Mr. Rochester No. 2

  • honey
09 Oct 2004 14:41 #661 by honey
Replied by honey on topic Re:Mr. Rochester No. 2
I think Nat would do wonderful in what ever role he plays. I have the film Wuthering Heights on Dvd, the version with Ralph Fiennes playing Heathcliff. And he makes a wonderful Heathcliff, sorry I'm a bit parcial to Ralph as I'm with Nat.


Please Log in to join the conversation.

09 Oct 2004 21:32 #670 by Natalia
Replied by Natalia on topic Re:Mr. Rochester No. 2
I do know there is more to Wuthering Heights, whilst Nat may be more suitable age wise, I would hate to see him play such an embittered and sad a character as the older Heathcliff became, so obsessed by revenge for the death of his love.

Please Log in to join the conversation.

10 Oct 2004 05:28 #672 by webmistress
Replied by webmistress on topic Re:Mr. Rochester No. 2
Embittered? Well "driven" is the better word for it. Btw. the young Heathcliff appears to be also driven and quite ruthless to me. I've been wondering as to why most people don't see that. His character actually doesn't change much over that novel. He's developing into what he was (or better what he's been made into).

And I for my own part do like to watch Nat in something elese than that "tall dark and handsome with romantic ambitions" clichee some seem to favour. What I'd really love to see again is a man with real problems (Predenting to be Judith was brilliant or Trust). Romantic roles have the tendency to be quite flat. Baddies are so much more fun for an actor!

I do hope to see more like that in the future.


Post edited by: admin, at: 2004/10/10 07:34

"I don't know. I need help. I'm sorry. And something else. [...] I forgot it."
~ Armand Gamache

"If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck." A simplified version of Occam's razor.

Please Log in to join the conversation.

  • Debbie
10 Oct 2004 12:40 #679 by Debbie
Replied by Debbie on topic Re:Mr. Rochester No. 2
I'll never get tired of seeing Nat in a "tall, dark, and handsome/romantic" role, but because he is an actor, it would be cool to explore something in which he "makes waves". There is something scintillating about this, especially in a movie/project, because it's "acting", after all. ;)

Please Log in to join the conversation.

10 Oct 2004 13:50 #682 by Calencir
Replied by Calencir on topic Re:Mr. Rochester No. 2
You never know what can really be drawn out of a talented performer when coupled with the "right" director and the "right" script. It is trul wonderful when all the elements fall in to place. While disturbing, I was most impressed with Charlise Thieron's (please forgive my spelling) portayal of an female serial killer in Monster. Such a gorgeous woman! She really brought out her craft in that one though like I said the movie was disturbing. It would be interesting to see Nat break out of the "cad" roles or the dashing lord of the manor type. I really think he can do more.

Obedient women are not remembered in history.

Please Log in to join the conversation.

19 Apr 2005 09:36 #1109378043 by Emma
Replied by Emma on topic Re:Mr. Rochester No. 2
Filmwise, I think Nat faces the same prejudice in Hollywood as most English male actors do. Americans love to see a tall dark handsome Englishman playing either the dashing hero, the bumbling fool or the evil villain. Take Hugh Grant, for example. I've seen a good deal of his films and he plays the exactly the same character in each of them, the lovable, bumbling Englishman (albeit a good looking one!) Colin Firth seems to be landed in the same category, although less bumbling idiot, more dashing hero. Its a shame, really. Even in the Lion King they had to get an Englishman (Jeremy Irons) to play the baddie!!!!

I might be off the mark here, just something that I have noticed over the years.

Post edited by: Emma, at: 2005/04/19 11:36

Please Log in to join the conversation.

Moderators: webmistress
Time to create page: 0.041 seconds

We use cookies on our website. Read our Policy