner. Of course that would include Adrien Brody, and he may have been at one time, but he definitely isn’t now.
The idea that a single name alone can put butts on seats is sort of passé at this point. Which is one of the reasons so many studios are so fixated on franchises.
Firstly, of course it isnt permanent or serious PR damage. His problem is that he is a bit of a laughing stock among the people who followed his stumbles. But in truth, there arent that many of us who did. He’ll be fine. I still dont think he is leading man material but lets see how Kong goes.
Omg, that GQ interview made me cringe so hard. I feel like it made it even worse, not better!
Also, sorry he is 36 years old. He should either know better, or hire a better PR consultant. Because his image is now a joke.
I was a big fan after The Night Manager, but would not be able to take him seriously in a film now. (other over exposed actors I cannot take seriously include Matt Damon, Mark Wahlberg and Ben Affleck)
I was also cringing my way through the GQ piece and it DEFINITELY made his problems worse, not better!
IMHO, though, this is a branding problem, not a goods problem. I can still take him seriously as an actor because his work is outside of the summer romance and ham-fisted awards speech. His problem in Taffy’s piece was that he was revealed to be hyper-aware of how he is perceived, out of control of the story being told about him, and desperate to fix it through controlling a narrative, desperate enough to have been mulling over what he said to Taffy, lurking near her hotel, and driving over early to get in a last word to clarify things. I can understand the temptation to do this all too well, but it doesn’t help the situation, and the more you try to micromanage your story, the more you thwart your own attempts to come off in a certain way.
I can believe Tom is a lovely guy, but in light of his overall desperation in the article, everything he did when with Taffy, like heating up leftover Bolognese sauce for her, seems to contribute to that desperation to be seen as Tom Hiddleston TM, kooky lovelorn heartthrob who is just so sweet and considerate. When you’re desperate, it’s hard to be truly sincere even if you intend to be. That is the PR misstep and probably what he could work through with a PR manager who would give him some insight into how he is perceived.
That you are desperate when you cook for a guest, is news to me. Actually, it was heating up a left-over; had he ~prepared an actual meal~, then… i don’t know. Maybe that would get him in to Thirst Jail or something.
Also, many journalists before mentioned Tom tends to call them/ e-mail them clarifications of his statements on a previews interview. That’s was not new.
“…to be seen as Tom Hiddleston TM, kooky lovelorn heartthrob who is just so sweet and considerate.”
on point. Perhaps this is just who he is? And painfully insecure about it?
He just doesn’t know how good he really is.
I can’t wait to see how he turns out when he grows up.
I think Tom is a workaholic so even on downtime he has to be doing something.
“Let’s not go out to dinner. I have leftovers in the fridge I can heat up for us”
*opens fridge to reveal 23 neatly stacked Tupperware containers of food*
There was no pasta! Just the sauce! Insanity!
@cd YOU’RE RIGHT! OMG!!! Who even does that?!
(the fact that the entire piece and its interpretation seems to hinge on Tom’s culinary offerings is making me laugh so hard right now).
A theory for the conspiracy bin: Tom didn’t want to serve Taffy bad bolognese so he made it ahead of time ON PURPOSE to serve her leftovers because he’s a stone-cold control freak.
@MI6: I think Tom DOES know how good he is but saw that to get to the next level of fame/projects he’d have to play the PR game and is trying to do that mostly on his own, with the results we see before us. I hope he figures it out, though.
@secret squirrel: Meal Prep Thom Hiddleston seems so accurate to my vision of him. I bet he plans out his macros, too!
But Senna, if he did, would he be so desperate to prove it??
And Squirrel, I will never get the vision of neatly stacked Tom Tupperware out of my head 😅😅
Speaking of pr – where is luke these days?
I think he has been busy with Emma Watson and Colin Firth. That should tell you where Tom falls in the bell curve of celebrity – even within the small universe of his PR agency. I wonder if Luke will be lurking during the Monkey Movie press. I think Beauty and the Beast comes out just before or just after, there may be competing demands on his time.
I think the powers that be are trying to sell him as “leading man” when solid character actor with a varied, indie type career might be a better fit. It happens often, a good eye-catching supporting role gets attention and then the image is damaged in an attempt to be the next big thing. See also: Colin Farrell, Michael Fassbender.
As for this Swift thing, misjudged but men in movies have done much worse and still be awarded, like Mel Gibson, Woody Allen, Roman Polanski.
I think it’s ridiculous that people mention “men have done much worse than Hiddleston” and then bring up Gibson, Allen and Polanski. These three are very far away from what Tom did. There’s a million examples in between, more suited to be compared to Tom, everything from Cruise’s Oprah antics to Grant’s prostitute scandal to various actors shooting themselves in the foot with ridiculous statements. But to compare him, even in “he’s not as bad” fashion, with literally worst of the worst? Why?
Why? To illustrate that Hollywood will forgive anything as long as the money keeps coming into the bank. That Hollywood has no issue with the most vile acts against the most defenseless in society as long as they can keep making money. The thirsty antics of a fame seeking b- actor won’t even raise an eyebrow in the offices of Hollywood. Hope that helps.
Because it gives an illusion that he’s almost as bad as them. Not as terrible, but almost there. But he’s not. He’s miles away from those men with his antics. That’s why I mentioned men with less serious incidents that were also mocked but later forgiven.
The guys I worked with who binge-watched TNM and loved it and know nothing about Taylor Swift other than their daughters listen to her probably wouldn’t think his brand was damaged. To those who follow gossip and nit-pick every little thing he does, sure, whatever. To most of the population, which actually does NOT follow celebrity gossip, and know him just as Loki or one or two other roles, no, not at all. So, I think the guys interviewed are right.
