I just realized that I Saw the Light will have its limited release starting this week. I’m sure it won’t come to my town, but hopefully we’ll be getting, like, a premiere? Or some big new interviews from Tom Hiddleston and Elizabeth Olsen? Or are they pretending that this film didn’t happen, following it’s not-so-stellar premiere in Toronto last year? Hm. There have been new promotional photos released, plus this clip of Tom-as-Hank Williams singing “Honky Tonkin’”.
To me, Tom’s voice sounds sort of thin, but then again, the real Hank Williams’ voice sounded kind of thin in the older recordings too. But voice is important… the voice is what’s being picked apart by Hank Williams III, the grandson of Hank Williams. When Tom’s casting was announced in 2014, Hank III complained loudly that they were getting an Englishman to play Hank. Hank III also blasted Tom’s voice after Tom performed at a music festival, singing some of Hank’s songs. Well, now on the eve of the film’s release, Hank III still wants you to know that he does not approve.
Hank III will not be seeing the movie: “I’ve seen a two-minute clip and that’s enough for me.”
He hates that they’re using a posh Englishman: “Hank Williams Senior should not have been played by a European type. It needs to be an American from the South who has eaten, lived and breathed these kind of roles before. I immediately thought of Matthew McConaughey because of the weight he lost for ‘The Dallas Buyers Club’ and he has a natural arrogance, fire.”
He also has a problem with the director, Marc Abraham: “It’s not just the actor, it’s a little deeper than that,” he says, explaining he would also have preferred a heavy weight director such as Martin Scorsese or Clint Eastwood instead of rookie Marc Abraham.
He’s annoyed that Tom re-recorded Hank’s songs: “They should have used Hank’s voice. Maybe the director said that seems too old, or too thin, but there are ways to get around that.”
But no one invited Hank III to the table: “I wasn’t invited to the table probably because I have strong views and think outside the box…”
The fact that they’re not using Hank’s real vocals is weird to me too, because I seem to remember that the producers actually got the rights to the songs. Maybe they just decided to use Tom’s vocals because he worked so hard on sounding like Hank, or maybe they just got the rights to the music but not Hank’s vocals. Also… Martin Scorses directing a country-western bio-pic? Yeah, that was never going to happen. I understand wanting your famous icon grandfather’s story to be told properly (and let’s be clear, I do not believe this film tells the real story properly), but complaining about how Marty Scorsese should have done it? Ha.
Also: Tom will be on Jimmy Kimmel Live on Tuesday this week. And Elizabeth Olsen will be on Monday. So… at least there’s that.
Photos courtesy of Sony Pictures Classics.
A little self-important are we? Just because you have a famous relative doesn’t mean you know them well or that you deserve to be consulted.
A famous relative who died long before Hank3 was born.
….but if you look at him & see him, he is the reincarnation of his Grandfather. His voice is exactly like Hanks. Looks nothing like his own father or mother.
The rest of the family have expressed their happiness with the film and Hank 3 has a reputation as being a bit cranky.Having spent years playing some kind of hybrid country he is now saying he wants to return to more traditional country music,
Hank Williams’s voice if you listen to his early recordings was not a strong voice -when i first heard it i wondered how he became a star and decided when it comes down to it it was all about his songs and charisma.There are some nice descriptions in Rodney Crowells book of what Hank meant to ordinary people and being taken to see him as a toddler
The other thing to remember is that not all films re singing stars goes for an exact imitation as it can sound quite karaoke.I know in the UK it is quite exceptable to put your own mark on it but I have noticed in America they seem to like the star doing his own singing’.Apparently Tom struggled with the laid back country rhythm more than the inflection.
I agree. Who asked you, grandson who never met the man? “I think outside the box.” Please. Who actually says that? I think he wanted to play the role himself, or to make money off of the movie somehow.
He wanted it for himself.
Right? Scorsese, Eastwood, McConaughey… that’s not exactly “thinking outside the box.”
Grandson likely wanted the role, or some paid role within it. He does look like his grandfather, but it doesn’t mean he can play the role.
the grandson did want the role but the bigger question was could he act-the script may have had bad reviews but Tom;s portrayal has been praised in every review I have read.
Hank will make money by doing what he is doing -switching back to traditional country music and picking up on the buzz
He is the living relative. It’s not like Hank can speak for himself.. It is his legacy.
I don’t recall people saying that when other relatives complain about movies of their families; we have seen this all the time. This is his family’s Legacy. He has a right to voice his opinion. Regardless of whether he met his grandfather or not. He is trying to protect his family’s legacy.
** I think Tom looks and sounds good. But I don’t have a person interest in it.
You are right if Zoe zaldana can be heavily criticized so can Tom
I think his own self-interest makes him different from family members who voice concerns over the portrayal of their ancestors, as well as his ignorant remarks. A Southerner has to be played by a Southerner? Not a “European type?” (By which I think he meant gay, by the way.) Scarlett O’Hara was played by an Englishwoman and Ashley Wilkes was played by an Englishman. It’s just a stupid argument. I’m not saying the movie is perfect – I haven’t seen it. But neither has he. He saw a two minute clip. He doesn’t want to like it, he won’t even bother watching it.
J.K. Rowling said she only wanted British actors cast in her Harry Potter movies and those characters aren’t even real. Granted she actually created the characters, and because she was part of the creation, her say in the matter would and should weigh more heavily. But I see Hank Williams III’s criticism as being kind of in the same vein (i.e I’d like a Southern to play my Southern relative).
I have no issue with Tom Hiddleston, as an actor and a person, but I’m not really offended by the criticism here, since it’s coming from a relative. If the criticism came from Jack Black, well, that would be different…
I don’t care about the casting either way (because, well, why would I?) but I think it’s okay for relatives to personalize the whole thing a lot more than the general public.
He’s one of five living relatives. The other four are fine with it, and two have publicly praised Tom’s performance (after actually, you know, watching the movie.)
JK Rowling’s situation was also a little different in that she had that as a contract clause in order for the movies to be made. She didn’t want them subsumed into the Hollywood machine.
@perplexed
J.K. Rowling negotiated British casting and filming location for Harry Potter not only because it’s a very British story created while she was being supported by the government, but also if it wasn’t part of the contract, it would have been yet another writer, director and acting jobs that UK would have lost to the big studios of Hollywood that no one can compete with when it comes to buying story rights. So it was more a political-economic issue than it was about cultural pride and ownership.
I understand him not loving the idea of Tom, an Englishman, playing an American icon. As an American myself I find it a bit weird and annoying, but oh well, ya know? It’s just a movie. We cast Americans as English people all the time, it’s just that it’s easier for me to spot a fake American accent. It’s not like hollywood is known for their faithful adaptations of real life stories and treating the real people involved with any grace.
The guy just comes off naive and bitter. Say it with me, it’s called acting. Someone pretends to be someone else, and if they’re good enough, it doesn’t matter who they are in real life. This is pretend land. Just be happy they cast someone who can actually act.
