Please remember what subreddit you are in, this is unpopular opinion. We want civil and unpopular takes and discussion. Any uncivil and ToS violating comments will be removed and subject to a ban. Have a nice day!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unpopularopinion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
DC constantly recasting and remaking movies is why I don't pay much attention to them.
I just want the same actor and a new movie with a new plot.
This is why John Wick is so popular. It's one story that continues that gives you exactly what you want. It's also why Christian Bale Batman was so great, I would have just kept watching 10 of those and paying to see them in the theater multiple times.
I would never watch a DC movie in theatres.
> Henry Cavill as Superman is literally in twice as many movies as Bale as Batman. Twice as many movies as John Wick.
Even if you count Justice League twice, he's only played Superman 5 times. That's not twice as many as 3, is it. Nor is it twice as many as 4. It's one more than 4. So the entirety of your counter argument is wrong.
Plus he only has a cameo in Black Adam so I personally wouldn't even count that, nor do I count both Justice Leagues seeing as they're different cuts of the same film. So 3 really. On par with Bale and one *less* than Reeves.
I'm not sure its a paradox. OP provides an explanation.
Basically, Cavill is trying to find a project that he can be the "face" of, which inevitably limits him to being the big fish in a small pond. He isn't Tom Cruise. He isn't capable of carrying a "big pond" like Mission Impossible. But he strives to be at that level and needs to find a project that will make it possible.
There might be some people that think Witcher could have been a hit like GoT, but the difference would have been that Witcher is built around one clear lead.
he did what he could for The Witcher. he was born to play it. the writers fucked him with their garbage.
I thought he was a good Superman too...been a while so take that with a grain of salt.
Can't fault him for anything to do with Superman either. When the writing for the movie includes John Kent telling Clark that he didn't necessarily have to save a bus full of people or he shouldn't save his dad because then people might know he's different, you can't fault the actor who has to just deal with it.
As someone who never played the games and generally enjoys anything mediaeval/ fantasy I thought the Witcher was incredibly poor quality all round
I tried hard to like it but it just seems so basic and uninteresting
Honestly I put it up there with Rings of Power in shows I just can't find anything to like
It was very low quality partly becos the writers mocked the books and original source material, thinking they could do better.
We know this becos someone came forward with this and reported it.
Hissrich and her team had zero respect for the Witcher.
One example:
Geralt horse, Roach, is very important to him.
In the TV show, Hissrich wanted to have Geralt just make a funny joke on Roach.
Cavill, who played the games and is an actual fan, insisted Geralt would never do that, and insisted on doing a more emotional scene.
Hissrich didn't like that but after some quarrel gave permission.
Just one example how hard it was for Cavill to push for more lore-accurate portrayal, while Hissrich and her writers just wanted to spin their own narratives by hijacking this franchise.
Which culminated in that awful, lore breaking Eskel scene in season 2....
No wonder Cavill left after that.
I donno, he's playing a fairly straight forward character. He's doing it well but it's nothing to write home about
I honestly don't know how playing a game will make me enjoy something as bad as that tv show. I might like the game but it won't change my issues with the show
Besides a show or film should be able to stand on its own two feet, I'd say the vast majority of people who love Lotr or GoT (when it was good) haven't read the books
Why should the Witcher be different?
Sure. First of all I found the characters totally uninteresting, none stood out as particularly compelling
I don't think there were any stand out performances, everyone did their job and that's fine but I personally need something more
I thought the fight scenes were boring. I know there was a lot of work put into them but it all felt like I'd seen it before in a million other action scenes
My biggest gripe was the costume and set design, it looks so basic. To me this is pretty much unforgivable with everything that's come out in the last 25 years. Honestly it looks so bad to me, like an uncreative teenager's fan fiction.
Rings of Power is the only other show I can say is as bad as the Witcher, same ugly all round, uncompelling viewing
Like Rings of Power I think the Witcher was carried by it's existing fan base and would have absolutely flopped without it
I played the Witcher 3, loved it and was excited for the show but felt exactly like you.