Now, we’re shoveling out icy snowy crap here and it is cold, so hot chocolate for everyone.
Agreed on all points.
And thanks for the hot chocolate! Yum
Exactly, lightpurple.
Oh, lightpurple. The logic. The logic.
Maybe the audiences aren’t aware of his pr missteps, but casting agents, directors, and producers and other people involved in the movie/tv-making process have to think he’s credible. If this guy’s likely to do embarrassing interviews and make major pr missteps (which you have to admit is exactly what the Taylor promance was), are they going to trust him with casting him and requiring him to promote a film?
The Taylor Swift romance aside, Hiddleston has a good rep for interviews, ranging from silly antics for younger audiences to serious talks for other events. he knows the public and acts accordingly. He’s also known for enjoying promotion work, something studios really appreciate. I’m mainly speaking from a Marvel fan’s perspective here because I don’t know much about his shilling for smaller films, but he was constantly praised by producers, journalists, and movie analytics alike because he did this part of the business well too. So I don’t think his reputation in this regard suffered at all. Even if he does something silly, it’s usually just that, no serious eff-ups, and while half the audience mocks him, a large portion defends him (it was like that with his GG speech on many news sites, for example).
I can’t watch his interviews ever since his beginnings with Marvel, because he’d always say something cringey or do some antics I found embarrassing, so I can’t see what the big deal all of a sudden is. He’s always been like that. It’s not the end of the world.
Has he shown up drunk for an interview? Blown off an interview? Stormed off during an interview? Argued with the interviewer? Made any outrageously offensive statements during an interview? Does he show up on time for work? Make outrageous salary demands? Treat the crew badly? Fight with directors? Fought with co-stars? Dragged family drama onto the set? What are his references like? You know, references, when we apply for a job and they want to talk to people we worked with before? Does he have good references? Those are things they look for too. And those things are a bit more important than whether an actor behaved in a silly manner with a girlfriend while on a break from work.
I’ve been on this site now for over 3 years and people are constantly insisting that Tom Hiddleston’s career is close to over because “INSERT SILLY, INCONSEQUENTIAL REASON HERE.” During which time, he has earned an Olivier nomination, an Emmy nomination, won a Golden Globe and an Evening Standard theater award, headlined a sold out run of a Shakespeare play, made several small independent films, for which he earned good reviews, acted in and produced a successful Emmy nominated television series, and two films that are likely to be blockbusters this year. The guy’s career is going fine. He really doesn’t need all this advice on what everyone else thinks he should be doing.
The fact that there are pr people wondering out aloud on the issue of whether his career has been harmed is enough to doubt his career trajectory after his fame-obsessive and shameless-promance ways. The global coverage of his GG speech was viral and very unflattering. This is just a fact. His profession is all about perception, which is why he leapt at the chance to be a “power couple” with Taylor. Winning a lot of awards doesn’t change the fact that their industry is fickle and the “this is always your last role” thing.
It was the gossip sites and blogs that made a mountain out of the molehill, and others picked it up for clickbait. We who read gossip sites see this as an affair because the negatives are disproportionately reported, while the positives are not. The press shared the twitterers anger of his GG speech, but how many did share the support he got from Christian Slater and Naomie Harris, two people who were inserted into this story against their will? I have to give credit to CB for mentioning at least the latter.
He got a lot of support. Every article about his ways had loads of supporting views as well. Especially the GG thing. But people mock because they think it’s fun, while in the long run this has very little effect. That is basicly what these PR people are saying, too. We gossipers have less power than we might think (for good and for bad). Studios have more important issues to consider when picking actors than their previous (completely legal) love affairs and badly worded speeches.
Also, TNM gained a lot of free press thanks to Hiddleston not being able to make a good speech. That’s a good thing.
Like other professions, his profession also depends on references; whether you show up on time; whether you get along well with co-workers; whether your former manager says you’re a good worker.
He was never a big star to begin with. He doesn’t have much of a brand right now. He’s talented but even if he had conducted himself perfectly I don’t know if he has a right energy to be up an A-list leading man.
Please. Is anyone’s brand ever ruined now-a-days? If Johnny-too many scarves- Deep can keep landing roles after the hit “his brand” has taken in the last few years then I think Tom will be just fine. What he does need, though, is new management especially a new PR person. I shouldn’t know who Luke Windsor is .
The problem with Hollywood – and society as a whole, to an extent, but especially Hollywood – is that it’s a high school locker room. Even ignoring their differing levels of fame, I don’t think you should dismiss the popularity and cool factor.
Johnny’s stuff will be dismissed as ‘oh, boys will be boys,’ because he gives off a cool vibe, and no one wants to admit they don’t like the cool guy. Hiddleston, bless him, comes across as the theatre geek, and as a former theater geek myself, I can say from experience no one wants to hang out with the theatre geeks.
It’s gross, but in some ways, if Hiddleston had done something like getting caught with a (female) prostitute or something else to affirm his masculinity (rather than simply be too eager), it probably would have been better for his career.
(I’m not saying I agree with any of this, btw, just what I’ve observed)
For future stunt purposes, the shot callers need to remember Taylor can get someone more press and thus raise their profile and up their celebrity quotient. But she absolutely cannot add to anyone’s artistic cred. She still seeks help in that department (like her Bad Blood remix with Kendrick Lamar). Word to the not so wise.
He has a lot of potential, but Lordy-loo is he jealous of Chris Hemsworth! Feels like he just can’t come to terms with his charm, which is the quirky and smart, but still hot gentleman. He wants to be standard beefcake and it just doesn’t work for him.