HW3 is very much a chip off the old block. He’s right about how badly miscast TH obviously is, he’s wrong with his casting and directing suggestions.
The block that is his father was fine with the casting.
Have you seen the movie?
From what I’ve heard Tom’s acting of HW is fine. It’s just his voice is not the best match of HW. Don’t forget most people now don’t even know who HW was much less an idea of what his personality was like. It’s not like today where there’s candid video of just about anybody. That’s not to say not to even try to be accurate, but there’s a lot more that determines casting than doing a searching for months or even years to find the perfect American actor at the right price that will also get investors on board and the right director and writer.
It’s all a balancing act. You might find the perfect incarnation of HW, but if you can’t get any investors because the actor is too unknown or not tested enough then you’re stuck. If you’re trying to get popular actors then you need more investors cause it’s going to cost a lot more to make. With big actors you’d need to also hire a really good script writer and director. It becomes a whole different level of beast, and Mark Abrams wanted to do this movie himself, or he only got enough funding for the actors which were all good.
If I were to make any changes, it would have been replacing Mark Abrams as the director and script writer before even thinking of replacing Tom. Even if Tom is not the perfect incarnation of HW, he is VERY charismatic on the screen, and his performance of HW draws you in regardless of any “perceived” inaccuracies.
the rest of the family wrote to Tom to say how pleased they were with Tom in the film -so he is the only member not to have seen it.He will never be happy and everyone involved probably gave a sigh of relief he was not involved.I had some sympathy with him at the beginning but now he is just coming across as someone who cannot accept what is clearly in the past now
I tried listening to Hank Williams a few years ago and just couldn’t get into it. I don’t get his appeal.
I agree. I don’t know why, but the “twany” puts me off.
Sorry, I mean twang.
He wrote “workers & simple songs back in the day. My grandmother said he was liked because he was seen as one of the singers that was for the poor man.
Just listened to Hank Williams “Honky Tonkin'” on youtube. Very twangy, for sure, but it’s got swing and sass to it that Hiddleston doesn’t achieve.
Hiddleston has a different voice type than Hank. His is deeper and fuller. As someone said below, Rodney wasn’t trying to make Tom sound exactly like Hank, that’s impossible, but rather to get “him to portray the authenticity and emotion of what Hank was singing about.”
Maybe for you this was not achieved, but he would have never been able to sound just like Hank without sounding completely unnatural and contrived. I would think it must be hard to have the right sass and attitude if your voice resonates so differently and at a much lower register. I love to sing, but it’s hard to match other singers’ voices and intonations especially such stylized singing as Hank’s.
Me either Dangles, but I do find Valerie June quite intriguing and pleasant to listen to. Now she could really give Hank 3 a run for his money as to who’s music is the most authentic embodiment of HW. Her musicianship and talent is certainly authentic and original albeit influenced by traditional folk, gospel, blues and Caribbean.
Here’s a good example,
https://youtu.be/njf_BhpTRyw
Iprefer his songs done by other artists but having listed to past recordings his singing grew on me
The other members of the Williams family liked Tom’s performance. Hank3 is just seeking attention.
With the opening of ISTL, High-Rise’s release next month, and promotion for TNM, Tom’s going to be popping up quite a bit in the next few weeks. He’s in Entertainment Weekly this week, Parade Magazine, on Kimmel, on the Today show, on a Times Talk with Hugh Laurie, and he’s appearing at some BAFTA event in New York in early April.
The veranda will be open with food and beverages through the duration.
Hank3’s opinion is the only one that really matters here. The “family” probably needed the money a biopic was hoping to provide.
The family didn’t own the song rights and is not getting any money from it.
Holly Williams (Hank’s granddaughter) is 20x the musician that Hank III will ever be, and very successful in her own right. If she’s cool with, that’s all that matters to me. http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/holly-williams-weighs-in-on-hank-williams-biopic-i-saw-the-light-20150928
And when Hank III refers to his father and another family member as “the heirs” that should also tell you something about his motivation. But @lilac is right, none of the family profited from this. The producers bought the rights to a biography that was not written by the family, and a music company holds the rights to Hank’s music and the lyrics.
Dara, great link. Thanks for posting it.
Why does Sheldon’s opinion matter more than Holly or Jett Williams? Who were both evidently very moved by Tom’s performance.
I agree completely: Hank3 is thirsty.
May I supply some chocolate truffles for the spread on the veranda? My specialty is booooozy flavors, e.g., mint julep.
Yummy!
In addition to Tom singing Hank tunes over the sound system, I would like to offer some Valerie June for our listening entertainment. She’s a perfect accompaniment to the music list for this occasion.
https://youtu.be/njf_BhpTRyw
https://youtu.be/8ywuF-N8xXQ?list=RDMbGREQj3foE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MbGREQj3foE
If you ever get a chance to see her recorded performance at Austin City Limits 2014/15 the female background singers ROCKED the horns in “Workin’ Woman’s Blues”.
Will Hank III be finally happy if it flops both ways?
Hank3 will never be happy.
Something tells me he wouldn’t have been happy unless they had asked him to play the part since he bears some resemblance to that country-blues singer.
He will get his wish.
From what I could tell by the clip, I thought he did a good job. I’d watch it.
Same here, GNAT. And I really, really don’t like country music.
If TH had sounded just like Hank, it might have made the movie “too country” for some viewers.
Hank Sr. died more than 60 years ago. It’s doubtful even Hank Jr. can remember his father, and Jett wasn’t born.
It may not be critical that the performance be exact on all counts. When Sissy played Loretta, that was a bit different because L. Lynn was still an active performer. If Sissy had missed the mark with voice/singing, everyone would have noticed. Not sure it’s quite as critical in this case.
Hank III gave one of the best concerts I’ve ever seen in my life. This is a movie about his grandfather. I’d be dubious too.
Having said that, Tom Hiddelston is sexy as f*ck.
He is gifted and works his arse off on the stage. Agree he is unbelievable live and nice to his fans. He mingled with the crowd hours after he left the stage.
I actually like it. I think does a convincing job with his accent.
There will be a premier in LA this week. Plenty to talk about along with all the other promo The PuddleTom is doing over the next couple of weeks. No Bora Bora holiday just yet.
I think Tom ( and the sound engineer ) did a good job with the singing and bitter Hank 3 needs to hush up and deal with not getting his own way.
My own bitterness is directed at Sony for not having Tom record all of Hank’s hits on the soundtrack. I’m cherry-picking the tracks I’m interested instead of buying the whole album, thanks to their stupidity.
Do you think maybe the reason they didn’t go whole hog on the album is because he’s not very convincing singing the songs? Everything Hank 3 complained about is being/has been vindicated.
Except for the part where TH’s performance, including his singing, has been singled out by critics for near universal accolades, even from those who didn’t like the film itself. So, you know. Except for that.