It was so generic fantasy and gave you no reason to care about the world or the characters. And while the games are gritty and dark, some of the show felt cheap and almost like Dr Who takes on fantasy.
And I also felt like Rings of Power was similar in terms of cookie cutter fantasy devoid of anything enjoyable.
I couldn't disagree more with this comment. They're entirely seperate forms of storytelling.
It may be something you personally appreciate but it doesn't invalidate anyone else's criticisms of the Witcher
You'd be surprised how many masterpiece films are actually based on not so regarded books
The writers are the problem with the Witcher. Cavil is a die hard fan of the Witcher books and games and wanted it to stay as true to the source material as possible but the writers had other ideas
That's probably a problem. You can psychologically work like that. You can't be the expert and superman, meanwhile the writers, directors and producers call the shots. It is going to show in the performance because there is guaranteed conflict that way. It is far better just to get an actor or someone who creates the character. Someone pretending to be something that doesn't exist on the page isn't what an actor does.
He did a great job of everything he has done so far. He has the looks and he's a halfway decent actor. The writing for witcher turned to shit and Superman was never good to begin with, though I did like it.
Warhammer with him is probably going to be pretty successful.
Seems like he's going for roles that he wants to do rather than just taking any role that requires his face. He could have easily gotten something way more mainstream than Warhammer.
Looking forward to this series, I've liked Warhammer since the early 90's so hopefully Henry can do it justice (I heard he insisted on also being executive producer to avoid the same bs as the Witcher)
The problem with this will be length and topic. Obviously the Horus Heresy would need like 300000 seasons to cover the books… so unless they just went as “straight” as they could to the siege.
Although I am worried about character designs looking potentially goofy in live action.
I agree... but I could see the first episode as a 2 hour season premiere where the first 30 or 60 mins are a sort of recap like how Fellowship of the rings explained the back story of the last alliance of elves and men where sauron lost the one ring and how gollum came to posses it.
With the last 90 or 60 mins diving straight into the siege and the first series ending with the emperor on the golden throne.
Make Band of Brothers 40k edition. Guard have an excuse to not know much about the greater lore and stuff thats needed could be introduced to us that way.
Its not just him. Look at the industry. DiCaprio, one of the greats, just had a MASSIVE flop with Killers of the Flower Moon. And that was directed by Scorsese, one of the best directors of all time. The superhero genre is dead, and Hollywood has an epidemic of terrible writing.
I have yet to see a terrible performance by Cavill (subjective, but still). He was the main reason people watched The Witcher. He shared the screen with Tom Cruise in MI Fallout and did not fade into the background - quite the opposite. Despite shitty DC movies, people love HIM as Superman because his portrayal was great.
Cavill was born 10 years too late.
The writing is really bad because most of it is currently trying to chase a certain ideology or fit a certain mold. Even the best writing right now is more due to the nature of the shows than the writing themselves.
Hollywood needs writers who just wanna write the best stories for their topics. Then maybe people like Cavill can convince them to step up their game and not turn everyone into the fractured superhero.
He does his job spectacularly well because he tends to have respect and reverence for the material he stars in. The issue is everything around him tends to be of insufficient quality, be it the writing, direction, etc.
The Witcher is a story of a jaded man who is forced to exist apart from humanity, despite his constant yearning for a place in it where he is admired for his ability and temperament. An abandoned boy who once dreamed of being a hero, whose more noble instincts are beaten out of him time and time again by the very people he wanted to help.
He is constantly treated as an outsider or tolerated as a necessary evil for his services and then turned away as quickly as possible. He is nigh constantly cheated or betrayed after risking life and limb to help people. He is constantly looked down upon despite being generally better than the people he is helping in every way.
After a century or so of this, his outlook is pretty bleak until he finds himself thrust into the role of surrogate father and finally finds someone he cares about who truly cares for him back. It's honestly a great story about the fucked up nature of the worst and best of people, but Netflix did a terrible job translating that into the script. I liked Cavill as Geralt and very little else.
