Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 gorgon wrote:
I remember everyone bashing Gal Godot's weight, and saying that they'd been better off casting muscle women like Gina Carano and other MMA/pro wrasslin'/bodybuilder types. (Even though the character hasn't been portrayed as a hulk for most of her history.)

Then Gadot puts just a little meat on her bones, gets a great costume, and suddenly...

Gal Gadot is still almost head taller than Portman, no?
Any way, they can just glue her head into different body (digitally, that is...) so I am none too worried about that aspect.

Re: Jackman, isn't he like 20cm taller than Wolverine? I guess you could argue Wolverine should have relatively broader shoulders, though that is true for almost any comic book character.

Jack Reacher is 6'5", apparently nobody mentioned that to little Tommy Cruise.

There comes a point where this sort of discussion just seems.. petty.

 Azreal13 wrote:
Jack Reacher is 6'5", apparently nobody mentioned that to little Tommy Cruise.

Somebody should have though. I like most Cruise movies, but not his action movies, and part of it is that he simply does not have necessary physicality.

Voss wrote:
Same. If anything Jackman was too average to be Wolverine- too normal size, wrong posture, too clean-shaven and lacking in some of his more bestial mannerisms and traits (though that varies a fair bit by artist). But Wolverine was _short_ and also tended to hunch and crouch, and was often pictured with his arms posed in a fairly simian fashion


And I mostly remember Wolverine from Comics Code days, and his occasional violent killings were always off panel (and often retconed to actually not end in death), so his brutality in the films was relatively high in comparison.

You have put it much better than I did!
Jackman seemed too pretty and too small of frame. I didn't mean his height specifically.
Although I wonder how The Rock would look like with side burns and a leotard....hmmmm

Backfire wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:
Jack Reacher is 6'5", apparently nobody mentioned that to little Tommy Cruise.

Somebody should have though. I like most Cruise movies, but not his action movies, and part of it is that he simply does not have necessary physicality.

It was perfect for Legend. He spends a big chunk of his screen time in that film crouched, with his knees up to his chin, and often moves with one hand on the ground or wall.
He's basically an innocent man-child, halfway between human and faerie.

Any way, comics and cartoons exaggarate so much that it is pretty much impossible to exactly copy physical attributes or mannerisms drawn characters have.

Backfire wrote:
Any way, comics and cartoons exaggarate so much that it is pretty much impossible to exactly copy physical attributes or mannerisms drawn characters have.

He 100% got a spinal issue

That's a Space Marine chest, right there.

 Argive wrote:

Backfire wrote:
Any way, comics and cartoons exaggarate so much that it is pretty much impossible to exactly copy physical attributes or mannerisms drawn characters have.

He 100% got a spinal issue

He's got worse than that.

Am I missing something? Wolverine has always been a short guy.

It was meant as a statement about about the girth being the issue and not the length... Sometime girth is more important than length

 gorgon wrote:
Yeah, I think criticizing her acting is something the smarmy interwebz kidz do, but basically every critical review I read thought she was solid in the role. I thought her chemistry with Chris Pine was quite good, actually. It was during the CGI-fest ending where things break down. And hers isn't even the worst performance in that battle. Thewlis -- who is a better actor -- chews every piece of digital scenery on the hard drive.

To each their own. Me? I found her delivery flat and devoid of emotion. I also don’t feel she showed any real screen presence in any of the three films.

But hey, just an opinion.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:But after their marvel workout he looked superhuman. I'm sure they can do the same thing to Portman if the role requires it-

With her vegan diet? I doubt it. You need certain raw materials to pull that sort of building off, and edamame won't cut it.

Mr Morden wrote:Whatever they do with Ms Portman they can't ruin the character more than they did with Lex Luthor in Bats Vs Sups. Marvel have made very few misteps so far and I donlt think they will repeat that kind of franchise killing mistake

And here I thought you'd go at least one thread without going on a Isenberg Luthor rant. And to call that performance franchise killing is severely disingenuous at best. They did worse with Flash's casting in those movies than they did with Luthor.




As far as them making this movie? As long as it's good cinema I don't care WHAT they do. I just assumed that given her... temperament in regards to being part of the MCU before would have fostered (heh) a recast. Didn't Hugo Weaving have some similar commentary about his part? Didn't they also get a different actor for Infinity War?

They did.

But at this point, we know precious little about how much screen time she’ll have, let alone screen time as Thor.