Rodney has said in interviews they weren’t trying to make him sound like Hank. They wanted him to portray the authenticity and emotion of what Hank was singing about.
As a fan of Hank’s music and as a musician, I think he did a commendable job.
@Ennui, very true. While the film itself is not getting good reviews, Tom’s performance has received very favorable reviews, both for the accent and the music, from a broad spectrum of professional critics.
What Nutballs said and also Mark Abrams said the film was to be more centered on Hanks personal struggles than on his music as in the book that this film is based on.
chelsea and HankIII seem to be confused: this is a movie, not a concert, so sounding like the object of the biography is quite secondary. Plus, Scorsese, McConaughey, “thinking outside the box”, LOL! More like basic macho wet-dream standard vulgarity! xD
I didn’t like the film and don’t think Tom’s acting is always the bees knees in every role, but I genuinely thought he was great here. Probably one of his best performances in his career so far. He put his all into it.
@Christin Very good point-
Matthew McConaughey? Come on. The man doesn’t look like Hank, and is more than ten years older now than Hank was at the time of his death. Silly bunny!
But he’s not a “European type.”
With a surname like that you can bet he is! “His ancestry includes Scottish, English, Irish, Swedish, and German.!” according to wiki.
So Zoe Saldana is horrible but he’s okay? I don’t get it. Why can’t family members have an opinion about someone from another continent playing a relative? What a real surprise, the Afro Latina gets dragged thru the mud and the lily white English guy gets off Scot free.
Are the same people criticizing one while praising the other? Because I know I haven’t posted one word about the Zoe Saldana situation other than to say the recent Oscar nominated documentary on Simone was very good.
Because that always happen even if people like to pretend otherwise if Zoe wasn’t right for Nina then Tom should get the same criticism directed at him veiled sexism of people still at play
That makes no sense whatsoever. Just because people (I don’t have an opinion one way or the other, btw) don’t think that Zoe was the right choice for Nina Simone, Tom Hiddlestone should automatically be criticized for playing Hank Williams or its sexism? The situations are completely different. Do you even know WHY people are criticizing both actors? The reasons could not be further apart. Very, very lame. When you haul out complaints of sexism with such a flimsy argument, you dilute the real issue. It helps nothing.
Hank Williams was white and so there is no comparison here. Tom Hiddleston isn’t wearing blackface to portray him.
I have seen this movie at TIFF and it was okay. It wasn’t the worst thing out there and probably the best part was Hiddleston. The movie was a bit dull though.
@ honest This! I can’t with this double standard. I swear white males get away with everything and yet the very same people talk about diversity..
@ nic919 are you kidding? Zoe Saldana is black like Simone she lighter skinned and has a different culture but nonetheless a black woman. Let’s not pretend Hiddleston is culturally qualified to play a dirt poor southern boy with his English upperclass Eton privilege.
You do know that Scarlett O’Hara and Ashley Wilkes were both portrayed by English actors in Gone With The Wind? Culturally qualified? This is just ridiculous. The problem with Zoe is blackface, not cultural qualifications.
Cate Blanchett didn’t come from the same culture as Bob Dylan and no one criticizes that. Changing your skin color is different than changing your accent or playing people from different cultures. And I mean Meryl Streep is African and she never plays someone from Africa!
It’s called acting.
I dont think the criticism is so much about where Tom is from as whether he is capable of conveying the “gruff masculinity” that Hank associates with his grandfather. “European” type in this case means “soft”. I dont know whether he would be fighting against Tom Hardy or say a white Idris Elba.
SloaneY, you beat me to it. Have Matt Damon even been an astronaut, or Fassbender a slave owner, or a medieval king of Scotland? As far as I know both Hank Williams and Tom Hiddleston are/were white males.
I don’t know where he’s getting that “gruff masculinity” idea from. Hank SR had sex appeal and charisma, but gruff is the last word I would use to describe him. Watch the videos where he’s chatting with the crowd between songs.
@TotallyBiased I know nothing about Hank Williams so I cant argue with that. I was just imputing from Hank III wording. When a Southern man says “European type” its pretty clear he means “wine sipping, manicured, unmanly man”, right?
I dunno. I watched some Hank videos, and though he is charming, he’s a bit weedy and genteel. Not one brimming with machismo as HankIII ascribes.
They should have gotten a dark skinned actress to play the role, light skinned African women get more advantages. Esdp Zoe who is light skinned and latina.
Agree @snowflake
But the point here is you could easily say that they should have gotten an authentic actor to play Hank too.
And we could talk about how posh white actors have it more easily compared to working class actors so…
I get pissed not because I defend Saldana as Simone but because she’s a black woman and they are by far already the least advantged ( of course it’s easier to be Saldana then a dark skinned actress but it all pretty relative they are all far down on the chain compares to white actresses) in the movie industry and you know she’s the one who gets dragged the most.
But hey these guys like Hiddleston, redmayne and cumberbatch can play whatever they like.
HAnnah are you saying that Hiddleston is not an authentic actor?
@Hannah
Stop bringing your class bigotry of posh vs non-posh actors into this argument. The issue regarding picking Zoe Sandana for the role of Nina Simone goes back to the issue of #OscarsSoWhite where the grip is that there are many, many black actors and now more black directors and black issue films that are worthy of being awarded but still get no or little recognition from the HollyWood establishment.
People are angry about the casting of Nina Simone because:
1. What she stood for in her life and her work of being a African looking woman in the entertainment business. She did not compromise herself and instead embraced her African features despite those that would deny her opportunities because of it.
2. There are virtually NEVER any roles that call for a African featured Black woman. That’s what makes this sting. It’s not like they can say “the next film with a ‘black’ looking women lead”. At the rate of things that would be another 20 yrs.
3. And, very important here- it’s not as though there aren’t many, many “black” looking actresses that aren’t super talented and experienced enough for the role. Danai Gurira for one who’s got a lot of fans from being on the Walking Dead. If she wasn’t available, there were plenty more like her to have considered.
Like Lilac says, Honest and Hannah, a different group of people comment on different types of post here. So no hypocrisy noted by me.
But I comment on both and I can say that I would be mightily pissed off if LEGS was cast to play an iconic British working class hero whose achievements were deeply rooted in his class and regional identity. Hank III seems like an arse of a person but I have sympathy with what he is saying.
How would you feel about a really working class actor having a role as an upper class Englishman? Or how did you feel about Michelle Dockery playing Lady Mary in Downton Abbey
That’s completely disingenuous, spidey. There is a big difference between a fictional character and a cultural icon. The latter demands sensitive casting and any casting is up for discussion when a cultural icon is deeply rooted in identity. As I said very specifically.
In an ideal world, anyone would be able to play anyone but it isn’t an ideal world. Hank III has EVERY right to respond critically to Tom’s casting and not be shouted down by an enraged fandom. It’s a perfectly reasonable discussion to have, whether one feels LEGS is an appropriate casting or not. On a personal level, I don’t care about it one way or the other.