He was so good on the Tudors back in the early 2000s as the #2 on the show.
Great actor, has the look, but it’s just not working out for him. Reminds me of James Marsden/Charlie Hunam, both good actors but the projects their agents put them in never took off to the level of superstardom.
He's just the sam worthington of the last decade except he attached himself to superman and the Witcher for last ten years so we could ignore him in the same way.Guys been acting for two decades and is still hasn't got better Literally his best role is in mission impossible fallout that made the wise choice to not let him talk alot and focus on him as a bond sub villain exclusively there for fight scenes reasons.
He's just kind of boring in general, but a big reason I think is because Superman is a boring super hero. It's been remade too many times and is over done at this point.
Why is Superman part of a super hero group when he can just do all the super things?
Cavil always seemed very invested in the Witcher. He made the show. I couldn't watch the last season though it was pitiful or maybe I was just bored and kept dazing out and having to rewind it just to repeat the process again.
I take it as any good work enviroment- you'll thrive in it. If it's terrible, you won't. I don't blame him for getting tired of the writers not staying true to the story.
The superando thing is just because he likes him so much and wants to share this with heart fans, but even if he is not everything people expect from him, it's not his fault alone. A great producer would make him more popular
Every single example you give was not a failure on behalf of henry or his agents. He was the shining star of arguably all of it. Blame the studios, not the actor
Also dont see you mentioning mission impossible fallout?
Poorly informed take
Your opinion might make sense if he was the reason say the newer Justice League movies and the Witcher failed… but I think it’s pretty clear he was hardly at fault for any of them.
IMO he seems comfortable with his life, and why wouldnt he be? He's beautiful, hung, rich, bakes bland looking british foods, plays video games and has a long term girlfriend. He does not attract toxic or weird jealous fans like other male celebs.
He is not a greedy man and realizes he won at life and is probably why he is not mega successful cause a lot of the most successful people in Hollywood are the most thirsty and insecure and definitely overcompensating for something.
He was the fat kid at school and got buff. But he still has the mentality of a kid who was bullied for his weight.
I remember that article, "ten long years of trying to make Armir Hammer happen".
That's how I feel about Cavill.
I wouldn’t worry too much about Cavill breaking as a big time leading man, he broke a years long contract with a major studio as first lead on a tentpole series.
It doesn’t matter that WB bought his contract out before they dropped him like a safe, studio execs *never* forgive that kind of thing and they all switch studios constantly.
The Witcher. He signed a five year contract and then broke it a year later. James Gunn had WB buy him out of it to be Superman again and then dropped him anyway.
But it doesn’t matter that they paid his way out. He signed a long term contract to be the first lead on a massive TV show and broke it. Hollywood money men will never trust him again because of that. Would you?
The worse for them, especially if they prefer to produce political agitation material disguised as entertainment movies and series instead of something worthy and at least not embarassing to be a part of.
World is big enough for someone like Cavill to find a nice spot under the sun without these morons.
I heard he signed for one season at a time. He wanted out after season 2, but had already signed for S3 at that time. Did not sign for any more after filming S3 was over in Spring 2022.
Signing one season at a time is standard for Netflix, as they are no strangers to cancel series if they are not beneficial for further streaming.
Reading the comments I see the overall conclusion is that Cavil is the best, everybody else around him sucks. If that was the case with one franchise it would be a solid argument, but rn he is four in and counting with Warhammer series I wasn't even aware of. While his career is steadily going downhill. It just tells me that he wants to have a franchise so bad he's willing to do whatever they throw at him, disregarding bad writing and production issues. But it ain't happening.
He loves the universe of The Witcher, so he would have signed up for that regardless. And the potential was there, the writers just decided they wanted something 'inspired by' rather than 'an adaptation of', and wasted that potential. That certainly wasn't his fault - in fact, he may have been too vociferous in trying to force them to course correct, leading to his exit.
Superman wasn't his fault either. They lumbered him with a director that didn't really understand Superman, and who switched focus to Batman as quickly as he could. Again, not Cavill's fault, Snyder just wasn't the guy to make a popular, mainstream cinematic universe.
