|
|
Post by futuretrunks on May 29, 2020 22:29:00 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on May 29, 2020 22:38:32 GMT
I think I mentioned in another thread that Gosling is probably his era's Jeff Bridges. A talented leading man that's well liked by the Oscars, but not really a big or consistent box office draw in his own right. But like Bridges, Gosling will probably never stop getting opportunities. The severe box office underperformance of both First Man and Blade Runner 2049 might hurt another actor more, but like a modern day Bridges (for whom box offoce underperformers were a constant thing in his career), Gosling just shrugs it off and gets offered another big studio project. This project is an established IP that has proved popular in the past, so it'll probably do well if it's well made, regardless of Gosling's lack of drawing power with audiences. But even if it flops, like the new Bridges he is, he'll keep working like nothing happened  |
|
|
|
Post by jakesully on May 29, 2020 22:41:40 GMT
Now that is what I'm talking about! Gosling is going to crush this role.
|
|
|
|
Post by stephen on May 29, 2020 22:46:20 GMT
I think I mentioned in another thread that Gosling is probably his eras Jeff Bridges. A talented leading man that's well liked by the Oscars, but not really a big or consistent box office draw in his own right. But like Bridges, Gosling will probably never stop getting opportunities. The severe box office underperformance of both First Man and Blade Runner 2049 might hurt another actor more, but like a modern day Bridges (for whom box offoce underperformers were a constant thing), Gosling just shrugs it off and gets offered another big studio project. Because Gosling plays it smart. Blade Runner 2049 was touted as more of a Villeneuve endeavor (and obviously being the sequel to a cult-classic sci-fi film) than a Ryan Gosling vehicle. And First Man was the second collaboration the two did, right on the heels of the very successful La La Land (and it felt like a Chazelle joint more than a Gosling one). Gosling has been attaching himself to auteurs right and left, building that cred, and even if the films underperform, they don't really hurt him as much as they do the directors. And even then, Villeneuve and Chazelle are still doing very well despite those films undershooting at the B.O. When all is said and done, it might be the Goose who comes away from his generation with the best filmography. I'd say he's already there, but he might make it unquestionable by the end. |
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on May 29, 2020 22:50:37 GMT
I think I mentioned in another thread that Gosling is probably his eras Jeff Bridges. A talented leading man that's well liked by the Oscars, but not really a big or consistent box office draw in his own right. But like Bridges, Gosling will probably never stop getting opportunities. The severe box office underperformance of both First Man and Blade Runner 2049 might hurt another actor more, but like a modern day Bridges (for whom box offoce underperformers were a constant thing), Gosling just shrugs it off and gets offered another big studio project. Because Gosling plays it smart. Blade Runner 2049 was touted as more of a Villeneuve endeavor (and obviously being the sequel to a cult-classic sci-fi film) than a Ryan Gosling vehicle. And First Man was the second collaboration the two did, right on the heels of the very successful La La Land (and it felt like a Chazelle joint more than a Gosling one). Gosling has been attaching himself to auteurs right and left, building that cred, and even if the films underperform, they don't really hurt him as much as they do the directors. And even then, Villeneuve and Chazelle are still doing very well despite those films undershooting at the B.O. Good points. You also forgot to mention white privilege (and despite the laugh, I'm serious. A non-white leading man with a box office track record as shaky as Gosling's would be in leading man movie jail with studios right now). Benicio Del Toro flopped with his version of The Wolfman and wasn't seen carrying studio films again. |
|
|
|
Post by stephen on May 29, 2020 22:54:25 GMT
Because Gosling plays it smart. Blade Runner 2049 was touted as more of a Villeneuve endeavor (and obviously being the sequel to a cult-classic sci-fi film) than a Ryan Gosling vehicle. And First Man was the second collaboration the two did, right on the heels of the very successful La La Land (and it felt like a Chazelle joint more than a Gosling one). Gosling has been attaching himself to auteurs right and left, building that cred, and even if the films underperform, they don't really hurt him as much as they do the directors. And even then, Villeneuve and Chazelle are still doing very well despite those films undershooting at the B.O. Good points. You also forgot to mention white privilege (and despite the laugh, I'm serious. A non-white leading man with a box office track record as shaky as Gosling's would be in leading man movie jail with studios right now). Well, that goes without saying. But Gosling still had to build up a lot of goodwill; Taylor Kitsch proved that even a good-looking white man can get bodied out of the fast lane with a quickness, if you don't produce results. Gosling's pathway has been exactly what actors of his generation should be doing (and I'd argue Michael B. Jordan is the one most closely following his modus operandi). Build enough indie cred, garner strong support in the industry and audiences, then make the jump to mainstream projects that fit your brand. You can be inventive and offbeat like Robert Pattinson, but he had to do his time in tween franchise purgatory and build up a bankable fanbase. |