It’s sad, because i feel like if he embraced his quirks, he would be off the charts hot. I mean, quirky is always more interesting and he is a very good actor. He just needs to stop trying so hard to be something he isn’t.
Why would he be jealous of Hemsworth? They both suffer from the same curse: they are great in Marvel, and each is great in another role or two, but they cannot carry films as leading men. I’m sure they’re both aware of that.
hemsworth has the title role,he not.
the money ,prestige and opportunities must not be the same.i suppose the eton education implies an alpha male mind
However, Hiddleston gets great reviews.
nem, like Third Ginger said. While I can imagine Hiddleston thinking at first “too bad I didn’t get the main role, only the villain”, he’s been praised for this way more than Hemsworth. It didn’t show as much in Thor (possibly because Branagh is a better director than Taylor and was able to even things up), but already in Avengers Hemsworth was part of the team and Hiddleston had to stand on his own, and more praise went into his direction.
Thor The Dark World was basically carried by Loki, not Thor, if you read the reviews. Marvel acknowledged that (even before the release) by first giving him Comic Con, then giving him more scenes, then using him on the commentary, then making the BluRay documentary about the brother relationship. At this point, Hiddleston would be an idiot if he wanted to swap places with Hemsworth within their Marvel work.
And outside of Marvel, none of them has proven to be the leading man (they both have some awesome films they’re great in, like Rush and OLLA, but they’re too few and far apart), but Hiddleston has had more critical success than Hemsworth. When his movies flop, he’s usually mentioned as the good thing in a huge mess. Chris has no such luck.
Maybe what i meant was lost in translation(i m french,so excuse my bad school english)
we agree about the successful career of hiddles in u.k in prestige projects.and he s a better actor than hemsworth that s for sure.
and he ‘s ambitious.he wants superstardom, the hollywood one =a list
but he has to be hunky or classic heartthrob,because these first roles are the highway to his goal.
the problem is he doesn’t fit neither of the two.
two of his eton rivals have already taken the difficult prestige snob quirky spot.
mc avoy and elba are more gifted and already established.
fassbender is hunky and given chances and has had franchise.
english romantic comedy isn’t the same star vehicule anymore.
when cumberbatch has caught the dr strange marvel franchise,and redmayne the harry potter one.
by taking loki role he ‘s trapped himself in second role, and crimson peak has failed him.
so he has to look to the lesser hemsworth shine the best he can,when he knows with another head and body ,he would have milked it to the max.
so yes he must be pissed to go the taylor snake way.
he was dreaming to be hugh jackman,who do classy, goofy and wet white tee at ease
But why would he look to the lesser Hemsworth shine? I would understand (if in some cases disagree) if you said he’s jealous of Fassbender or McAvoy (Elba is in a completely different category so I’m not sure why he’s in the mix), but not Hemsworth. Chris is basicly in an even worse spot than Tom. Not only does Hollywood ATM have many hunky actors for these roles, they even share the same name. And he has flopped harder than Tom both financially and critically.
I also have a problem with people claiming he’s trapped because he took the Loki role. That role made him. It’s also still his safe cushion to fall on if everything else goes dark.
It’s also not such a second role. He’s still Marvel’s no. 1 villain. They’re sticking him into new movies eventhough he was planned to be killed off in TTDW. He literally has a better position than many heroes.
Fassbender’s projects have not been faring well. Cumberbatch has zero range. The Loki contract is expiring. Seriously, very doubtful the guy needs career advice from any of you, especially since, if you paid attention to yourselves, you’re all contradicting yourselves.
sorry when i say hemsworth “shines” it was in a ironic way.
in france we have this expression “donner de la confiture aux cochons” which means giving jam (or marmelade) to pigs.We use it when you someone receives fine delicate exquisite things and is unable to appreciate or to use because he ‘s too dumb, uneducated, boorish, unsensitive or inedaquate,etc. for it .
hemsworth can’t use all his opportunities at all because of his mediocre acting skills.
that s the comical side of the blockbuster appeal, you will be on top for a lot of exciting things ,regardless your level,until you re rejected as box office poison.
yes hiddles has to be jealous of his winning (big) peers. and Dr strange must have been the biggest blow to his ego
But his meal ticket implies looking a bad actor wasting what represents the chance of a lifetime for himself.
see like Hillary was bitter about Obama.But Troll in chief must have made her facepalm and eyeroll so much.
and the loki role hasn’t(yet?) fulfilled its most inportant task :being the first step to bigger things.that s why i call it a (bittersweet and well paid) trap.
for an example,edward norton was a second role in primal fear which leads to american history x or the 25th hour,etc.
second role isn’t an insult.you can find so great performers in it( like Kathy bates, octavia spence, j.k simmons, maggie smith…) who uplift scenes and other actors and honor their art.
Hiddles want worldwide A list superstar fame and status.so most proeminent marvel villain , extended role life won’t be enough when all heroes have franchise on their name potential.that is his tragedy.
to me the only vilain with stand alone film possibility was heath ledger ‘s joker.he’s this generation greatest and most popular to date.
Idris Elba has been a popular name for James Bond.Even with the race problem.
him and chiwetel ejiofor may have a better future with the good film.i m surprised to see how well black british actors do in hollywood
@lightpurple ,you didn t look seriously to my post.
Fassy is given chances.it doesn’t mean he’s going to succeed.
Cumberbatch isn’t interesting to me,so i don’t watch him.but Eton guys are clearly for some of them living on hype and buzz.talented or not dr strange is big lottery ticket.and he has won it with the “prestige” reputation, real or not it s part of his appeal in the us.
i’m not giving advices i m just stating he’s not where he wants to be.