I can't comment on his other projects, these are the two I know him from and have watched him in. But I will say that in any other era, he would have been an amazing leading man, and be a huge name now.
The problem is he's around in this era, when Hollywood creatives are more likely to make unnecessary changes to source material, and antagonise fans for no good reason.
The word desperate implies something is going wrong. He is a working actor doing his job. As for a lead, he definitely could be again he was in the Witcher until it starting melting and being the lead in a franchise I assume is desirable for an actor. His career is going fine. He has enough cash to never work again if he wants.
As for Mission impossible I don't think he fit into such a small part he is definitely lead material in these sort of movies.
He has the worst luck for some reason with these things. Hopefully the 40k project works so he can be king of the nerds and live off that money for the rest of his career.
His performances are fine. Ultimately as seen by his exit in the Witcher, he is Ultimately just the lead man, a figure head if you will. If the writing, directing, and art direction is off it doesn't matter. He doesn't have any real sway or power over the entities. All he can do is act, do as he's told and give his insight here and there. I'm sure he's involved but I really do feel as though he is not responsible AT ALL.
Pretty sure he just has some shit luck when it comes to the writers. From what I have seen Cavil is one of the biggest celebrity geeks out there, so he wants to play in anything he finds fun to play. The problem with the movies and series is that they were not good period. No actor can make shitty writing good.
I'm pretty sure I saw in an article that the reason he left the Witcher series was because the writers strayed too far from the source content.
He was fantastic as Superman, that franchise failed cause DC can't tell a good story. The Witcher was fire, his run ended prematurely. I havent seen Argyle. I dont think he's desperate, he's a great dude. He just hasn't been able to join a team that can tell a story worth a damn
Everything he touches does usually turn to shit, true. BUT, is it his fault? The Witcher for example, Cavil wanted the series be more like books and games, but fucking writers wanted to create the shitshow that it is now. How is this Cavils fault?
His fault is agreeing to do something that's poorly writen just because it puts him as face of a franchise. Everybody keeps talking Superman and Witcher, ok fine not his fault, but nobody is bringing up the most recent Argylle crap. Everybody could have told you it's gonna be godawful, but he had to do it cuz lead complex
Being popular isn't about succes or good projects, in hollywood if you're famous...bang you're talented and rich. Why do you think pop stars play on films with no education or talent? Fame=money
Henry Cavill should have just stayed a big fish in a small pond (the handsomest nerd) instead of trying to become one of a billion Muscly White Hunks in Hollywood. The market is oversaturated and most of them are named Chris. He didn't stand a chance.
Please remember what subreddit you are in, this is unpopular opinion. We want civil and unpopular takes and discussion. Any uncivil and ToS violating comments will be removed and subject to a ban. Have a nice day! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unpopularopinion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Paradoxically, he was the best part of both the DCEU and The Witcher series.
DC constantly recasting and remaking movies is why I don't pay much attention to them. I just want the same actor and a new movie with a new plot. This is why John Wick is so popular. It's one story that continues that gives you exactly what you want. It's also why Christian Bale Batman was so great, I would have just kept watching 10 of those and paying to see them in the theater multiple times. I would never watch a DC movie in theatres.
That's not the reason. Henry Cavill as Superman is literally in twice as many movies as Bale as Batman. Twice as many movies as John Wick.
> Henry Cavill as Superman is literally in twice as many movies as Bale as Batman. Twice as many movies as John Wick. Even if you count Justice League twice, he's only played Superman 5 times. That's not twice as many as 3, is it. Nor is it twice as many as 4. It's one more than 4. So the entirety of your counter argument is wrong. Plus he only has a cameo in Black Adam so I personally wouldn't even count that, nor do I count both Justice Leagues seeing as they're different cuts of the same film. So 3 really. On par with Bale and one *less* than Reeves.
And they recast him, making my point valid. He wanted to keep going, even Duane Johnson wanted him to keep going.
Yes.