If LEGS (or Bendy, or or or) was cast as Kier Hardie, a figure with emotional resonance and importance to me and my traditions, I’d shout my outrage from the rooftops. And no number of cheesed off internet girlfriends would shut me up!
Surely it is a case of can he/she do the job? How did you feel about Meryl Streep playing Thatcher?
ps. I’m not a cheesed off internet girlfriend, I was just interested in your opinion.
I thought Streep did a dreadful job and thoroughly enjoyed that she did, what with my being anti-invested, as it were, in Thatcher’s legacy.
But it’s not about ME, which is what you don’t seem to see. I think the casting of Streep was entirely up for discussion. It’s not a kumbaya world where talent finds its ideal niche. And pretending that it is, or that people with strong emotional attachments to particular forms of identity and traditions should be silent on topics that matter to them because internet boyfriend, are things I disagree with entirely. Even when it’s one of MY internet boyfriends.
I guess I prefer it when people are a little more open minded than HW III seems to be.
I find this a pretty sterile argument by HW3. Icons far more significant than singers have been played by people of other nationalities. Alan Rickman as future Irish president Eamon De Valera in Michael Collins, Aussie Mel Gibson in Braveheart and so on. It’s the performance that counts. Tom’s reviews are largely positive but once again he seems to have been badly served by those making the film. A shame.
@Anne, ” Icons far more significant than singers have been played by people of other nationalities. . . It’s the performance that counts”.
And I would add by different class backgrounds too.
@Sixer
That’s a real fine gray line though Sixer. There were a lot of American cultural icons in music, and most of them were from poor working class, Elvis, Wood Guthrie, Bod Dylan. This is part of the Rock n Roll phenomenon that came out of the working class (Black) music of Blues and Blue Grass.
Furthermore, the poor working class legacy of HW and of class consciousness at all is mostly unappreciated by modern American culture today. American’s don’t really appreciate class struggle issues unless it’s glorified for the sake of a movie. Modern murican culture only gives it lip service during campaign years in the form of sound bites not in real engaged, cultural discourse. I mean most Americans don’t even appreciate the struggle of being POC and what it’s like to be culturally and economically marginalized today.
So I have to agree more with Anne that if the performance is authentic and true then it really doesn’t matter the background or nationality of the actor. I can agree with HW III if that’s his honest criticism of the performance, then fine he has the right to his opinion. I’m fine with criticizing TH on his performances too, he’s not perfect, but to deny actors role of iconic people based on class background is a tricky road to go down in general. Where do you draw the line?
In short I don’t thing HW is enough of a relevant cultural icon today to support this kind of discernment.
You should probably go back to some.of those Nina Simone threads and see who was commenting and speaking out (hint: it was other black women who were offended that they put Saldana in blackface)
Pretty much yeah, two white men, nobody cares
ok so everyone’s just going to drag Hank3 and defend hiddelston blindly?
Don’t see the difference between this posh white English boy playing a poor American country boy icon and Dominican Zoe Saldana playing African American icon Simone. Saldana was dragged on this site like you’d think she just killed somebody for pretty much the same thing.
The double standard….
I haven’t done anything blindly. Hank3’s sister, father, and aunt have made it known that they disagree with him on this. And I have stayed out of the Saldana/Simone debate. Perhaps you should be more careful before accusing “everyone” of a double standard?
I don’t think she is talking about you specifically. Zoe was in fact trashed on CB recently, and CB does have something of a reputation for its Dragonflies who regard Tom as something of a sacred cow. Sorry? But this is true.
She used “everyone.” “Everyone” means everyone. I’m well aware of what happened on the Saldana/Simone threads and I stayed off of them. “Everyone” is being accused of hypocrisy and double standards when it comes to racism and sexism. That has nothing to do with being dragonflies. Sorry, but I don’t take being accused of sexism and racism lightly. When accusing others of bigotry, even in generalities, people do need to be very, very careful and not do so blindly.
She asked a question no? If you took it personally thats on you. Its fair to point out that the problem here is quite similar
Hiding a blind, overly general accusation in a question does not make it less of an accusation. Word choice does matter. There are ways to point out issues without making overly broad accusations and you take your victims as you find them.
Hank 3 has publicly denounced his Dad on several things. One of them, they come from a history of taking up for and advocating for the poor, yet his Dad is deeply conservative. They disagree a lot on politics and Hank 3, indicates his father was very removed from his life as a kid. There is more to the story than them just disagreeing with him. Hank 3 and his Dad have been clashing for years.
Your argument holds no water whatsoever. I didn’t comment on the Zoe situation. I don’t have an opinion one way or the other. I’m not defending Tom, and I’m not especially a fan. I just happen to think that this man wanted to play the part himself, and he’s criticizing a movie he hasn’t even seen. You’re the one blindly making baseless accusations because people aren’t buying into your ridiculous argument that an Englishman can’t play an American, a rich man can’t play a poor man, because yeah, THAT never happens. With your argument, no one can play anybody but themselves.
Tom is white and Hank was white too. Zoe Saldana is latina but Simone was black. Do you see the difference?
First, sorry my english.
Second, i don´t see the diference.
Yes, she is light skinned, but she also is black american.
As far i know Zoe was born in EUA, then she is american. Everybody that was born in America, that includes North, Central e South America is american. People are not less american just because they were born in Brazil or Dominican Republic.
The “real” concern should be if she could play the role because in my opinion Zoe is not good actress.
And what do you mean by “Tom is white and Hank was white too”?
I am chinese and just because I have black hair, small eyes, light skin( they call yellow skin) doen´t mean that I like when people laugh and say that all asian are the same. I can they you that is not the same and that is racist and also ignorant.
I think Zoe Saldana would be considered both black and Latina. I don’t think the two categories would be considered mutually exclusive.
I understand that the issue with Zoe is that she was considered too light-skinned for the role, but setting aside that issue, as far as the social construct of race goes, I think she would be considered black ethnicity-wise and Latina culturally.
In my opinion you are misunderstanding the conversation. This isn’t what people are saying. They are just pointing out the similarity in the situations and the vastly different responses to said casting, specifically on this site. Tom isn’t any closer to Hank Williams than what Zoe is to Nina. They should both be free to play different types of characters far removed from their own specific lives, thats what actors do right? I do understand the thing about skin colour specifically in the case of Nina Simone as this was an important factor in her life. However that criticism should be directed at the director and producers of said biopic.
Generally speaking and as a POC who is about to embark on an acting course in the UK next autumn it makes me a bit confused and sad that its only POC who are held to account on shades of skin (colour). The outrage when white actors such as Fassbender (Jobs) and Hiddleston play a characters far removed from them just isn’t the same. In the case of the Nina Simone biopic i believe that this should have played some part in the casting. But generally speaking it should be the actress or actor that is best for the part when it comes to POC too, no? We can’t just use this as an artistic principle with regards to white actors.