|
|
|
Post by futuretrunks on May 29, 2020 23:07:49 GMT
Because Gosling plays it smart. Blade Runner 2049 was touted as more of a Villeneuve endeavor (and obviously being the sequel to a cult-classic sci-fi film) than a Ryan Gosling vehicle. And First Man was the second collaboration the two did, right on the heels of the very successful La La Land (and it felt like a Chazelle joint more than a Gosling one). Gosling has been attaching himself to auteurs right and left, building that cred, and even if the films underperform, they don't really hurt him as much as they do the directors. And even then, Villeneuve and Chazelle are still doing very well despite those films undershooting at the B.O. Good points. You also forgot to mention white privilege (and despite the laugh, I'm serious. A non-white leading man with a box office track record as shaky as Gosling's would be in leading man movie jail with studios right now). Benicio Del Toro flopped with his version of The Wolfman and wasn't seen carrying studio films again. I get what you're saying, but I think Gosling's insulation stems more from how he rose up doing small-budget indie films that were mostly profitable, so by the time he stepped into mainstream studio fare, he'd had almost a decade of being a lead in smaller stuff. Someone like Fassbender only broke out in 2008 with Hunger and did a lot of supporting work in the ensuing years, so his profile never felt cemented as a leading man. Also, who else could they cast for more reliable bankability? Driver or Gyllenhaal or McAvoy are as liable to appear in flops/underperformers as Gosling. |
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on May 29, 2020 23:07:54 GMT
Good points. You also forgot to mention white privilege (and despite the laugh, I'm serious. A non-white leading man with a box office track record as shaky as Gosling's would be in leading man movie jail with studios right now). Well, that goes without saying. But Gosling still had to build up a lot of goodwill; Taylor Kitsch proved that even a good-looking white man can get bodied out of the fast lane with a quickness, if you don't produce results. Gosling's pathway has been exactly what actors of his generation should be doing (and I'd argue Michael B. Jordan is the one most closely following his modus operandi). Build enough indie cred, garner strong support in the industry and audiences, then make the jump to mainstream projects that fit your brand. You can be inventive and offbeat like Robert Pattinson, but he had to do his time in tween franchise purgatory and build up a bankable fanbase. is the face of a huge adult franchise in Creed. I don't think he would get the luxury of skipping from movie to movie like Gosling without that kind of bulletproof insurance policy behind him. Lakeith Stanfield is an interesting leading man in the indie arena, but I think whomever the team is behind his career, know they can't stick him in big studio movies without having some type of insurance if one movie flops. Taylor Kitsch was a TV guy they tried to fastrack into Tom Cruise level movie stardom in one year. It was kinda ridiculous, and you can see why even Hollywood realised it was a terrible idea in the first place. |
|
|
|
Post by futuretrunks on May 29, 2020 23:15:59 GMT
Good points. You also forgot to mention white privilege (and despite the laugh, I'm serious. A non-white leading man with a box office track record as shaky as Gosling's would be in leading man movie jail with studios right now). Well, that goes without saying. But Gosling still had to build up a lot of goodwill; Taylor Kitsch proved that even a good-looking white man can get bodied out of the fast lane with a quickness, if you don't produce results. Gosling's pathway has been exactly what actors of his generation should be doing (and I'd argue Michael B. Jordan is the one most closely following his modus operandi). Build enough indie cred, garner strong support in the industry and audiences, then make the jump to mainstream projects that fit your brand. You can be inventive and offbeat like Robert Pattinson, but he had to do his time in tween franchise purgatory and build up a bankable fanbase. Yeah. Or even look at Chris Hemsworth. After Rush, Blackhat, and In the Heart of the Sea underperformed, he stopped getting offers for prestigy stuff. He's had to pivot into bland franchise work nobody else really wants (Men in Black: International), a Netflix John Wick-esque ripoff (Extraction) more in line with Dwayne Johnson's M.O., stuff nobody saw (12 Strong), more Thor, etc. Michael B. Jordan has the right idea, but something has to hit that isn't as pre-established as Rocky/Marvel if he's going to take the next step. The O. Russell thing sounds like a good idea, though the Methuselah Boyle thing seems odd. |
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on May 29, 2020 23:16:15 GMT
This is a no-brainer great move - I posted recently about where you'd like to see "Great Actors End Up At The End Of Their Career" - nobody cared for that thread ........ but where I would like to see great actors go in their peak is horror.
