Tom Hanks

Nebit

Does anyone else feel the same as me when i say im fed up with tom hanks playing the same role in virtually every movie???

He always plays the good guy! i would like to see him play a bad guy more often because i think he could pull it off.
im not critising his acting, just the roles he picks.

What do you all think??

liah

I just want more of his classic films. Bring back Turner and Hooch!

][cEMAN**

Are you sure he could play a bad guy?

kaimera

Charlie Wilson wasn't necessarily a good guy!

the whole year inn

Money Pit anyone?

Driver 8

Ladykillers? *shudder*

faceman

Funny, they used to say the same about Henry Fonda. (Although he is a far better actor than Hanks) Then in '69 Fonda played the villain in "Once Upon A Time in the West" (He did to be fair, want to play a villain for a change) and he did an awesome job on it. (still considered one of the best villains in film history)

Maybe Hanks can surprise is yes? (yeah right!)

humanji

I'd say he could be a brilliant bad guy given the right role. I see him kind of the same way as I see Tom Cruise, who was pretty good playing a bad guy in Collateral that you'd normally wouldn't of associated him with.

I can picture Hanks in a kind of psychotic antagonist like Michael Keaton in Pacific Heights.

RoadKillTs

That's the thing about some of these actors, they get stuck with the same role all the time.
It's hard to imagine him been a bad guy the same way it's hard to imagine Ardal O'Hanlon been serious.

foxyboxer

Carl Hanratty in Catch me if you can?

"Knock, Knock" "Who's there?" "Go f**k yourself"
or on the RTE showing
"Knock, Knock" "Who's there?" "Go fudge yourself"

Jimmy Dugan in A League of their Own? Certainly not a good guy but funny as hell
Michael Sullivan in Road to Perdition

abouttobebanned

I think he's a brilliant actor, and I think a lot of people probably wouldn't be too comfortable seeing him play a nasty character. Strange as that may sounds it can sometimes do more harm than good for an actor to take a big risk with a role choice.

Kipperhell

kaimera wrote: »

Charlie Wilson wasn't necessarily a good guy!

Certainly not. Still can't get over how they try to make him a good guy in the movie when in truth he lied to the American people and took part in an illegal war. He should have been done for war crimes

DinnyBatman

faceman wrote: »

Funny, they used to say the same about Henry Fonda. (Although he is a far better actor than Hanks) Then in '69 Fonda played the villain in "Once Upon A Time in the West" (He did to be fair, want to play a villain for a change) and he did an awesome job on it. (still considered one of the best villains in film history)

Maybe Hanks can surprise is yes? (yeah right!)

Who exactly considered this? Average acting in an average film IMO.

irish_bob

Kipperhell wrote: »

Certainly not. Still can't get over how they try to make him a good guy in the movie when in truth he lied to the American people and took part in an illegal war. He should have been done for war crimes

the man helped the afghans defeat the soviets which helped end the cold war and free eastern europe

as for tom hanks , i suppose he is not what you would call a truly great actor but i just like the guy and he has the midas touch for choosing films , he is rarely in what you would call a stinker

DinnyBatman

DinnyBatman wrote: »

Who exactly considered this? Average acting in an average film IMO.

Most respected consider the film to be one of the greatest westerns ever made and Henry Fonda's performance to be on of the most impressive acting performances in cinema.

There has been a lot written about the film with pretty much everyone agreeing that it is in the top 10 westerns of all time. Alex Cox heaps praise atop the film in his writing on the genre.

][cEMAN**

*cough*

foxyboxer

irish_bob wrote: »

, he is rarely in what you would call a stinker

Angels & Demons, nearly fell asleep....

MikeC101

foxyboxer wrote: »

Angels & Demons, nearly fell asleep....

I actually did fall asleep during it. In the cinema. I think the only time that's ever happened to me.

Admittedly I was a bit tired, I dozed off and missed about ten minutes of it. Made no real difference to following the plot.

Naos

foxyboxer wrote: »

Angels & Demons, nearly fell asleep....

He said rarely, not never.

I like Hanks and reckon he could do well as a bad guy, purely because we're so used to seeing him as a good guy.

Similar to Cruise in Collateral, it's unexpected.

ziedth

I argue that Forrest Gump was pure Evil :pac::pac::pac:

Seriously, I'd love to see him as a bad guy too. it had a good result for can be said for Tom Cruise (as mentioned) and Robin Williams.

Give the right role could be at the very least interesting.

bnt

What about Road to Perdition, in which Hanks plays a mob enforcer? I actually got it on DVD but have yet to watch it.

I listen to the NPR radio show Wait, Wait ... Don't Tell Me! (by podcast), and Tom was the guest a couple of years ago. He sounded a bit sick of always being the good guy, and when asked about that, he had the opportunity to play the bad guy for a minute. You can listen to it here. "DAMN YOU TO HELL!" he says at one point ...

Riddle101

I can't really see him as a Villian, he dosen't look threatening, and he dosen't have that villianous look. Not to mention his movie's tend to be, more about drama then actually who's a villain and who's a good guy. I mean Da Vinci Code and Angels and Demon's might be agruable but it still dosen't do it.

foxyboxer

Naos wrote: »

He said rarely, not never.