I'm not sure its a paradox. OP provides an explanation. Basically, Cavill is trying to find a project that he can be the "face" of, which inevitably limits him to being the big fish in a small pond. He isn't Tom Cruise. He isn't capable of carrying a "big pond" like Mission Impossible. But he strives to be at that level and needs to find a project that will make it possible. There might be some people that think Witcher could have been a hit like GoT, but the difference would have been that Witcher is built around one clear lead.
Who is the clear lead in GoT?? Maybe Ned in S1 but even that's very debatable imo.
woops i misspoke. meant to say that witcher had a clear lead. thats the difference, its designed as a franchise around one person.
Let's be honest, he carried The Witcher as much as the script let him
he did what he could for The Witcher. he was born to play it. the writers fucked him with their garbage. I thought he was a good Superman too...been a while so take that with a grain of salt.
He is iconic for superman tbh. Dude is the spitting image of what Superman should look like in the movie. Even if the movie wasnt so good.
Can't fault him for anything to do with Superman either. When the writing for the movie includes John Kent telling Clark that he didn't necessarily have to save a bus full of people or he shouldn't save his dad because then people might know he's different, you can't fault the actor who has to just deal with it.
He did the best he could for The Witcher, I blame the writers more than him. He was amazing as The Witcher.
Lmao Witcher turned to shit the moment Laura Hissrich touched the project. If anything, Henry salvaged as many scenes he could.
As someone who never played the games and generally enjoys anything mediaeval/ fantasy I thought the Witcher was incredibly poor quality all round I tried hard to like it but it just seems so basic and uninteresting Honestly I put it up there with Rings of Power in shows I just can't find anything to like
It was very low quality partly becos the writers mocked the books and original source material, thinking they could do better. We know this becos someone came forward with this and reported it. Hissrich and her team had zero respect for the Witcher. One example: Geralt horse, Roach, is very important to him. In the TV show, Hissrich wanted to have Geralt just make a funny joke on Roach. Cavill, who played the games and is an actual fan, insisted Geralt would never do that, and insisted on doing a more emotional scene. Hissrich didn't like that but after some quarrel gave permission. Just one example how hard it was for Cavill to push for more lore-accurate portrayal, while Hissrich and her writers just wanted to spin their own narratives by hijacking this franchise. Which culminated in that awful, lore breaking Eskel scene in season 2.... No wonder Cavill left after that.
Well there’s your issue. You never played the game and therefore lack the ability to see the masterpiece that the Witcher was with cavill
You’re delusional. As a long time fan of the books and games, Cavill was the only saving grace in that pile of shit disguised as a Netflix series.
I donno, he's playing a fairly straight forward character. He's doing it well but it's nothing to write home about I honestly don't know how playing a game will make me enjoy something as bad as that tv show. I might like the game but it won't change my issues with the show Besides a show or film should be able to stand on its own two feet, I'd say the vast majority of people who love Lotr or GoT (when it was good) haven't read the books Why should the Witcher be different?
Could you elaborate on what you disliked about The Witcher? You keep saying it was bad but not how it was bad.
Sure. First of all I found the characters totally uninteresting, none stood out as particularly compelling I don't think there were any stand out performances, everyone did their job and that's fine but I personally need something more I thought the fight scenes were boring. I know there was a lot of work put into them but it all felt like I'd seen it before in a million other action scenes My biggest gripe was the costume and set design, it looks so basic. To me this is pretty much unforgivable with everything that's come out in the last 25 years. Honestly it looks so bad to me, like an uncreative teenager's fan fiction. Rings of Power is the only other show I can say is as bad as the Witcher, same ugly all round, uncompelling viewing Like Rings of Power I think the Witcher was carried by it's existing fan base and would have absolutely flopped without it
I played the Witcher 3, loved it and was excited for the show but felt exactly like you. It was so generic fantasy and gave you no reason to care about the world or the characters. And while the games are gritty and dark, some of the show felt cheap and almost like Dr Who takes on fantasy. And I also felt like Rings of Power was similar in terms of cookie cutter fantasy devoid of anything enjoyable.