Horror because again it speaks to the moment, also because it can attract writers and directors who want to push boundaries. It also bucks the historical precedent in Hollywood.....sort of like Ethan Hawke (not a "great" actor, popping up in Sinister and The Purge was interest peaking....) ...the fact that it's Gosling pitch is even better.....
Side note: The white privilege random mentions is getting tiresome and dubious in every actor thread ....
|
|
|
|
Post by stephen on May 29, 2020 23:17:18 GMT
Michael B Jordan is the face of a huge adult franchise in Creed. I don't think he would get the luxury of skipping from movie to movie like Gosling without that kind of bulletproof insurance policy behind him. Lakeith Stanfield is an interesting leading man in the indie arena, but I think whomever the team is behind his career, know they can't stick him in big studio movies without having some type of insurance if one movie flops. Taylor Kitsch was a TV guy they tried to fastrack into Tom Cruise level movie stardom in one year. It was kinda ridiculous, and you can see why even Hollywood realised it was a terrible idea in the first place. He's the face of Creed now, but that wasn't his first role with Coogler (who is essentially the Refn to Jordan's Gosling; the auteur up-and-comer who started a strong creative partnership with his leading man), and he'd built up some strong goodwill going all the way back to The Wire. Jordan had to make his bones in TV (one of which is considered by many to be the greatest series of all time), and had a strong run starting with Chronicle, but even he had to find a previously existing franchise and secure his spot before blazing a new trail with something completely original ( Methuselah, perhaps). Besides, it's still unclear whether or not there will be a third Creed film, or if Jordan's even interested in going back to that well. Stanfield is going to have to build up his rep. He's a bit too eclectic at the moment, but I can definitely see him landing that role in the next decade to see him get that awards push. |
|
|
|
Post by futuretrunks on May 29, 2020 23:19:57 GMT
Well, that goes without saying. But Gosling still had to build up a lot of goodwill; Taylor Kitsch proved that even a good-looking white man can get bodied out of the fast lane with a quickness, if you don't produce results. Gosling's pathway has been exactly what actors of his generation should be doing (and I'd argue Michael B. Jordan is the one most closely following his modus operandi). Build enough indie cred, garner strong support in the industry and audiences, then make the jump to mainstream projects that fit your brand. You can be inventive and offbeat like Robert Pattinson, but he had to do his time in tween franchise purgatory and build up a bankable fanbase. is the face of a huge adult franchise in Creed. I don't think he would get the luxury of skipping from movie to movie like Gosling without that kind of bulletproof insurance policy behind him. Lakeith Stanfield is an interesting leading man in the indie arena, but I think whomever the team is behind his career, know they can't stick him in big studio movies without having some type of insurance if one movie flops. Taylor Kitsch was a TV guy they tried to fastrack into Tom Cruise level movie stardom in one year. It was kinda ridiculous, and you can see why even Hollywood realised it was a terrible idea in the first place. I was so excited about John Carter. But I still think it was Andrew Stanton's fault, and that Kitsch does/did have potential as a film actor. I thought he (and the whole cast) was good in Oliver Stone's Savages, True Detective S2, and that Waco thing with Michael Shannon. John Carter was just insanely bad and stupid. |
|
|
|
Post by stephen on May 29, 2020 23:20:59 GMT
Well, that goes without saying. But Gosling still had to build up a lot of goodwill; Taylor Kitsch proved that even a good-looking white man can get bodied out of the fast lane with a quickness, if you don't produce results. Gosling's pathway has been exactly what actors of his generation should be doing (and I'd argue Michael B. Jordan is the one most closely following his modus operandi). Build enough indie cred, garner strong support in the industry and audiences, then make the jump to mainstream projects that fit your brand. You can be inventive and offbeat like Robert Pattinson, but he had to do his time in tween franchise purgatory and build up a bankable fanbase. Yeah. Or even look at Chris Hemsworth. After Rush, Blackhat, and In the Heart of the Sea underperformed, he stopped getting offers for prestigy stuff. He's had to pivot into bland franchise work nobody else really wants (Men in Black: International), a Netflix John Wick-esque ripoff (Extraction) more in line with Dwayne Johnson's M.O., stuff nobody saw (12 Strong), more Thor, etc. Michael B. Jordan has the right idea, but something has to hit that isn't as pre-established as Rocky/Marvel