And some of Crox’s ones would be really useful to him as i think it comes from a real fan.
you ll be a sweetheart to give the quotes with contradictions
nem, I’m less familiar with his work than it would be fair to admit, but it still seems to me you’re reaching. You presume quite a bit. As a Marvel fan, I seriously doubt he would trade places with Cumberbatch within this franchise (I’m projecting, all I know is that if I were him, I wouldn’t want to trade). At this point at least. Doctor Strange was well received and the character will appear as a side character in other films, but there is no plan at this point for a second Dr. Strange film, at least before The Avengers 3 & 4 play out and Marvel figures out what works for the future. This is one of the few films in Marvel that’s not getting an immediate sequel. Doctor Strange, at this point, is still a much smaller property than Loki.
To you Heath Ledger might have been the only villain to deserve his own film, but Loki as a solo movie had been in the eyes of many, it was discussed on virtually all superhero channels you can think of and on many channels discussing blockbusters. And not only by fangirls, you have genre fans (guys) debating that. The idea was later shut down by Marvel, as it was for Hulk, because it didn’t fit the plan, but you cannot pretend it wasn’t a loud one.
sorry for my presuming on you.
about dr strange,that s why i think you ll do a better work than his current team and himself.
Hiddles career is now plagued with his love of shiny things.
i m from the generation with matrix as the superhero film.i m more in nolan ‘s batman than in marvel which is too much …colourful and family safe for me.
i think the watchmen graphic novel is the real deal( zack znyder has to go with his false gritty, )
i haven’t look at all the marvel franchise,but loki didn’t click with me.
i know he’s popular , and i ‘m ready for good antihero movies but i think there are more iconic villains than him,ready for a film.
I’m a Tim Burton Batman generation (to me still the best Batman), but I don’t know what that’s got to do with anything. 🙂
I understand tastes vary, and if you’re not a fan of Marvel, I completely understand why Loki wouldn’t be your cup of tea and that’s alright. But the MCU is ATM the most successful franchise and Loki is a big deal inside it, because Marvel has not been very successful with creating other memorable villains. And the Marvel executives (Kevin Feige and Louis D’Esposito) stated very clearly this is due to Tom Hiddleston’s performance.
Jealous of Chris’s success in such films as Black Hat, In The Heart of the Sea? Riiiiiight.
jealous of the opportunities…
But why would he be jealous of Chris’ opportunities? Of Hemsworth of all people? Following your logic, I’d understand if you said Chris Pratt, but not Hemsworth.
pratt is what hemsworth would have been with box office success.Hiddles can’t even be hemsworth for now.that the cause of his pseudo meltdown
But he’s in a better place than Hemsworth.
Eh, I give up.
I agree with LaraK that Hiddles so desperately wants to be leading-man material and he’d be way better embracing his own strengths (see John Malkovich, De Niro, Michael Shannon, etc – actors who embraced their non-mainstream factor and did very well because of it) because you can really see it on screen when someone is not their own best advocate. He nearly got Thor; he’d worked out like crazy and auditioned endlessly for the film but they cast Hemsworth instead in the end.
Wait, but all three actors you mention have much longer careers than Hiddles, and during their careers, they did try leading man (definitely Malkovich and De Niro, not sure about Shannon here), villain roles, romantic attempts, all kinds of heroes, indie films etc. Like normal actors do. Hiddleston isn’t really that different because while he’s trying to be the kind of the action movie lead (The Monkey Movie), he’s also doing theatre, and indie films, and Oscar-bait, and TV-shows and what have you. I’m sure by the time his Hollywood career is as long as theirs, he’ll cover many other types of roles and settle where you said he should (because most do, whether they want it or not).
And he didn’t audition endlessly for Thor. What does that even mean? He went for the Thor role and audition just as much as any other actor who wanted that role and made it through several rounds (while others were dropping off, and he did at the end too (so did Hemsworh, but they called him back)). He wasn’t then sent home like all the others, tho, he was offered Loki instead, something he worked into his own advantage.
I’m sure he auditioned for many other roles he didn’t get, too. So did all other actors. That’s the nature of the business.
Robert DeNiro? Did you say two-time Oscar winner Robert DeNiro? The RobertDeNiro from Bang the Drum Slowly, Mean Streets, Godfather II, Taxi Driver, New York, New York, The Deer Hunter, Raging Bull, True Confessions, Midnight Run, Goodfellas, Cape Fear, Casino, Heat, Wag the Dog? THAT Robert DeNiro? Or were you talking about some other Robert DeNiro?
What other De Niro is there?? Okay, he’s doing dirty grandpa or whatever movies these day but he just wants to keep busy, I suppose. Can’t deny he’s not a leading man, mainstream heartthrob type. He and Al Pacino, etc, broke the mode in the 60s and 70s by embracing their non-mainstream-ness.
I’m not the one denying DeNiro is a leading man. I’m not the one pretending he was just some quirky character actor.
@lightpurple you have to recognize they didn’t have robert redford ,warren beatty classical wasp good look.
He did silly things, maybe but nothing wrong.
Polanski is still around and he was convicted of raping a 13 years old. Chris Brown is still around and he beat the shit out of his girlfriend.
TH might be a huge dork, but he did not commit any crime, never been violent towards women. SO, I hope he will be find.
Every actor who has some fame and gets any lead roles is a brand. They might not be big enough for ordinary public to really think about but they are big deal with with kind of roles and paycheck stage actors get, it is not just for the acting ability which is paid for but the persona and how it represents the film.