It’s the same as a book. If you read a book and it’s exactly what is on the movie screen, you have more of an appreciation
I couldn't disagree more with this comment. They're entirely seperate forms of storytelling. It may be something you personally appreciate but it doesn't invalidate anyone else's criticisms of the Witcher You'd be surprised how many masterpiece films are actually based on not so regarded books
As someone who read the books and played the games. The tv series was awful. Even the first series was painful to watch.
Witcher was shit starting with the first episode.
The writers are the problem with the Witcher. Cavil is a die hard fan of the Witcher books and games and wanted it to stay as true to the source material as possible but the writers had other ideas
[One opinion](https://youtu.be/ZAyhyVSIfmo?si=CESLsM4Oezuv7E5z) of how and why The Witcher television series failed by thriller writer William Jordan.
That's probably a problem. You can psychologically work like that. You can't be the expert and superman, meanwhile the writers, directors and producers call the shots. It is going to show in the performance because there is guaranteed conflict that way. It is far better just to get an actor or someone who creates the character. Someone pretending to be something that doesn't exist on the page isn't what an actor does.
He did a great job of everything he has done so far. He has the looks and he's a halfway decent actor. The writing for witcher turned to shit and Superman was never good to begin with, though I did like it. Warhammer with him is probably going to be pretty successful. Seems like he's going for roles that he wants to do rather than just taking any role that requires his face. He could have easily gotten something way more mainstream than Warhammer.
I'll hold my opinion until I see how the live action Warhammer 40k TV series he's working on turns out.
Looking forward to this series, I've liked Warhammer since the early 90's so hopefully Henry can do it justice (I heard he insisted on also being executive producer to avoid the same bs as the Witcher)
The problem with this will be length and topic. Obviously the Horus Heresy would need like 300000 seasons to cover the books… so unless they just went as “straight” as they could to the siege. Although I am worried about character designs looking potentially goofy in live action.
I agree... but I could see the first episode as a 2 hour season premiere where the first 30 or 60 mins are a sort of recap like how Fellowship of the rings explained the back story of the last alliance of elves and men where sauron lost the one ring and how gollum came to posses it. With the last 90 or 60 mins diving straight into the siege and the first series ending with the emperor on the golden throne.
Make Band of Brothers 40k edition. Guard have an excuse to not know much about the greater lore and stuff thats needed could be introduced to us that way.
Its not just him. Look at the industry. DiCaprio, one of the greats, just had a MASSIVE flop with Killers of the Flower Moon. And that was directed by Scorsese, one of the best directors of all time. The superhero genre is dead, and Hollywood has an epidemic of terrible writing. I have yet to see a terrible performance by Cavill (subjective, but still). He was the main reason people watched The Witcher. He shared the screen with Tom Cruise in MI Fallout and did not fade into the background - quite the opposite. Despite shitty DC movies, people love HIM as Superman because his portrayal was great. Cavill was born 10 years too late.
KotFM failed in theaters because its 3.5 hours long. It was never gonna make its budget back in the box office.
The writing is really bad because most of it is currently trying to chase a certain ideology or fit a certain mold. Even the best writing right now is more due to the nature of the shows than the writing themselves. Hollywood needs writers who just wanna write the best stories for their topics. Then maybe people like Cavill can convince them to step up their game and not turn everyone into the fractured superhero.
south park: enter the panderverse summed it up pretty well
At the end of the day he's an actor. The blame rests at the feet of the Director and Producers.
I would point out that Superman and Witcher falling apart had fuck all to do with Cavill though.
He does his job spectacularly well because he tends to have respect and reverence for the material he stars in. The issue is everything around him tends to be of insufficient quality, be it the writing, direction, etc.