@Jess
The problem regarding the casting of “the best actor for the part” especially Hollywood $ industry is that most all the good lead roles for black women (which are very few) all go to light/”mixed” looking black actresses. Basically African featured black actresses get overlooked time and time again even though there are numerous, experienced “black” actresses that could perform the role superbly without having to drastically alter their appearance.
@Hannah, Miss J, Jess
So everyone, this issue is NOT that one white actor is more qualified or discriminated against than another white actor for yet another of thousands of movies about white men!
The issue is that yet again, black women with strong African features are passed over in the film business, and the argument always given is that there aren’t many leading roles for POC. So when there is finally a role for a “black looking” lead, and they pass over all the many black looking actresses that could have played it probably even better than even Zoe, it’s just more racist bullsh*t.
It is his family. He has every right to voice his displeasure. Southern pride runs deep and that strong love for country music. I have no skin in the game, so couldn’t care less that it’s a posh British actor doing it as long as he does a great job, but I understand his feelings.
I understood the huge backlash when slender, Texas-born actress Renee Zellweger was chosen for the beloved Bridget Jones character. She turned it around with her amazing performance, though. But I was the same way when first hearing about it. But still, Hank williams was a real person who is an icon in the country music industry, so his grandson feels strongly about this. Why can’t he voice his opinion?
I must be the only person who doesn’t get the Tom appeal. Don’t find him the least bit sexy or magnetic in any way
I’d feel territorial if the movie were about a family member, and if I didn’t like it, I’d say so. Loudly
But would you be so vociferous and verbose trashing a performance that you had watched only two minutes of?
The rest of the family liked Tom’s performance. Their opinion doesn’t matter?
Nope. You got me there. I wouldn’t. Probably.
You aren’t the only one that doesn’t get Tom’s appeal RENEE. There are regular postings to that effect. People like me who very much see his appeal are generally very polite to those who don’t.
Does anyone remember the uproar over Renee Zellweger playing Bridget Jones? A Texan playing this iconic, universally adored British character?!?!
But she nailed it, and, after the movie came out, there was no criticism, because she did such an amazing job. I can understand the disgruntlement when someone you wouldn’t have picked or who, on paper, doesn’t look like they would fit, gets chosen for a character, but actors act, and if they do it well, you forget their background and only see the character. I’m willing to give this movie a chance.
–omg. We need diversity in casting! Why should actors be limited by their upbringing and their circumstances and accent? We need more opportunities for everyone! Anyone should be able to play any part if they can get to the essence of the character!
–omg. They can’t play that part. They don’t have the extremely narrow parameters that I feel this character should have. They aren’t black/white/posh/working class/middle class enough with exactly the right neighborhood within a city accent and have the exact same parentage and upbringing as this character! Their eyes are green, not hazel! Their lips are too thin! The horror! Burn them at the stake! How dare they ACT like they can play this person!
LOL.
From now on, it shall be written that no one can play anyone but themselves or their twin.
Or their clone.
Certainly for an actor as shallow as Tom Hiddleston.
We get it, Chelsea. You are not among Mr. Hiddleston’s admirers!
😉
I would actually be interested to know what parts Chelsea had seen Tom play.
wrong place,
I’m enjoying Chelsea’s hilarious posts
What are we going to do about actors playing aliens when they aren’t? Is there a Reticulan casting agency somewhere up there?
Chelsea’s here to to keep the Hiddlelove from going into the red zone. She’s the anti-Dragonfly and despite her repulsion to the man, helps to ensure his continued clickworthiness.
or their offspring
@chelsea, stay salty
You mean they aren’t real aliens? Oh!
Pretty sure Leonard Nimoy really was Vulcan.
I love you, Lilacflowers 😉
The video of him singing The Ballad of Bilbo Baggins pretty much confirms it beyond all reasonable doubt.
Oh girl you did not (I love you)
Holly Williams, Hank SR grandchild and also musician, calls Hiddleston’s performance “Haunting.”
Jett Williams, Hank Sr’s daughter Jett says she backs Hiddleston and adds: ‘He really got the Alabama twang’.
They actually watched the movie, too.
But then again, they’re just chicks. So what do they know about a Southern Man’s pain.
The New York Times,Entertainment Weekly, and others have some great positive press for Tom’s performance in I Saw the Light, but it is understandable that Hank III (Sheldon) ‘s attacks on a film he won’t watch are the headline grabbers. I wish he’d come out and say he’s just disappointed in the movie as a whole, but then he’d have to watch it.
The Times said, in its round up article on three recent biopics, “The movie is a mess, but see it just for the magnificent Hiddleston who honours Williams’ greatness but also wriggles beyond it: skinny as a rake and rakish as Casanova, he reclaims Williams’ sex appeal. He also channels, almost too well, Williams’ loneliest, most sunless moments.
Thrumming his guitar to Your Cheatin’ Heart, one of Williams’ final songs, Hiddleston is translucent as a wraith, a man already as good as dead. If you need proof of the suffering of a man who could write lyrics like “The moon just went behind the clouds/ to hide it’s face and cry”–spare, like a shard of Japanese verse, and giving clear shape to an intensely private pain–it’s all there in Hiddleston’s haunted, haunting face.”
Hank was a rebel at the time but also religious, with addictions. He was quite the character. Can definitely see Hollywood glamorizing him and making him a lot more simple than he was in real life.
Wow. That’s a great review, thanks for passing it on here TotallyB.
Oh, Hank3 again.
The reason a lot of filmmakers prefer to have actors doing their own singing for biopics is that having them lip-sync to the original can jarr the audience out of the film, and hinder suspension of disbelief. Also because when the music is emotionally relevant you want your actor to be performing it for the arc of the character and the authenticity of their performance.
That’s not to say that lip-syncing never works, but it can make the performance seem oddly artificial. The current vogue for actors to (seem to) ‘do all their own ….’ is probably a factor here.
I saw High Rise again on Friday. I think it’s had a few trims in the orgy scenes. A couple of people walked out half way through. Has anyone else seen it this weekend?
I am surprised there are still occasional walkouts. How can anyone go in to the movie at this point and not know what to expect?
I’ve seen lots of walk-outs reported on Twitter, but I don’t think it’s necessarily the sex/violence – in my screening the people left before we got to that point. I think it’s the pacing and editing that’s making people leave – the very slow build-up can drag, if you’re not picking up on the very black humour in it.
Were they walking out during the orgy scene?
No, before the chaos started. Sorry, didn’t realise how that would read – they were separate observations in my head!
I’m looking forward to that orgy.
Hey Miss J, it isn’t audience participation you know. 🙂
Has been said many times that High-Rise is divisive. There are plenty of rave reviews that came out this week and some very negative one. We know it’s going to be not everyone’s taste. Not surprised at the walkouts. Maybe those don’t know what they walk into, High-Rise isn’t for the fainthearted.