if he's going to take the next step. The O. Russell thing sounds like a good idea, though the Methuselah Boyle thing seems odd. Hemsworth's lack of success outside of Thor, I think, is mostly due to his extreme limitations as an actor. Thor is easily the most boring Marvel character (go figure that it took until the third Thor movie for them to finally make him somewhat watchable, and it's primarily because the movie feels like it's almost taking the piss out of Hemsworth), and while he's suited to play the blandsome god of thunder as well as anyone could, I don't think he's shown any sort of strong talent outside of that role, and even you stated it took several attempts for Hollywood to realize they should probably stop giving him prestige projects. |
|
|
|
Post by stephen on May 29, 2020 23:22:20 GMT
Michael B Jordan is the face of a huge adult franchise in Creed. I don't think he would get the luxury of skipping from movie to movie like Gosling without that kind of bulletproof insurance policy behind him. Lakeith Stanfield is an interesting leading man in the indie arena, but I think whomever the team is behind his career, know they can't stick him in big studio movies without having some type of insurance if one movie flops. Taylor Kitsch was a TV guy they tried to fastrack into Tom Cruise level movie stardom in one year. It was kinda ridiculous, and you can see why even Hollywood realised it was a terrible idea in the first place. I was so excited about John Carter. But I still think it was Andrew Stanton's fault, and that Kitsch does/did have potential as a film actor. I thought he (and the whole cast) was good in Oliver Stone's Savages, True Detective S2, and that Waco thing with Michael Shannon. John Carter was just insanely bad and stupid. What's really frustrating is I would take Taylor Kitsch ten times out of ten over someone like Hemsworth. Kitsch actually is a very good actor. He just got stuck with two franchise non-starters that were just never going to work regardless of who was leading them (I mean, a fucking Battleship movie?!) in the same year. |
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on May 29, 2020 23:24:54 GMT
Good points. You also forgot to mention white privilege (and despite the laugh, I'm serious. A non-white leading man with a box office track record as shaky as Gosling's would be in leading man movie jail with studios right now). Benicio Del Toro flopped with his version of The Wolfman and wasn't seen carrying studio films again. Also, who else could they cast for more reliable bankability? Driver or Gyllenhaal or McAvoy are as liable to appear in flops/underperformers as Gosling. I guess it's the nature of Hollywood to give new guys a chance, if the old ones have not proven reliable. That's how you find new box office stars. A pre-established IP like The Wolfman is the perfect kind of vehicle to give a leading man who isn't yet established in carrying big studio films a chance. Has Sebastian Stan for example been given a shot yet? He's got his comfy gig with Marvel as Winter Soldier, but he doesn't have to carry those films (or even the Disney + show, which he shares with Anthony Mackie), though he definitely shows leading man presence in them. He's built up some good indie work to boost his acting cred ( I Tonya, Destroyer etc). He's probably the kind of burgeoning leading man you give a shot here, and see how much of his fanbase comes along to support it. |
|
|
|
Post by futuretrunks on May 29, 2020 23:25:48 GMT
Yeah. Or even look at Chris Hemsworth. After Rush, Blackhat, and In the Heart of the Sea underperformed, he stopped getting offers for prestigy stuff. He's had to pivot into bland franchise work nobody else really wants (Men in Black: International), a Netflix John Wick-esque ripoff (Extraction) more in line with Dwayne Johnson's M.O., stuff nobody saw (12 Strong), more Thor, etc. Michael B. Jordan has the right idea, but something has to hit that isn't as pre-established as Rocky/Marvel if he's going to take the next step. The O. Russell thing sounds like a good idea, though the Methuselah Boyle thing seems odd. Hemsworth's lack of success outside of Thor, I think, is mostly due to his extreme limitations as an actor. Thor is easily the most boring Marvel character (go figure that it took until the third Thor movie for them to finally make him somewhat watchable, and it's primarily because the movie feels like it's almost taking the piss out of Hemsworth), and while he's suited to play the blandsome god of thunder as well as anyone could, I don't think he's shown any sort of strong talent outside of that role, and even you stated it took several attempts for Hollywood to realize they should probably stop giving him prestige projects. I don't think he's elite, but I thought he was quite good in Rush, and worked well in Blackhat despite that film flopping big-time. I think he's just not a good project selector, or inclined to choose very challenging material, so he's fasttracked himself into being recent Will Smith without having the success of 90s Will Smith. |