Remember, this follows ‘In the Multiverse of Madness’. Given Mysterio mentions a multiverse, and the destruction of the Infinity Stones? Who knows what’s about to break loose?

It could be a mere scene or two, as HemsThor travels through possible realities. Maybe this also links in to WandaVision.

We’ve very little information at present.

 timetowaste85 wrote:
Well, Steve already handed the shield to Sam at the end of Endgame. So, yes, we will have Captain Falcon now.

I don’t mind characters like Jane or Sam who have already proven themselves picking up the mantle of a hero to keep that hero going. I DO have a problem with characters showing up out of nowhere, deciding being a hero would be fun, and retiring gramps because “reasons”. Into the Spider-Verse changed my opinion of Miles, so I accept him as a legit alternate Spidey. I won’t accept Khamala Khan, Iron Girl, or Cho-Hulk. Those three can get binned hard.

Ummmm...Khamala Khan didn't retire anyone so not sure where that comes from, in fact neither did the other two. I don't think unless you have always had a problem with She-Hulk that Cho is a big issue, and Iron Heart has moved on to be her own character with Tony back as Iron Man. (Miles took up the mantle in an alternate universe Spidey story: Ultimate universe after Peter was killed). People really need to calm down on "new characters" being introduced as filling in for old characters. It is not uncommon, and the old character almost always comes back.

Ahtman wrote:

 Argive wrote:
I don't think he did, until Logan.. He always seemed way too small

This is the first time I've ever seen the complaint of Hugh Jackman's Wolverine being to small and, frankly, it has me questioning the world.

He's certainly far smaller (in musculature) than any comics iteration, and significantly taller than most depictions, but if matching comic book builds is key then few superheroes are ever going to be played by people who aren't world champion bodybuilders, and there aren't many of those with great acting chops.

Just Tony wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:But after their marvel workout he looked superhuman. I'm sure they can do the same thing to Portman if the role requires it-

With her vegan diet? I doubt it. You need certain raw materials to pull that sort of building off, and edamame won't cut it.

It's certainly harder for vegans to get as big as people eating meat, but there are plenty ripped and muscular vegans out there.

Yolanda Presswood is more muscular than many women in action movies I can think of. Likewise Melody Schoenfeld.

Oh and there's a skinny weakling called Venus Williams, too.

Trying to find any website that wasn't fellating their veganism was difficult at best, so figuring out if they started their vegan lifestyle before or after starting their fitness regimen is kind of important. Also are they the outliers or the norm for people of that lifestyle? I ask as someone who honestly doesn't know much about it other than the people I'm exposed to at the university I live next to, which would definitely infer outlier to these three.

Yeah, but you can prove anything with facts.

Maybe don't "infer". Maybe research yourself and don't shift the burden to others.

Start with The Hench Herbivore.

No it wouldn't-that isn't how outliers work. They're fit people who are also vegan.

Any random college kids you see aren't necessarily either, and you don't have any reliable method of determining if they're fitness nuts, vegans or even actually college kids, just your preconceptions.

 Just Tony wrote:
Trying to find any website that wasn't fellating their veganism was difficult at best, so figuring out if they started their vegan lifestyle before or after starting their fitness regimen is kind of important. Also are they the outliers or the norm for people of that lifestyle? I ask as someone who honestly doesn't know much about it other than the people I'm exposed to at the university I live next to, which would definitely infer outlier to these three.

I mean someones build and veganism really don't have a ton of overlap. A vegan who is trying to get built will need to consume protien fats etc. It is harder to do it if you are vegan but it can be done. People's builds are based off a number of things including genetics. Natalie Portman has always been smaller, and would be regardless of diet.

 Just Tony wrote:
Trying to find any website that wasn't fellating their veganism was difficult at best, so figuring out if they started their vegan lifestyle before or after starting their fitness regimen is kind of important. Also are they the outliers or the norm for people of that lifestyle? I ask as someone who honestly doesn't know much about it other than the people I'm exposed to at the university I live next to, which would definitely infer outlier to these three.

I mean they're professional athletes and record holders whether they turned vegan prior to or during their professional careers. Serena Williams (who I wasn't aware of, apparently switched later than her sister after she found it useful) and Novak Djokovich are other examples.