In recent years,
Angels and Demons
The Ladykillers
The Da Vinci Code
The Terminal

IMO all stinkers.

I'm a Tom Hanks fan but it seems he's been settling into roles just for the paychecks. In the past, a new Tom Hanks movie meant something but now it doesn't excite as it did before.

rednik

bnt wrote: »

What about Road to Perdition, in which Hanks plays a mob enforcer? I actually got it on DVD but have yet to watch it.



Well hurry up and watch it you will not be disappointed. He got no oscar but in my opinion probably his best role in his best film. Nothing else comes close. Downhill all the way for the last few years for Hanks.

Sir Gallagher

Yeah it's a real shame to see the roles Hanks played these days, the man was a brilliant comedic actor in his day, The Burbs has to be one of my favourite films of all time.

Chumpski

foxyboxer wrote: »

Naos wrote: »

He said rarely, not never.

In recent years,
Angels and Demons
The Ladykillers
The Da Vinci Code
The Terminal

IMO all stinkers.

I'm a Tom Hanks fan but it seems he's been settling into roles just for the paychecks. In the past, a new Tom Hanks movie meant something but now it doesn't excite as it did before.

I think The Terminal is a great movie. Angels and Demons was not too bad either.

komodosp

I think the man could easily play a bad guy.

I think he's a brilliant actor, and I think a lot of people probably wouldn't be too comfortable seeing him play a nasty character.

I think his job as an actor would be to convince them. I would never have pictured him as an army officer or sergeant or whatever he was before Saving Private Ryan.

Sir Gallagher

Chumpski wrote: »

I think The Terminal is a great movie. Angels and Demons was not too bad either.

No... just..no.

AARRRGH

Riddle101 wrote: »

I can't really see him as a Villian, he dosen't look threatening, and he dosen't have that villianous look. Not to mention his movie's tend to be, more about drama then actually who's a villain and who's a good guy. I mean Da Vinci Code and Angels and Demon's might be agruable but it still dosen't do it.

I reckon he could shave his head and play, get loads of nazi prison tattoos and play an old guy in the aryan brotherhood.

SirLemonhead

Sir Gallagher wrote: »

Yeah it's a real shame to see the roles Hanks played these days, the man was a brilliant comedic actor in his day, The Burbs has to be one of my favourite films of all time.

Yeah same, was hoping someone would mention it

irish_bob

Naos wrote: »

He said rarely, not never.

I like Hanks and reckon he could do well as a bad guy, purely because we're so used to seeing him as a good guy.

Similar to Cruise in Collateral, it's unexpected.

collaterol was tom cruises best ever role IMO , cant understand how jamie foxx was the one who got the oscar nomination but tom cruise always comes across as a cold blooded bastard , not the case with tom hanks so i dont know if he would be able to pull the bad guy role off

irish_bob

Sir Gallagher wrote: »

No... just..no.

agree , the terminal is the definition of passable , you can tell its a spielberg movie , very similar to catch me if you can in ways only not near as good , its also seriously dragged down by the increibly annoying and pointless catherine zeta jones charechter

tman

rednik wrote: »

bnt wrote: »

What about Road to Perdition, in which Hanks plays a mob enforcer? I actually got it on DVD but have yet to watch it.

Well hurry up and watch it you will not be disappointed. He got no oscar but in my opinion probably his best role in his best film. Nothing else comes close. Downhill all the way for the last few years for Hanks.

Agreed. Road to Perdition is a fantastic movie, but I wouldn't consider his character to be a bad guy just because he's in the mob...
Must watch it again for Paul Newman's

"none of us will see heaven"

line... Gives me goosebumps every time!

I would definitely love to see Hanks in a proper evil bastard role

flyingbassman1

Many actors stick to the role that they are comfortable... nothing wrong with that

FourFourRED

Serious trolling here! Now two Tom Hanks threads from years ago open :-P

Sam Kade

' wrote:

[cEMAN**;62935053']Are you sure he could play a bad guy?

He did in film clip I saw recently, he seemed to be a 1920's gangster shooting people with a machine gun.

Sam Kade

faceman wrote: »

Funny, they used to say the same about Henry Fonda. (Although he is a far better actor than Hanks) Then in '69 Fonda played the villain in "Once Upon A Time in the West" (He did to be fair, want to play a villain for a change) and he did an awesome job on it. (still considered one of the best villains in film history)

Maybe Hanks can surprise is yes? (yeah right!)

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=cHI6Hl7FUqA

Sam Kade

faceman wrote: »

Funny, they used to say the same about Henry Fonda. (Although he is a far better actor than Hanks) Then in '69 Fonda played the villain in "Once Upon A Time in the West" (He did to be fair, want to play a villain for a change) and he did an awesome job on it. (still considered one of the best villains in film history)

Maybe Hanks can surprise is yes? (yeah right!)

Sad Professor

Sorry, guys, 2009 wants its thread back.