“Hey Miss J, it isn’t audience participation you know.”
ahaahahhaa spidey, you got her good. 🙂
I never finished watching Boyhood. It just dragged on and on. It seems like it not only took 12 yrs to make but also 12 yrs to watch.
My viewing of it was actually interrupted, but I could have made it a point to finish it as I do with most all films I see even if I’m not wild about them, but I was too disappointed with it because of all the overrated hype it got. I wouldn’t be surprised if a lot of Tom’s more naive fans went to see it solely for him and just couldn’t handle it.
I mostly avoided the Zoe/Nina debate. But as has been mentioned it seems it was the blackface issue. Not that Zoe just had a different background. I get that HW3 may not feel a posh Englishman could really inhabit the character. But it’s easier to swallow that TH, a serious actor, could have done a lot of research on his life and the environment he grew up in.
Getting back to the narrow “Hank Williams III is still mad about Tom Hiddleston I saw the Light” topicof this thread:
It was obvious that HW3 made his mind up about the movie as soon as he learned of the casting. I understand he may not have agreed with it, which is his right, but to condemn it now without even having seen it says more about him than probably about Tom’s performance, which has been universally praised.
What Spidey said!!!!
Yes, this exactly. Of course HW3 has every right to voice his opinion. But to keep voicing the same opinion without having seen more than two minutes of the movie is churlish.
Hiddlestoners need to relax. I’m going to see this film and I hope it’s not as ridiculous as the trailer is. The guy is right. Apart from Tom being european he’s not able to lose himself in a part, it’s just Tom Hiddleston pretending to be someone else.
If you think Sheldon is right AND you think the trailer is ridiculous, why are you going to see the film?
(Oh, and is there any phrase more dismissive than
‘” ” need to relax.’ Perhaps I should just stick with “Sheldon needs to relax.”)
“it’s just Tom Hiddleston pretending to be someone else.” Isn’t that what actors do?
“Need to relax” is up there with “get a life” in the annoyance stakes. It suggests that anyone with a comment on anything less than a life or death situation is so shallow. Major geopolitical issues or nothing…
Yes, seems like a strange way to spend one’s time and money.
Tom Hiddleston pretending to be someone else? Hm. Isn’t that the reason why it is called ACTING? Just curious.
“Apart from Tom being european he’s not able to lose himself in a part.”
I think you’re full of crap Anon. I’m not saying TH is perfect and doesn’t have areas he needs to work on, but he also has strengths where he’s been spot on like in the Hollow Crown. And just because Loki is a fictional character of a superhero movie doesn’t mean just anybody can pull off those roles. In fact I see more American actors choke on these type of role because they’ve not had any theater training and have no idea how to act aside from acting like their self.
This is my criticism of most American popular actors and all the would be actors that copy this style. In American film industry you make it mostly if you are likable and more importantly, marketable. So American actors tend to get a lot of roles not because they are the best actor or fit for the part (i.e. Jennifer Lawrence in Joy) but because they will sell more tickets. American acting relies heavily on what I call “personality” acting. A certain actor has a cute personality with a signature trait like Julia Roberts’ laugh, Tom Cruise’ cheeky smile, Ryan Reynolds’ humor facial expressions, Sandra Bullock etc, so we see them playing every role with their trademark personality.
I’m speaking in generalities. I know we have fine actors that are very well trained in the craft. In fact “personality” acting has been retracting in recent years I think because people want to see more authentic performances. Plus actors like the ones I listed above eventually want to play more authentic roles and find that directors and audiences are hesitant to take a chance on them because they’ve only ever seen them act in one style, as their self.
If you think the trailer is ridiculous and that Tom can’t lose himself in a part (I presume you’ve heard the less-than-stellar reviews of the script/direction as well) then why do you want to spend money and two hours of your time watching it?
Seriously asking, anon, since you don’t seem to be a fan of the Hiddles, based on your comments.
*I meant to add:
Whereas despite his weaknesses, Tom has managed to not rely on personality acting. He’s tried out different types of roles from nuanced art house (Archipelago) to Shakespeare and some very challenging roles like Hank. All of which he’s acted very different for each part.
Well you guys proved my point that you need to relax. First of all, I never said that Tom is a bad actor. He’s good, especially when he’s doing Shakespeare, I think it’s his thing. Moreover, about the acting part, of course he is supposed to be someone else, when I see him though all I see is Tom trying… Look at Joaquin Phoenix, you can’t SEE him when he’s acting. To conclude, I am going to see this film because I like Hank Williams, I like Tom, I like watching films so I’m going to give it a chance even though I didn’t like the trailer. I think it’s good to first watch a movie, then have a clear opinion about it
sounds fair 🙂 It’s playing in your town? I’m shit out of luck and will have to wait for video release. I did see it already, but I’d love to watch it again, not bc I particularly liked the movie, but because I liked the performances of everyone.
@jammypants It’s not out where I live yet! I think I’ll have to wait for another month or so 🙂
As for High-Rise, it seems that many British critics quite like the film. I was rather surprised that it got 4 and 5 stars from the reviews of major journals. Is there things that only British can appreciate? Just being curious.
Don’t worry, it also got bad reviews from some of the papers.
I think it’s just a film you either get or don’t.
Okay, then, haha. I have no idea whether I will like it or not, and that’s a part of fun. I read the novel and found Wheatley’s style fascinating and Irons and Hiddles can kill me with their voices. So I will wait with an open mind.
I think Britons do enjoy peculiar.
Here is my favourite Britisher thing that has happened this week. We voted for a publicly funded scientific research vessel costing £200 million to be named Boaty McBoatface. Not The David Attenborough. Not The Endeavour. Boaty McBoatface.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/boaty-mcboatface-could-be-the-name-of-200m-research-vessel-after-public-vote-a6942551.html
Three cheers for Boaty McBoatface’
Ha! I would like to express my full support for this effort.
That sounds like a Bob the Builder character!
Is this very limited release? I can’t seem to find it in my indie theatre in Toronto. :/
Just NY and LA initially, I think. Then, it opens wider in Aptil but still possibly limited release. It will be playing art houses in the Boston area
It opens on coming friday 25th in LA, NYC and Nashville. Then it will go wide on April 1st.
Ohok. I see it is coming out in ciniplex up here on april 1. THank you!
Not wide enough…the only theater I can find in my general area so far is nowhere close to me. It means a long drive (long to go see a movie anyway) and probably not on opening night. Then again, I don’t live somewhere that could be described as a country music target market so I’m not super-surprised.
Hank 3 has a right to his opinions as everyone else. But he made up his mind before the film was even shot and he’s still complaining about it, despite the universal praise that Tom is getting for his performance. That, to me is ignorant, and undermines the credibility of his opinion. His suggestions for actor and director are way off the mark. And while I understand caring deeply about how an icon is being represented, he neglects to see that the whole point of acting is putting on a persona that dissimilar than oneself.