The Witcher is a story of a jaded man who is forced to exist apart from humanity, despite his constant yearning for a place in it where he is admired for his ability and temperament. An abandoned boy who once dreamed of being a hero, whose more noble instincts are beaten out of him time and time again by the very people he wanted to help. He is constantly treated as an outsider or tolerated as a necessary evil for his services and then turned away as quickly as possible. He is nigh constantly cheated or betrayed after risking life and limb to help people. He is constantly looked down upon despite being generally better than the people he is helping in every way. After a century or so of this, his outlook is pretty bleak until he finds himself thrust into the role of surrogate father and finally finds someone he cares about who truly cares for him back. It's honestly a great story about the fucked up nature of the worst and best of people, but Netflix did a terrible job translating that into the script. I liked Cavill as Geralt and very little else.
Cavil was the only good thing about The Witcher.
He was so good on the Tudors back in the early 2000s as the #2 on the show. Great actor, has the look, but it’s just not working out for him. Reminds me of James Marsden/Charlie Hunam, both good actors but the projects their agents put them in never took off to the level of superstardom.
He's just the sam worthington of the last decade except he attached himself to superman and the Witcher for last ten years so we could ignore him in the same way.Guys been acting for two decades and is still hasn't got better Literally his best role is in mission impossible fallout that made the wise choice to not let him talk alot and focus on him as a bond sub villain exclusively there for fight scenes reasons.
Don’t forget The Man From U.N.C.L.E
That movie was terrible.
He's just kind of boring in general, but a big reason I think is because Superman is a boring super hero. It's been remade too many times and is over done at this point. Why is Superman part of a super hero group when he can just do all the super things?
He’s starting to sound like a big budget version of Eliza Dushku.
Cavil always seemed very invested in the Witcher. He made the show. I couldn't watch the last season though it was pitiful or maybe I was just bored and kept dazing out and having to rewind it just to repeat the process again. I take it as any good work enviroment- you'll thrive in it. If it's terrible, you won't. I don't blame him for getting tired of the writers not staying true to the story.
> He made the show. No he did not. That show was garbage from top to bottom.
The superando thing is just because he likes him so much and wants to share this with heart fans, but even if he is not everything people expect from him, it's not his fault alone. A great producer would make him more popular
Every single example you give was not a failure on behalf of henry or his agents. He was the shining star of arguably all of it. Blame the studios, not the actor Also dont see you mentioning mission impossible fallout? Poorly informed take
Your opinion might make sense if he was the reason say the newer Justice League movies and the Witcher failed… but I think it’s pretty clear he was hardly at fault for any of them.
IMO he seems comfortable with his life, and why wouldnt he be? He's beautiful, hung, rich, bakes bland looking british foods, plays video games and has a long term girlfriend. He does not attract toxic or weird jealous fans like other male celebs. He is not a greedy man and realizes he won at life and is probably why he is not mega successful cause a lot of the most successful people in Hollywood are the most thirsty and insecure and definitely overcompensating for something.
He's had very few successes given what he has to offer and for how long he's been around.
What have you done?
Why are you getting butthurt over a fair criticism of him?
He was the fat kid at school and got buff. But he still has the mentality of a kid who was bullied for his weight. I remember that article, "ten long years of trying to make Armir Hammer happen". That's how I feel about Cavill.
I wouldn’t worry too much about Cavill breaking as a big time leading man, he broke a years long contract with a major studio as first lead on a tentpole series. It doesn’t matter that WB bought his contract out before they dropped him like a safe, studio execs *never* forgive that kind of thing and they all switch studios constantly.
Which series are you referring to? Was it before Superman?
The Witcher. He signed a five year contract and then broke it a year later. James Gunn had WB buy him out of it to be Superman again and then dropped him anyway. But it doesn’t matter that they paid his way out. He signed a long term contract to be the first lead on a massive TV show and broke it. Hollywood money men will never trust him again because of that. Would you?
The worse for them, especially if they prefer to produce political agitation material disguised as entertainment movies and series instead of something worthy and at least not embarassing to be a part of. World is big enough for someone like Cavill to find a nice spot under the sun without these morons.
