+1
I'm going to have to agree with Yoda and The Presitige but I am stuck in the middle of two different things here. Yoda, I agree with you on your argument that Statham does have the prerequisites to play Agent 47 and as you said earlier, maybe it did make too much sense to cast him. Everyone expected Statham to play Agent 47 however, in my opinion, I think it came down to Statham as the action hero and that his style in that genre of acting would be all too familiar. Statham isn't a bad actor. I like him. Mocoloco, How 'bout we remember his title role in Snatch and his smaller role as Bacon in Lock Stock...instead of jumping the gun and darting our eyes towards the lesser quality films he has made such as The Transporter One and Two and Crank.
I loved Statham in Snatch, I thought he was great and after that I was really looking forward to see him in more roles. Unfortunately it almost seems as if he has focused more of his...focus...on mainstream action films. Despite that, I think he plays the role well and is a good action star. With that said, I'm am relieved he was not cast as Agent 47 specifically because if he was, I would know what to expect as in acting. Statham as the action hero is one type of acting and if he was cast as Agent 47, I think we could all safely say he would present his character in the same manner of acting as he did for Frank Martin in the Transporter and the sequel. Did he mix it up in Crank, yes, but ultimately was it the same acting? Yes. Don't get me wrong however, I still think Statham is a good actor.
Timothy Olyphant I feel is a more dynamic actor. Due to that fact, I can't expect what to see from him. He hasn't defined himself as an actor adjusted to a single role, so unlike Statham, I'm intrigued as well and a bit worried as to what Olyphant will bring to the table as Agent 47. Hopefully he can pull of the action character and satisfy our expectations of him.
Last edited by PrometheusFG; 07-23-07 at 01:39 AM.
Reply to Topic