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on May 29, 2020 23:32:44 GMT
Michael B Jordan is the face of a huge adult franchise in Creed. I don't think he would get the luxury of skipping from movie to movie like Gosling without that kind of bulletproof insurance policy behind him. Lakeith Stanfield is an interesting leading man in the indie arena, but I think whomever the team is behind his career, know they can't stick him in big studio movies without having some type of insurance if one movie flops. Taylor Kitsch was a TV guy they tried to fastrack into Tom Cruise level movie stardom in one year. It was kinda ridiculous, and you can see why even Hollywood realised it was a terrible idea in the first place. He's the face of Creed now, but that wasn't his first role with Coogler (who is essentially the Refn to Jordan's Gosling; the auteur up-and-comer who started a strong creative partnership with his leading man), and he'd built up some strong goodwill going all the way back to The Wire. Jordan had to make his bones in TV (one of which is considered by many to be the greatest series of all time), and had a strong run starting with Chronicle, but even he had to find a previously existing franchise and secure his spot before blazing a new trail with something completely original ( Methuselah, perhaps). Besides, it's still unclear whether or not there will be a third Creed film, or if Jordan's even interested in going back to that well. Stanfield is going to have to build up his rep. He's a bit too eclectic at the moment, but I can definitely see him landing that role in the next decade to see him get that awards push. The third Creed film has been greenlit. Jordan isn't stupid. He's going to have the option of "failing" in arty movies that might lose money, precisely because that franchise still remains on the table. His ability to make some of these more auteur driven projects with him in the lead might suddenly dry up if it was announced there would be no more Creed films. At some point, he will need to carry a big hit outside that franchise to really cement himself. |
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on May 29, 2020 23:40:28 GMT
Yeah. Or even look at Chris Hemsworth. After Rush, Blackhat, and In the Heart of the Sea underperformed, he stopped getting offers for prestigy stuff. He's had to pivot into bland franchise work nobody else really wants (Men in Black: International), a Netflix John Wick-esque ripoff (Extraction) more in line with Dwayne Johnson's M.O., stuff nobody saw (12 Strong), more Thor, etc. Michael B. Jordan has the right idea, but something has to hit that isn't as pre-established as Rocky/Marvel if he's going to take the next step. The O. Russell thing sounds like a good idea, though the Methuselah Boyle thing seems odd. Hemsworth's lack of success outside of Thor, I think, is mostly due to his extreme limitations as an actor. Thor is easily the most boring Marvel character (go figure that it took until the third Thor movie for them to finally make him somewhat watchable, and it's primarily because the movie feels like it's almost taking the piss out of Hemsworth), and while he's suited to play the blandsome god of thunder as well as anyone could, I don't think he's shown any sort of strong talent outside of that role, and even you stated it took several attempts for Hollywood to realize they should probably stop giving him prestige projects. Brutally cold assesment, but probably true. Despite his super-conventional leading man looks that make him easy to cast for dramatic roles, I don't think Hemsworth is anything better than servicable as a dramatic actor. He really starts to come into his own when you give him comedy to play with. It's why it was pretty much a masterstroke to turn Thor into a bit of a clown by his third movie. The character has now become a proper beloved fan favorite because Hemsworth wasn't stuck trying to be a serious cod-Shakespearian performer, and was just allowed to yuck it up. |
|
|
|
Post by idioticbunny on May 29, 2020 23:41:47 GMT
I'm Ryan Gosling fan #1 (hell my girlfriend even made a shirt with his face on it for me), so I'm obviously down for whatever he does next. What makes this even cooler though is the fact that Gosling himself pitched it and it's being penned by two female writers. And the idea of something modern in the vein of Nightcrawler piques my interest a lot. Just a ton about this project I'm excited for. And yeah, I don't care if Gosling isn't bankable, as stephen stated, he's doing what all actors of his generation should be doing - building up a resume of fantastic films. It just so happens he also does fantastic work in all of them. |
|
|
|
Post by futuretrunks on May 29, 2020 23:45:42 GMT
|
|
morton
Based
Posts: 2,811
Likes: 2,954
|
Post by morton on May 30, 2020 0:01:44 GMT