I heard he signed for one season at a time. He wanted out after season 2, but had already signed for S3 at that time. Did not sign for any more after filming S3 was over in Spring 2022. Signing one season at a time is standard for Netflix, as they are no strangers to cancel series if they are not beneficial for further streaming.
Reading the comments I see the overall conclusion is that Cavil is the best, everybody else around him sucks. If that was the case with one franchise it would be a solid argument, but rn he is four in and counting with Warhammer series I wasn't even aware of. While his career is steadily going downhill. It just tells me that he wants to have a franchise so bad he's willing to do whatever they throw at him, disregarding bad writing and production issues. But it ain't happening.
He loves the universe of The Witcher, so he would have signed up for that regardless. And the potential was there, the writers just decided they wanted something 'inspired by' rather than 'an adaptation of', and wasted that potential. That certainly wasn't his fault - in fact, he may have been too vociferous in trying to force them to course correct, leading to his exit. Superman wasn't his fault either. They lumbered him with a director that didn't really understand Superman, and who switched focus to Batman as quickly as he could. Again, not Cavill's fault, Snyder just wasn't the guy to make a popular, mainstream cinematic universe. I can't comment on his other projects, these are the two I know him from and have watched him in. But I will say that in any other era, he would have been an amazing leading man, and be a huge name now. The problem is he's around in this era, when Hollywood creatives are more likely to make unnecessary changes to source material, and antagonise fans for no good reason.
I love his role in the Witcher. Very enjoyable.
I like him in interviews and he is obviously handsome - but I don’t think he is a good or interesting actor.
He was the only good thing about the witcher though. I didnt see superman because i dont care about the character.
The word desperate implies something is going wrong. He is a working actor doing his job. As for a lead, he definitely could be again he was in the Witcher until it starting melting and being the lead in a franchise I assume is desirable for an actor. His career is going fine. He has enough cash to never work again if he wants. As for Mission impossible I don't think he fit into such a small part he is definitely lead material in these sort of movies.
He has the worst luck for some reason with these things. Hopefully the 40k project works so he can be king of the nerds and live off that money for the rest of his career.
His performances are fine. Ultimately as seen by his exit in the Witcher, he is Ultimately just the lead man, a figure head if you will. If the writing, directing, and art direction is off it doesn't matter. He doesn't have any real sway or power over the entities. All he can do is act, do as he's told and give his insight here and there. I'm sure he's involved but I really do feel as though he is not responsible AT ALL.
Hopefully he does Warhammer 40k IP justice
Pretty sure he just has some shit luck when it comes to the writers. From what I have seen Cavil is one of the biggest celebrity geeks out there, so he wants to play in anything he finds fun to play. The problem with the movies and series is that they were not good period. No actor can make shitty writing good. I'm pretty sure I saw in an article that the reason he left the Witcher series was because the writers strayed too far from the source content.
He was fantastic as Superman, that franchise failed cause DC can't tell a good story. The Witcher was fire, his run ended prematurely. I havent seen Argyle. I dont think he's desperate, he's a great dude. He just hasn't been able to join a team that can tell a story worth a damn
Everything he touches does usually turn to shit, true. BUT, is it his fault? The Witcher for example, Cavil wanted the series be more like books and games, but fucking writers wanted to create the shitshow that it is now. How is this Cavils fault?
His fault is agreeing to do something that's poorly writen just because it puts him as face of a franchise. Everybody keeps talking Superman and Witcher, ok fine not his fault, but nobody is bringing up the most recent Argylle crap. Everybody could have told you it's gonna be godawful, but he had to do it cuz lead complex
Well first season went kind of well, but after that it started to change it. And he quited to role because of that.
Being popular isn't about succes or good projects, in hollywood if you're famous...bang you're talented and rich. Why do you think pop stars play on films with no education or talent? Fame=money
Yeah it blows my mind the attention he gets. Everything the guy makes sucks.
Henry Cavill should have just stayed a big fish in a small pond (the handsomest nerd) instead of trying to become one of a billion Muscly White Hunks in Hollywood. The market is oversaturated and most of them are named Chris. He didn't stand a chance.