OMG the dude is fine. His GQ interview was revealing in that he is a sheltered bookworm who needs to be reassured he is understood.
TS was a publicity stunt. EOS.
He should have brushed off all inquiries and just said they were lovers awhile instead of giving
‘prepared’ speeches. That was an amateur move. A bit immature maybe.
To me he seems lonely but does not know he is. I mean look how he clings to whomever interviews him. Taffy must have kids with separation anxiety to have handled him. LOL.
Tom is harmless and fun to analyze here. Oh and he wears a suit like no other. 🙂
I think it’s more that he was thought to be a perfect Disney prince-type, which wouldn’t have been viable in the long run anyway. The Swift thing just shot that fantasy down, and it also seems like some of what people feel about her got imputed him by association. TBH, a lot of this seems similar to what Cumberbatch dealt with when he and his wife went public.
IMO, he should be fine if he keeps his head down and continues working hard and being the kind guy that people say he is.
I don’t know anyone who knows his name, and most watch Tge Night Manager. I wouldn’t know who he is if not for this site and the Taylor Swift fiasco.
I don’t think he as a brand to damage, and I think he is more of an ensemble actor, not leading man. He will do fine. But his antics with Taylor and their photo-ops didn’t elevate him to leading man movie star status, as he had hoped.
Oh yes he can wear a suit alright, I think he is like a modern day David Niven, he should work that sort of charm for all he’s got.
I don’t really see him in the action hero mould, but he would make a great Alfred the butler in a Batman movie.
I think he’s sweet and can be very sexy indeed, in his own inimitable way.
He seems to get a big response on this very site, even from people who claim not to be bothered about him, so I think he can put bums on seats, or at least fingers on keyboards.
Good comparison with Niven. You know your old movie stars . Hiddleston is a throwback, for sure.
I loved David Niven in the original Pink Panther film…He was so smooth.
More Ronald Pickup than David Niven.
I don’t see how the GQ thing damaged his rep though. The GQ thing was just his rep in novel form.
All we need to know about LEGS is this: put a ball gag on him and all is well.
Sixer, I had to look up Ronald Pickup and then recognized him right away. Will you go for James Mason?
NO! He is not a James Mason.
I would elaborate but I’m on a deadline. Sorry!
sixer, hope you can relax later. Leslie Howard?
Tom has been compared – particularly in looks and voice – to both Leslie Howard and Errol Flynn. Though he doesn’t have the image or persona of either.
And we have a closet fully stocked with ball gags.
lol you’re right Sixer – this article does zero damage to him, we already know he’s thirsty!
I like the David Niven comparison, because he was very charming and appealing, but creepy somehow when playing romance. I think Hollywood realized this and seldom cast him in that kind of role. Tom H. should follow suit.
I’ve often thought that LEGS would have been quite successful in old Hollywood as the non threatening male second lead a la Niven, Leslie Howard and Franchot Tone.
I think he is building his brand now? as posh, naive, hardworking sweet guy ? I dont know, I just like him as an actor. he is decent.
personality wish, I think he is kinda exhausting. he is nice and all but you dont wanna spend much time with him, kind of person hehehe
I dont think TSGate will affect his carreer or public opinion. It was summer fling, nothing more. Yeah, they came all out with photo-ops but it wasnt scandallous enough to damage his carreer. but for good laugh inside celebs world? thats another story ..
I’m sorry, but I feel like I’ve already seen this article here before…?
Oh, you have. Young Mr. Hiddleston enrages a certain segment of the internet. The saw him with a woman who wasn’t a Cambridge don and lost their “lady boners.” The boy is clickbait.
You are fast becoming one of my favourite honest posters here third ginger!
The imagery of lady boners makes the mind boggle.
@ Lucy Several times.
Groundhog Day.
I think some people are confused on the use of the word brand. He’s not famous enough for the wider public to care too much and the two movies he has next (Kong and Thor) have nothing to do with him, win or fail. The best he can hope for is some good notices. But “brand” is also a term the studios use for really any actor and what slot they fit.
So did he do damage from an industry perspective? Depends. If he was trying to go the leading man, heroic, “James Bond”-ish type route then yes…absolutely. If he’s fine with “softer” roles (see also: Eddie Redmayne, who I doubt will ever have a role as an action lead, gangster, or tough guy) then no harm done.
“Tom Hiddleston made a speech and people thought it was silly” this cracked me up
I don’t understand the whole “he didn’t break the law!!” line his stans always trot out. Well, no: this is celebrity gossip. It hardly ever involves people breaking the law, and on the rare occasions it does, it’s sad and awful, not gossip. Kinda the entire point of celeb gossip is that it’s about razing people for trivial frivolous stuff. The top 20 articles on CB right now are about judging women for “wearing dresses,” so it’s a bit much to pull the “but he didn’t commit a crime!!” angle.
Imo this whole on-brand, image manipulation stuff only works if you’re A-list or Z-list (reality slebs). Tom is a successful working actor, and the only real way he’s going to build his career or improve his ‘brand’ is via his acting roles. He should get stuck in to auditions, maybe do another play, and forget all this PR nonsense as he’s really not good at it.
I wonder whether his own PR are partly responsible for the rash of “Has poor Tom damaged his celebrity brand?” articles, when the average person is probably like, “Tom who?”
‘I don’t understand the whole “he didn’t break the law!!” line his stans always trot out.’
neither do i. it’s like well, i bloody well hope so he didn’t.
‘when the average person is probably like, “Tom who?”’
exactly.
Interesting point, yeah.
He tries way, way too hard on the PR front. I’m guessing in order to game the system in the hopes of bigger, more iconic, more prestigious job offers.
