ST Alpha - "But it has to be as foolish to automatically assume someone would be lousy as it is to automatically assume someone would be great." (Reading a Post)

SlickerTalk
Search Archives
The Leaderboard
The FAQ

Down to Post

Backboards:

Posts: 153

In response to "I think David means in a broader sense, whereas that is decidedly not true of Hardy. -- nm" by Beryllium

But it has to be as foolish to automatically assume someone would be lousy as it is to automatically assume someone would be great.

Posted by Max May 20 '15, 16:50

Warrior-Hardy and Lawless-Hardy are niche performances that work in one place but not in this movie. Not based on theoretical Tom Hardy, but based on actual Tom Hardy in this actual movie, pretty much anyone would have been better, including Butler.

Responses:

Hardy has been tremendous in almost everything. Butler has been at best tolerable in most of his work. - David May 20, 16:56 3
- This is a Monty Hall casting situation. I'm telling you I've already seen Tom Hardy behind door #1, and I know my odds are better gambling on door #2. -- nm - Max May 20, 16:59 2
  - And *I* am telling *you* that you picked the goat behind door #2. -- nm - David May 20, 17:01 1
    - Because I know a goat would work harder than Tom Hardy did in this movie. -- nm - Max May 20, 17:03

Post a message top

But it has to be as foolish to automatically assume someone would be lousy as it is to automatically assume someone would be great.

Replies are disabled on threads older than 7 days.