Also, who else could they cast for more reliable bankability? Driver or Gyllenhaal or McAvoy are as liable to appear in flops/underperformers as Gosling. I guess it's the nature of Hollywood to give new guys a chance, if the old ones have not proven reliable. That's how you find new box office stars. A pre-established IP like The Wolfman is the perfect kind of vehicle to give a leading man who isn't yet established in carrying big studio films a chance. Has Sebastian Stan for example been given a shot yet? He's got his comfy gig with Marvel as Winter Soldier, but he doesn't have to carry those films (or even the Disney + show, which he shares with Anthony Mackie), though he definitely shows leading man presence in them. He's built up some good indie work to boost his acting cred ( I Tonya, Destroyer etc). He's probably the kind of burgeoning leading man you give a shot here, and see how much of his fanbase comes along to support it. Good idea in theory, but I feel like Stan's window to be super huge has closed already. I mean I know he's only 37, so he theoretically still has time since he still has his looks, but I always thought that his best opportunity was right after he left Once Upon a Time since that had such a large female audience watching it that loved his character before he left after the first season. Playing Bucky seemed like he was going to capitalize on it, but other than giving him very nice steady paychecks, he's not as big of a star as I thought he would be by this time in his career. Plus, I don't know maybe it's because I'm fickle, but I feel like he's not as exciting a talent as he was earlier on. I feel like there's cracks now that I didn't see before there. |
|
|
|
Post by pupdurcs on May 30, 2020 0:31:59 GMT
I guess it's the nature of Hollywood to give new guys a chance, if the old ones have not proven reliable. That's how you find new box office stars. A pre-established IP like The Wolfman is the perfect kind of vehicle to give a leading man who isn't yet established in carrying big studio films a chance. Has Sebastian Stan for example been given a shot yet? He's got his comfy gig with Marvel as Winter Soldier, but he doesn't have to carry those films (or even the Disney + show, which he shares with Anthony Mackie), though he definitely shows leading man presence in them. He's built up some good indie work to boost his acting cred ( I Tonya, Destroyer etc). He's probably the kind of burgeoning leading man you give a shot here, and see how much of his fanbase comes along to support it. Good idea in theory, but I feel like Stan's window to be super huge has closed already. I mean I know he's only 37, so he theoretically still has time since he still has his looks, but I always thought that his best opportunity was right after he left Once Upon a Time since that had such a large female audience watching it that loved his character before he left after the first season. Playing Bucky seemed like he was going to capitalize on it, but other than giving him very nice steady paychecks, he's not as big of a star as I thought he would be by this time in his career. Plus, I don't know maybe it's because I'm fickle, but I feel like he's not as exciting a talent as he was earlier on. I feel like there's cracks now that I didn't see before there. You may be right, but I think the window for Stan may still be there, particularly as he has a very vocal female fanbase online and on social media. That type of following is always attractive to casting and studio people. Plus I think his choices away from his Marvel stuff indicates a deliberate level of patience and career building. I don't think he's trying to get huge as fast as possible. He's doing all these little indies with major talent around him, and it's building his rep as an actor to be taken seriously, not just that cyborg from the Marvel films or that guy who was in a season of Gossip Girl. None of the indies where he's the lead have made much impact, but those where he's part of the ensemble ( I Tonya, Destroyer) have helped his rep as a serious actor. I feel like he's probably been offered super commercial things like taking over Paul Walker's role in The Fast And Furious films and turned them down. You can see it's part of his plan to build indie cred....then maybe at some point, he'll start accepting big studio leading man offers in commercial projects outside of Marvel. |
|
|
|
Post by Christ_Ian_Bale on May 30, 2020 0:46:14 GMT
Been awhile since I've seen it, but isn't this basically The Howling? |
|
|
|
Post by theycallmemrfish on May 30, 2020 1:18:41 GMT
Just give me a scene where Gosling battles it out with the cast of What We Do in the Shadows.
Actually just give me human Gosling having to deal with Colin Robinson.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pavan on May 30, 2020 7:16:22 GMT
I'd rather it is set in the past but whatever, i need more werewolf movies and Gosling is a good get. Bring it on.
|
|