They're outliers in the way that all professional athletes are, but it's not tough to be vegan and muscular. There are a lot of successful athletes that are vegan. There are plenty powerlifters and, specifically important for the discussion, bodybuilders that are vegan. There are lots of potential health problems associated with a vegan diet, but they are easily accomodated for if you can afford it. Building mass is not a problem.

Can Vegans be buff?



Yes! Yes! Yes! Yes! Yes! Yes!

 Just Tony wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:But after their marvel workout he looked superhuman. I'm sure they can do the same thing to Portman if the role requires it-

With her vegan diet? I doubt it. You need certain raw materials to pull that sort of building off, and edamame won't cut it.

Mr Morden wrote:Whatever they do with Ms Portman they can't ruin the character more than they did with Lex Luthor in Bats Vs Sups. Marvel have made very few misteps so far and I donlt think they will repeat that kind of franchise killing mistake

And here I thought you'd go at least one thread without going on a Isenberg Luthor rant. And to call that performance franchise killing is severely disingenuous at best. They did worse with Flash's casting in those movies than they did with Luthor.

Yeah your so edgy and inaccurate - have a point.

Well at least my comment is about the thread topic - its not just whining, defending crap acting and directing or ranting about vegans.

Maybe think about an actual contribution to the thread next time mate.

Backfire wrote:
Any way, comics and cartoons exaggarate so much that it is pretty much impossible to exactly copy physical attributes or mannerisms drawn characters have.
[https://stuarte.co/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/Rob-Liefelds-horrible-art-style.jpg]

Hey now, let's not bring Rob in to this. He's busy trying to avoid drawing feet, he won't have time to respond.

It isn't harder to source protein as a vegan - at least not in Britain, Canada or the U.S.. It is much cheaper than animal-proteins and freely available in almost any supermarket.

Plant-protein is also no-less accessible to the body than animal-proteins.

Both are simply myths that carnists like to toss off as a fact. Tons of world-class athletes purse a vegan or plant-based diet, but for sure it wouldn't work for an actor or a Fedora on a forum.

 Excommunicatus wrote:
It isn't harder to source protein as a vegan - at least not in Britain, Canada or the U.S.. It is much cheaper than animal-proteins and freely available in almost any supermarket.

Plant-protein is also no-less accessible to the body than animal-proteins.

Both are simply myths that carnists like to toss off as a fact. Tons of world-class athletes purse a vegan or plant-based diet, but for sure it wouldn't work for an actor or a Fedora on a forum.

It isn't that it is hard, it is that it takes sourcing at all. I've known plenty of vegans and vegetarians that don't do a good job of getting enough protien in their diet because they don't source it or seek it out. Most people that are not vegan don't really put a ton of thought into their diet, so needing to do so makes it harder. That said most vegans I know put more thought into their diet then those that are not.

In the end most actors are closer to athletes in watching their diet and exercise, then your average person.

A certain percentage of all kinds of people, everywhere, have shocking diets.

A person who eats exclusively from a McDonald's menu isn't an argument against carnism and a person who eats vegan or plant-based and is sickly isn't an argument against veganism/plat-based diets.

 Excommunicatus wrote:
A certain percentage of all kinds of people, everywhere, have shocking diets.

A person who eats exclusively from a McDonald's menu isn't an argument against carnism and a person who eats vegan or plant-based and is sickly isn't an argument against veganism/plat-based diets.

Hey I'm not arguing against it, just that being on any kind of diet takes more effort than not. Which honestly for anyone trying for a change in their body is going to be a thing anyway so veganism is not really relevant to whether Portman can bulk up for the role or not.

I'm a little confused, honestly. Like, is she just getting the powers of thor transferred to her? I think in the original comics the powers were transferred through nothing but the hammer, but that's not how the movies work so far.

Unless it's just a genderbent reboot, which doesn't make much sense as thor is going to still be in it.

Also, didn't the hammer get destroyed and they had to return the time traveled one?

So long as Portman doesn't come out and say "This movie's not for white guys' I don't see a problem.

In the end, that was the only real problem with Captain Marvel, as far as gender goes. Yes, the women of the story do pretty much everything with no significant help from the men, but we've seen plenty of other movies where the men do pretty much everything with no significant help from women and there's no comment at all. This is no different.

There IS a noticeable RACE issue in Captain Marvel - Nick Fury being used as token comic relief black guy, not quite the worst racist stereotype, but still noticeably bad - but that's neither here nor there with Thor.