I don’t know whether it’s working. I’d say not after the ridiculous TS fauxmance and all the fall out from it (an ill-advised contractual PR stunt that backfired rather badly IMO).
Sure you need to promote yourself – and sometimes aggressively too in that industry – but it needs to be based on the work, and on something worthwhile. If it isn’t the air is going to go out of the balloon fairly quickly I think and then you’re no better off.
I’m not exactly sold on the idea of TH as a beefcake, action hero type. He didn’t convince me in TNM and the Kong thing doesn’t resonate much either. I think he can do lead roles (he’s a good stage actor) but maybe needs something more cerebral to play to his strengths.
Because the conversation is about whether this has damaged his career and most people understand that committing a crime can do that (or should, although it often doesn’t), but we don’t understand why something as silly as wearing a t-shirt (so gossip silliness) would.
“Tom who?” Exactly!
This is how I imagine people sitting in a cinema, watching a movie with Hiddleston.
“Isn’t this the guy from Hunger?”
“No, that was Fassbender.”
“Oh, but wasn’t he in Doctor Who?”
“That was David Tennant.”
“But he was in…”
“That is Benedict Cumberbatch! Hiddleston was in The Night Manager!”
“I knew it! He was so familiar!”
so they don’t know Fassy, tenny, or benny either.
It will take a long time for me to unseen him in that Taylor Swift Light.
The damage is probably temporary. I think he needs better PR and media training. The public and media tend to be very forgiving to male celebrities.
I’m so late to this party. Is the bar still open?
A.) His brand isn’t big enough for him to truly be considered a brand, but I get it that PR will always encourage their clients to think in terms of building a brand. That said, eager hyperactive puppy humping everyone’s leg is not a very good brand to have, and I think that is where he is.
B.) His GQ interview was a brazenly obvious effort on his part to fix his brand and go back to being the Internet Boyfriend Farting Rainbows that he was a few years ago. This in my opinion makes things worse, not better. Funny to watch, I guess, but I doubt this is the result he wanted.
C.) There was another article out there which speculated that all of his GQ answers were heavily vetted by TayTay’s people and he might be scared of what they could do to his brand if he dares to say anything but hyper-positive things about her. He really is out of his league.
@Miss Jupitero
Re: C) I don’t think he can be candid (and truly honest) about it all anyway for obvious reasons… But I agree that he may have had to be careful what he says about her and the ‘romance’, perhaps for contractual reasons as well.
What a situation to get yourself involved in. Jesus.
It could also be just to be ahead of her. If she’s really planning to write a song about him, being nice to her in advance and heartbroken is in a way disarming. If she puts out a nasty song about him, she’ll be the one looking bad and she already has an image problem.
@Crox
Yeah, that works too. I don’t think TH is likely to publically dish the dirt in any way whatsoever, regardless of what actually went on. It’s not his style.
The GQ interview was super awkward. I wouldn’t be surprised if it were vetted. I also think it might ultimately be not damage control, but at least the end of the discussion. If I were giving him advice, it would be that if Taylor Swift ever comes up again, he should say he’s already answered questions about the relationship and that he’s not going back to the subject any more.
I’m not sure how he didn’t realize that this was going to be enormously complicated when he got into it. Taylor seems to square off best against people like Kim Kardashian, Kanye West, and Katy Perry, none of whom are afraid to alienate some people. I don’t think he was ever cut out for that.
Thanks for making me laugh. A puppy humping everyone’s leg indeed. 😂 Poor Tom, I kind of feel for him because I too am over earnest and would suck horribly at PR if I were in the public eye.
“all of his GQ answers were heavily vetted by TayTay’s people”
Does anyone remember her first two gym appearances after announcing she’d broken up with him because he was too eager to be seen in public with her? Her nose was literally in the air and she had the smuggest look on her face.
Where Tay-Tay is concerned, that was the precise moment where I transitioned from vague irritation to active dislike.
Don’t get me started on that “he wanted to be too public” nonsense. Tom may have been more than happy to go along with everything, but all of the photo ops from this summer were straight out of her playbook. When it came to the break-up, I’d bet good money that Team Taylor saw the same mockery in the press we did and figured painting Tom as the real famewhore in the relationship would be a good way to deflect her share of the public ill-will onto him… “See, it’s not my fault you hated Hiddleswift, I warned him but he wouldn’t listen. I’m the one that wanted to be discreet.” Yeah, sure.
So true that she tried to pin it on him when it was her trying to minimise the Kanye thing or get back at Calvin or whatever or both. Which is why TH gushing over her in GQ seems quite pathetic. But then that’s the only way to go if you want to convince the world it wasn’t a promance and you’re not a fameho.
Can someone explain “stan” How is it different from fan? And yes, I really am that old.
I think its got to do with the Eminem song, Stan where a super fan ends up doing an unspeakable act* to gain attention.
*Wearing a slightly questionable vest perhaps, which means people keep going on and on about it forever, while claiming they don’t really care.
Haven’t heard that song in probably 15 years!!
Ah the good old days when Eminem was brilliant.
It’s fan with over-zealous knobs on, ie. obsessive to the point of blindness where the object of their standom is concerned.
I do joke about how young Hiddleston is my “pretend son” but I don’t fit the stan, as an earlier poster labeled me. I think he’s overly effusive, talkative, and needy. I also almost died laughing when he went to the Selena Gomez concert. What I defend is his basic harmlessness and his considerable talent.
Me too I have taken the piss out of him considerably on here, but I do like him, find him attractive and quite sexy, and basically harmless.