No one can deny that Hiddles is a dead ringer for Hank Williams. That’s a good place to start when considering who’s going to play Hank, don’t you think? Not only does Matthew McConaughey not look like Hank he’s looks way too old to play someone in his twenties.
I have no problem with this casting but want to say that acting is not a lookalike contest. Meryl Streep doesn’t look like thatcher. Forest Whitaker doesn’t look like Amin, it didn’t matter.
I think it’s ridiculous that his nationality is brought up he’s an actor.
I am not convinced this guy is all that on screen though. I find him to be quite a mannered actor in the things I have seen him in. His performance in the night manager is underwhelming. His acting style isn’t as nuanced or multilayered as Olivia Coleman or Hugh laurie. You can see their characters think, hiddles doesn’t seem as organic in his acting. I have a feeling he’s better in the theatre.
In other roles you’ve been able to see him think. I think he’s deliberately opaque in The Night Manager because the character he is playing is hiding what he really thinks the whole time.
Agree
That is my take as well.
The character Tom plays in the Night Manager is of a man trying to hide his true self. Not exactly the type of character you’re supposed to be reading like a book, or that can stretch itself to be obviously “nuanced and multilayered”.
Agreed
My mother was a big Hank Williams, Sr. fan, and I grew listening to his music, so I saw the movie as a tribute to her memory and because Hiddleston is one of my favorites. HW3 should have been more concerned about the movie itself than the casting. While Tom and the other actors were terrific, the movie was poorly paced and about 30 minutes too long. I came away somewhat disappointed.
He said he was unhappy with the director, which means he was concerned about how good of a movie it would be. It’s nice to hear the actors were good in it, though.
Yeah but he only said he was unhappy with the director because he thinks his granddaddy’s film should be directed and acted by the top, most popular directors and American actors.
I don’t have a problem with HW3 stating his criticism. But he doesn’t seem to have an appreciation for how the film business works. Many decisions that go into making a film not only have to do with the casting, writing and direction but also the financing. There’s more smaller factors too like timing, availability, legal rights etc.
Come on Olsen, give us another Chastain moment, please. Every time I see something out of this movie, I only see Olsen how she is hiding behind her ridiculous scarf, whining “Tooooooooooooom” while he doesn’t give a s***. Sad, but true, I have to be honest.
I agree. What was all that nonsense about? What a baby.
I too am curious if Lizzy will give us any eye-rolling moments this week.
Buckle up Nutballs. Olsen will suprise us… Eagerly waiting.
I haven’t seen it yet. I plan to. I have heard mixed reviews. Mostly bad about the writing and EO’s acting. I’ve heard the clips of Tom singing. I grew up listening to Hank Williams at my Grandfather’s knee. He warbles a bit on the yodel, but yodels are challenging.
As for H3, well he is isn’t welcome in some towns because he wears the Confederate flag and thinks it’s okay. He says the worst that happens is some beers are thrown at him. And that is a quote.
Matt McConaughey is way too old to play the role. He also can’t sing worth a damn. As far as the acting, Matt plays loose and comfortable roles, or people that can be easy to get along with. He can’t suppress that charm. Tom can play the steal under the silk. That was probably the difference that got him cast.
Great analysis!
Just seen on Twitter:
Bernie Sanders has been added to Jimmy Kimmel Tuesday night in place of Kristen Bell.
So Bernie and Tom will be on the same night.
That is more than a little awesome!
http://abc.go.com/shows/jimmy-kimmel-live/news/schedule/jkl-schedule-for-03212016
OMG this is too awesome.
Is it taping on Tuesday or airing?
I think it tapes earlier in the day and then airs that night, Cranberry. He has the I Saw the Light premiere that night.
Hmm – could be awesome, or could be a case of Tom (as 2nd guest, I’m assuming) getting his segment cut down to nothing because Bernie is his usual awesome self and his segment ends up running long. Remember The View last fall? Double-edged sword I suppose – more people may watch, but with a big name ahead of Tom he could end up as chopped liver.
Any word on the NY-based shows? Still hoping for Colbert and Corden. Or, and this may be better, saving those talk shows closer to The Night Manager airing in the U.S. He and Hugh will both be in NYC in a few weeks.
I hope someone will post a rundown of his appearances this week. Besides Kimmel and the LA, isn’t he also doing a morning talk show appearance?
He’s going to be on the Today Show, but I can’t remember which days. Oh, just checked. Thursday morning, two different segments.
Oh you’re right Dara. It could go either way. Dam you Bernie! (Still love ya)
The View appearance totally pissed me off. I can understand this happening with Bernie. In fact I feel sorry for anybody coming on after him right now especially a relatively unknown Brit with a small limited release film to promote.
But The View episode was totally amateur hour. They mismanaged and went over time for their lame headlines/politics “chat” segment. What’s especially irritating is that these ladies offer NO valuable insight to anything they talk about and certainly not politics which they were attempting to discuss. In fact usually the whole segment is them interrupting each other and Whoppi ending it saying something that has no relevance at all. Then they went on to have a lame fashion show which was seriously nothing special. They had another segment or two and left Tom to the very end with like four minutes and then had the stupidity to ask him about CHems.
They could have easily cut any of their other segments to make up the time lost from the opening chatting. If they don’t get their act together I don’t see how they can stay on air. I don’t watch this show because of what I described above, but I didn’t expect it to this amateur when I suffered though it for my boy. I was pissed.
Oh, Kaiser–meant to update you.
I don’t think they’re sweeping this under the rug. Coverage in everything from the NY and LA Times to EW to this week’s Parade magazine.
Promo contests for travel to Nashville, movie posters, and an authentic Stetson-style hat made by those great hat makers for the movie.
Even the Academy of Country Music awards Twitter account has been plugging the movie, along with several other country music online players.
SOMEBODY has put some money into promoting this flick.
(Did I mention the digital billboards in Atlanta and LA?)
Ha! The Daily Fail has discovered those old pics of Tom from RADA and Cambridge productions, claiming they have just ‘surfaced’.
They’ve been on the web for years – it’s like the Fail’s only just realised who he is!
He has a hit TV show. They have to cash in on that with click bait. And they give away a major spoiler for the Night Manager in that article.
Thanks for the warning lilac. I was able to stop reading right before the spoiler at the end of the article.
After reading yet another article that has to broadcast every place Tom went to school, I’m beginning to wonder if the whole posh actors debate is intentionally being inflamed by the DM and other rags.
I mean if this were just one of a few articles going over his CV and education I wouldn’t mind. On the surface it’s doesn’t seem dubious, but when you consider the constant referencing every time anything is written about Tom it starts to seem disingenuous.
Not trying to inflame this discussion either. It’s just that compared to other actors or how US actors are treated, his schooling is brought up constantly as opposed to his acting and his film. I guess it is a very note worthy thing true, and at least this article showed how he was acting at Cambridge and didn’t just come out of nowhere. Still, it’s too repetitious and constant to not suspect that it’s ALL really for the agitation and the clicks that follow.