The summer of love was ripe with piss taking opportunities and I was all agog because he went and did something so seemingly bonkers, when before I’d always found him quite enigmatic. But I was of course confusing him with Loki.
Of course I forgot that ALL actors have the thirst or they wouldn’t be in that profession in the first place.
@third ginger – Ha, no, you’re not a stan! A stan, for starters, wouldn’t laugh re the Gomez concert, a stan would say he was 100% tricked into going there by TS who told him she was taking him to the theatre. and then list all the reasons why he would never willingly attend such a low-brow event. 😉
a stan doesn’t have to be that extreme. a stan would totally laugh at silly things and also insist he/she is not a stan. most stans are fairly balanced, but also spend a lot of time defending their idol, or are obsessed with a certain celebrity. there are different level of delusional stanningdom.
@third ginger: That doesn’t sound like a stan!
Using another actor as an example, a fan is someone who thinks Robert Pattinson is a good actor, will try to see his movies, and perhaps has a crush on him. A stan thinks he’s been secretly married to Kristin Stewart for years and has a couple of kids with her.
ell, what’s a fan then?
I hereby proclaim myself a “scorned’ actors’ stan” or something. 😀 I have only seen a handful of Hiddleston’s films, I can’t watch him in interviews because I cringe, and I don’t want him as Bond (nor I believe the rumours), I don’t care if he dates Swift or some other girl or a dude or himself, for real or for PR. But I do jump up (way too much, I think) when I feel he’s undeservedly under attack. (I do that for several other celebrities too.) Stan, yes? Because I wouldn’t call myself a fan.
@Ell – Well, ‘standom’ can also be applied to someone who can’t tolerate any type of positive comment about someone they dislike. It’s coming from the same obsessed place.
Just sayin’.
@Crox – that’s not being a stan, that’s just having a sense of balance and fair play.
@Third Ginger, in decades younger than you said you are and I also had to google what “Stan” was recently.
I actually thought it was Stalker + Fan = Stan but god knows where I read that.
Anyway I’m enjoying your posts on the topic and you definitely do NOT sound like a Stan!
“Stan” is an insult. Also see: “nanny” or “nannystan.”
If his brand is sycophantic smarm, his strategy has been spot-on.
I also have to say that the trend of “branding” human beings annoys and depresses the f$&k out of me. Like we’re all a bunch of Procter & Gamble products. Corporate America has taken over our very souls, Trump is king, and we’re all doomed.
You took the words right out of my mouth. I am tired of the very concept of brands. Product has become some sort of religion.
Agree re this branding business. Apart from anything else, it’s so off-putting as it immediately implies that someone has agreed to deliberately embark upon a PR-generated campaign to fit themselves into and appeal to a particular market. It’s a major turn off.
Which is why the likes of eg. Jeff Bridges, Javier Bardem, Tilda Swinton and Frances McDormand will continue to hold the sacred place they hold in my brand&bullshit-free, natural talent-appreciating heart.
I take the opposite view. It’s all fake, deliberately, and strategic anyway, so talking about it as a brand is being honest and transparent, and helps separate the human from the perception that translates into roles and dollars.
This is kind of a puff piece, with some unnecessary sympathy being given by strangers who probably don’t care.
That being said, I agree that Hiddleston isn’t really in a position to damage his brand. As noisy as fans and detractors are, they aren’t large enough in number to affect the success or failure of a movie (theater is probably a bit different given the smaller audiences). If there were these hordes of fans who had now lost faith, some of his indie projects would have been bigger hits. Personally, I find him less crushworthy than I did last year. I also wasn’t willing to drive an hour to see I Saw the Light, and I’m certainly not going to skip Kong if it looks fun or some other movie he’s in later on if it looks good. I think a lot of people are like that.
There’s another way star can damage his brand, more in the way where the concern is not that he turns off fans but that the person will be unpleasant to work with or won’t show up to work at all. A guy like Johnny Depp can get away with that. A guy like Shia LeBeouf may not be able to. But come on. I don’t think anyone’s worried about that with Hiddleston, who by all accounts works hard and gets along fine with his directors and costars.
His career is going to depend on whether he gets cast in good or successful (preferably both) movies and whether he gives good performances in them, which is basically where he was last year.
Wait, I’m far back with Depp gossip. Has he ever been nasty on set?
I haven’t heard whether or not he’s mean on set. For him, I was thinking of the unable to work bit. Are you aware of the video of him cutting off part of his finger while drunk? That happened while they were shooting one of the Pirates movies, and led to rescheduling while he went back to the US for surgery. Obviously they put up with that because he’s Johnny Depp and they’ll put up with a lot from him, but I think that is something that would have ruined the career of a B list actor because it inconvenienced a ton of people.
@Crox – when he was on 21 Jump St, he used to turn up to set late and drunk. Was rude to the crew and once punch a director in the face. And all because he wanted to get fired to get out of his contract as he wanted to be a movie star – he almost ruined his career right there but for Tim Burton. But he seemed to learn his lesson as there were always good reports about his professionalism until the latest Pirates movie when again he didn’t turn up in Australia when supposed to and cost the studio money – that was what caused all the drama around Amber’s dogs.
Thanks guys for the examples. The finger story is gruesome but it could happen to a lot of people (although I think you’re right, lunchcoma, not many could afford that).
But the 21 JS anecdote balances it out, I think. He was a heartthrob back then but not a household name, and yet he managed to get work even with being terribly unprofessional (punching a director sounds like something that should be a career killer). He was probably lucky he didn’t live in the time of the internet back then.
Hiddles is actually a really talented actor…but he’s not made to be a marquee name. He should stick to doing theater, prestige tv and arthouse indies.
I was impressed he got to co-deliver the last BAFTA award of the night – best film. At the Oscars the last award is usually reserved for a big name to do.
He needs a new girlfriend.
Why is he still skipping the red carpet? Oh well, it is not like we’ll never hear from him again. Three weeks to SI in the states.
Tom…I don’t know him but he just seems like he’s…unpredictable…and irreverent but in that like charmingly cynical British way…which is fine but not easy to maintain a brand that way as an A-list celebrity.
It definitely put a dent in his street cred, but he’s talented and in time, with the right projects, he’ll be fine.
I think it’s a case of any publicity is good publicity. Even though people are pretty much making fun of him, at least he’s being talked about. He isn’t really my type of celebrity, but I don’t hate him. I just think he’s funny and totally extra haha. He’s entertaining!
To borrow a golfing term, I wonder if he’s come down with a case of the yips. If I were in a position to give him advice, I’d tell him to relax and everything will work itself out. Don’t overthink it and just let that natural charm do the work. Sometimes, if we try too hard to fix things, we overcompensate and make things worse, but for different reasons.
I think the vest/tee was the killer move (as the culmination of a series of teenage Instagram-like activities), not the romance itself which would have been useful in raising his profile across the United States had it been a series of trips and adult-looking dates. A good comparison might be Tom Cruise with the couch jumping. And Cruise was still a beloved A-list star at that point, but it marked the beginning of going off the deep end publicly.
The thing is if you’re trying to project a cool, suave guy image (whether as a dapper Englishman or an American action star), maybe don’t create an indelible image in people’s minds of yourself acting like a childish fool.
Man acting fool on beach on holiday.
I doubt it is an indelible an image in most people’s minds though.
This. Shortly after that incident happened I witnessed this theory in action: 3 couples in their 30s and 40s on a dinner gathering, one lady bringing up – in an overinvested manner – the disaster that Hiddleston had become, and then three men (who had to be explained everything) and two women shutting her down for being ridiculous. We literally do sillier things regularly. Sure we’re not famous, but this type of antics makes Hiddleston relatable. Life should be about fun as well. And fresh relationships are crazy.
I think that was the problem. It wasn’t Taylor or the t-shirt, it’s that he came across as a ridiculous person willing to do foolish things in exchange of fame.
It may have been okay if he was younger, but these days he actually looks like he’s much older, and with the personality of a vapid teen.
I think his image suffered because people were expecting a lot of him, there’s a lack of good and serious actors. Unfortunately in what I’ve seen of him he’s really not a good actor, he’s terribly flat, so I’m afraid he damaged his career by trying to use a fake relationship as a shortcut to bigger roles.
No
Something a little lighter:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c6YN5tDAVW4
No.
Oh he ‘s really harmless, to the point of being irrelevant.
The majority of people still don’t know his name and can identify him only as Loki or that guy who was with Taylor Swift after Calvin Harris. And that’s the younger generation, older people don’t even know who Taylot Swift is.
These people are in no way in the same rank as Tom Cruise or Brad Pitt or George Clooney. No comparison. You can’t really damage something that’s not there.
Plus if Jake Gyllenhaal could survive Taylor Swift and maintain his career and serious actor status, anyone can.
What brand???
“It’s like snakes all around you,” OR… snake emojis? LOL.
Caitlin_thomps has a podcast on her twitter with Taffy (recent GQ profile writer about Tom) that is mostly about tennis. But about 3 minutes in til about 7 minute mark, Taffy explains how wonderful Tom is. She just gushes about how nice he is. A theme I’d say.
I can find her twitter, but I cant find the podcast with Taffy…
https://twitter.com/caitlin_thomps/with_replies?lang=es
When you go to her twitter account, click tweets and replies and it’s a few tweets down.
“He was charming and considerate and gentle and kind. He is just a great man, a great piece of man.” And she totally meant it. She obviously meant to write a humorous piece, a bit at his expense, but if people found the piece to be embarrassing, it had more to do with their issues with him than with how she feels about him as a subject/person.
The whole idea is slightly ludicrous. Does anyone think that the average moviegoer is going to stay home from a giant ape movie because some English actor they’ve probably never heard of wore a silly tank top?
I don’t. But apparently, some here believe millions will.
Tom made a fool of himself with that fake affair with Taylor, but even worse–remember him posing in his paper white panties? It will be awhile for that to go away..
It’s not his actions or his relationship choices that are the issue, but his work as a leading man, not as a co-star to Hemsworth, is lacklustre. The Night Manager was an exercise in tedium. There was no on screen charisma at all. It’s as though he is really only suitable for roles like Loki (OTT roles) or English period dramas a la Downton Abbey.
He doesn’t strike me as interesting for those reasons, not because of the stupid tank top or his frolicking with Swift.
While I actually agree with you on the quality of TNM, he just won an award for it, so TNM can only work in his favor. But I do agree with the rest too, or at least with the idea that if an actor is bad at his job (or parts of his job), that and that alone should be a reason not to be hired anymore, not some silly but harmless antics. Luckly, I think, many feel the same way.
I really like him in a lot of things (the Marvel films, The Hollow Crown, Wallander, Crimson Peak, on-stage in Coriolanus) but I found him incredibly dull in TNM. For most of the runtime he just didn’t do anything much at all, aside from simper and look sheepish. I know he was portraying a character who was undercover and therefore had to conceal his true feelings, but there wasn’t any depth or complexity to his performance. Mind you, most of the characters in it were 2D and unconvincing so it might have been the writing and the direction that was at fault.
Amazed he won a GG for it. It was very weak fare.