Oops, sorry for not flagging the spoiler – I only read the first paragraph. I guess I’m just finding it a bit amusing how parochial the Fail is. You can be in one of the 3 biggest-grossing films of all time, you can work with legendary film directors, you can be ‘Internet catnip’, you can be nominated and win major acting awards, but the Fail won’t pay attention until you have a hit TV show on the BBC.
Hank III is entitled to his opinion.
He is a spoiled brat who hasn’t even watched the movie yet. Different opinions are great but hey, first watch the movie then say something.
His opinion on the film sure as heck ain’t informed.
Tom H. Is a good actor but there’s just something missing in this performance. The southern twang and drawl isn’t quite there. The swagger of southern country boy traditional masculinity isn’t on full display either. The suave sexy Brit is miscast here.
Hank SR: charismatic, but “a bit weedy and genteel” as jammypants put it.
Swagger and machismo wasn’t the underlying basis of the music he and other artists were putting out in the 30s and 40s.
I’m liking Tommy in army greens. Henley, half-zip… makes no diff as long as its tightly woven over some muscled GUNS. HONK, HONK!
That’s the best thing I can say about episode 5. Won’t express my specific disappointments for those who haven’t seen it. I’m already worried that I’m going to hate how this series ends (even more than I hated the book’s ending).
I hope the change of the ending in the series will improve from the source material. I liked episode 5 actually. It was quite tense. A lot of quite acting from Tommy boy and scary suspicious face from Hugh.
I liked it, too, and I thought David Farr did a decent job in updating the source material. It is not the most innovative adaption but I liked some of the changes he made with the women. And the weapons and refugee… It’s not realistic drama like the Beast of No Nation, but it made me think about what face of evil is.
definitely not realistic..
I think it is getting better with each episode actually. 😕
Ep 5 was the best so far, imo. Now that they are veering away from the book, I find not knowing exactly what is going to happen next actually has me enjoying it more. The plot is still pretty simplistic, but at least I’m not bored by it.
@Dara, I found episode 5 taut and suspenseful and the plot changes freed them from some of the stilted dialogue that had been taken straight from the novel. And the military fatigues just add a whole new dimension
*SPOILERS*
Here’s the issues I had with it:
1. Jed being at the Haven was completely implausible.
2. Jed getting slapped hard by her otherwise loving boyfriend was a stretch. Yes, that’s drama, but I think he could have accused her of betrayal much more subtly and not been so quick to accuse her.
3. Pine’s facial expressions in the Haven pretty much giving away that he’s the one that’s betraying Roper. That may have been Suzanne’s direction to Tom to be that obvious that he’s not on the team, but I think it would have been more effective with a poker face.
4. Corky’s demise was too soon and not dramatic enough. To me, he’s been underutilized throughout the series.
The best things for me was Coleman’s performance, the army greens, so I still enjoyed it, despite my issues noted above.
SPOILER
Jed has always been pretty much implausible. In the book, she gets dragged onto the yacht for no reason, accused, knocked about, knows Pine has disappeared and Roper must have done something to him, but she STILL has sex with him. The series just changes the location.
The fact that the military searched the convoy from the Haven and Pine/Birch and Jed are the only ones who knew the weapons weren’t there gives them away, regardless of expressions. Corky would have known the convoy was a decoy so if he were the rat, the real convoy would have been seized. Same with Sandy. They had done it before.
SPOILERS ABOVE
SPOILER
Correction: Pine/Birch and Jed were the only ones who didn’t know the weapons weren’t there. My mind got ahead of my typing and dropped a negative earlier.
SPOILER
I would agree that it’s gotten more suspenseful the past two episodes. I think Happy Valley has obliterated my prior (lower) standards for BBC drama so my impressions of TNM have been affected. Had I seen it a couple of years ago, I probably would not have been so distracted by the implausibility of some of the plot lines or noted the sometimes corny dialogue.
Also, I’ve come to expect a good BBC drama not relying on sex to help sell it as so often is the case with American dramas. With TNM, I see the Pine sex scenes as a distraction from some of the other problems that plague the adaptation, which may be good in one sense, at least.
The Guardian and the Independent both have articles up about the plausibility of Roper as an arms dealer, Pine’s ability to infiltrate, and whether Burr could do what she is doing. Nothing touches on the implausibility of Jed. She was not plausible in the book at all – they’ve actually improved her a bit. I do hope that the backstory they give her, which will have to be revealed in the next hour, is better than the one in the book. But any thing would be better than her story in the book of Roper rescuing her from gang rape/sex slavery or whatever it was.
The novel has lots of plot holes and some clunky lines, many of which have been directly transported to the show. The essence of it is that it really is nothing more than spy story escapism – Smiley meets Bond with exotic locales and beautiful people mixed in with the gray bureaucrats – and i think it has met that level. It isn’t high art. I don’t see the need for constant comparisons to Happy Valley, which is a different genre entirely, or anything else. If you don’t like it and prefer something else, you don’t like it and prefer something else. It is as simple as that.
SPOILER And there are only 60 minutes left in the series with lots and lots of plot lines to tie up. So, it makes sense for Corky’s storyline to have been resolved with 75 minutes left to go in the entire series. Given that they are in talks for a sequel, we may end up with a cliffhanger. SPOILER
I definitely prefer spy stories more along the lines of 24, Alias, Homeland, TTSP and Spooks. My point being, if they were going to take liberties with the story (which is some instances is fine) I wish they’d made different decisions, that’s all.
Interesting. One of the changes was the elimination of Yvonne, who lived in a hotel with a strip club, and who engaged in wall-banging, closet-banging, laundry-room banging, lots of banging.
I’m with Lilacflowers–they subtracted a LOT of sex from the book storyline. Still not sure how I feel, haven’t watched 5 yet and I’m dancing around like puss’n’ice skates trying to avoid letting my eyes fall on y’all’s spoilers!
Yvonne lived my Pine dream. I’m bitter they left her out. She was sex for all the RIGHT REASONS.
Well my thoughts on this are…
– Hank III can express whatever thoughts he wants to. It’s his right.
– Anyone should be allowed to disagree and/or question the motive.
– I thought Tom was wonderful in this. The first few scenes he seemed a bit uncomfortable, but as the movie progresses, he completely disappears into the role, even his accent eases a bit. He doesn’t sound even the tiniest bit like Hank, but I felt he kept the integrity of the performance fine, at least when I look at old Hank performances. Easily one of Tom’s best performances (for me).
– Hank III will dissent until the cows come home, but judging the entire performance/film on two minutes isn’t exactly a fair assessment.
I agree wholeheartedly with points 1, 2, and 4. I can’t comment on point 3 because I haven’t seen the movie yet, only the trailer and clips. And who would judge a whole performance based just on that? I mean, that would just be ridiculous!