“Tom Hiddleston didn’t get nominated for an MTV Movie Award this year” links

wenn20270374

This year’s MTV Movie Award nominations: lots of Jennifer Lawrence, Leonardo DiCaprio, Chris Hemsworth & no Tommy Hiddleston! [I'm Not Obsessed]
Lena Dunham’s first SNL promo. [OMG Blog]
Here’s the trailer for Transformers: Age of Extinction. [PopBytes]
Massachusetts judge says upskirts are A-OK. [The Frisky]
Does anyone think that this is a step down for Erin Andrews? [Reality Tea]
Reese Witherspoon’s sweatpants are awful. [Celebrity Baby Scoop]
The name of Jennifer Lopez’s new song is a think-piece. [Evil Beet]
Russia Today anchor resigned live on air. [IDLY]
Annette Bening is great at flippy-cups. [Jezebel]
Here’s a really messed up story about a Texas judge. [Bossip]
Adam Lambert is your new Freddie Mercury (sort of). [Seriously OMG WTF]
Jenna Dewan loves when Charming Potato has some chunk. [Life & Style]
Katy Perry is barely qualified to do the weather. [Limelife]

PS… How have I never noticed Tommy’s thunder in this photo? Goodness.

wenn20270375

Related stories

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

202 Responses to ““Tom Hiddleston didn’t get nominated for an MTV Movie Award this year” links”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Leah says:

    So tom gets nominated for MTV awards and his contemporaries gets nominated for Golden Globes, Baftas and Oscars. His serious actor credibility still has some way to go.

    • jammypants says:

      Tbh, his resume is pretty barren. He’ll flesh it out in time.

    • Secret Squirrel says:

      Sir Anthony Hopkins started his career around 1968 but didn’t win an Oscar until 1991 (as Hannibal Lector).

      It seems a little harsh to expect someone who is still relatively young and only just gearing up his career to be pulling Oscar-worthy performances out of the bag yet. Winning an award isn’t the only measure of success in the movie industry. Steady work and role satisfaction has to be a big part of the recognition too. And Tom has said he wouldn’t mind eventually stepping behind the camera and producing films in the future, so I’m sure he likes roles that give him scope to work with great Producers as well.

      • Janeite says:

        Good point, Squirrel. Nominations for awards and the winning of those awards are a nice thing, but hardly the only determining factor in a successful career.

      • jammypants says:

        agreed and no offense to his contemporaries, but they are older than him if we’re talking about Fassbender and Cumberbatch.

      • Lilacflowers says:

        Richard Burton and Peter O’Toole never won Oscars. Ian McKellan wasn’t nominated until he was in his 60s and he still hasn’t won one. Christopher Plummer didn’t get his first Oscar nomination until he was 80 and his first win when he was 82. Kevin Bacon has never been nominated. Jude Law, Matt Damon, Leonardo DiCaprio, Johnny Depp, Brad Pitt, Michael Fassbender, the list goes on and on, are all older than Hiddleston but none of them have acting Oscars either. Leto and McConaughey both earned their first nominations just this year and they are in their 40s. Can’t understand why the guy is being derided for not having accomplished something distinguished actors who are older than he is have also failed to accomplish.

      • icerose says:

        Tom won awards/nominations for the first three theatre productions he appeared in after leaving RADA and the first two indie films he had leads in also won film festival awards which is pretty good for someone straight from college. He landed with Loki -all within that four year period so his rise to international stardom has been swift. So yes his CV is not as full as those actors who did years of TV/theatre work etc prior to stardom.
        His CV is smaller than say Benedict’s had been around a lot longer before he came on the international scene at about the same time as Tom. Michael Fassbender left drama school in 1996 but did not appear in his first film till 2007.Before that it was mainly small telly roles.
        Lots of actors do not make it till they are well into their thirties/forties so he has not done badly so far.

      • Leah says:

        He is not that young. 33 i believe. And anthony hopkins was mainly a theatrical actor for much longer.

      • Lilacflowers says:

        He is not a contemporary of Fassbender or Cumberbatch, being years younger than either. And Cumberbatch was not nominated for an Oscar, a Golden Globe or a BAFTA.

    • Lilacflowers says:

      The only person nominated for an Oscar, BAFTA, or Golden Globe who could be considered a contemporary of Tom Hiddleston in terms of age and experience is Jonah Hill. Fassbender, Ejiofor, DiCaprio, Cooper, Bale, Leto, and McConaughey are not his contemporaries.

      • icerose says:

        Tom was also older than most when he fully engaged with his career. He did some odd bits of TV/FILM work at Cambridge but he was fitting it in around his studies.

      • Lilacflowers says:

        Yes, icerose, and all those I named as nominees this year are not his contemporaries because they are all several years older, with some starting as child actors.

      • Roberta says:

        He’s a contemporary of both Fassbender and Cumberbatch if he’s going for the same roles IMO.

    • JoAnn says:

      I think what you may mean is “congrats on the Olivier nomination you got today, Tom!”

  2. Crank says:

    What would he get nominated for? Loki? Please excuse me while I laugh. I love Tom, but Loki is so so overrated.

    • Camille (The Original) says:

      Tom AND Loki are massively over rated.

      • betsy says:

        Agreed. He plays the same camp creepy guy in everything he’s in. Even Shakespeare!!

      • Secret Squirrel says:

        @Betsy – F Scott Fitzgerald is a creepy guy???

      • ray says:

        i think tom is lovely and cute in his interviews etc and damn dude can shill a franchise but yeah i dont really get the massive hype around him

      • jammypants says:

        he was pretty adorable as Adam in OLLA

      • Janeite says:

        Actually, I don’t think there really is massive hype around him, Ray, except on the internet. In the “real” world, he is still not all that well known aside from fans of the Marvel movies. And that is a pretty small percentage of the overall movie-going public.

      • 'p'enny says:

        Camille /Crank- deliberate provoking?

      • Isadora says:

        Loki might be overrated (I have no idea since I’m not a big fan of comic adaptions/Marvel stuff/superheroes), but Tom is definitely an impressive actor with a surprising range. I’ve just seen Coriolanus and it’s still baffling to me how such a nearly disgustingly happy, good-natured and all-smiles person can change into a conflicted, decidedly non-happy character and and have such presence on the stage. And it’s not even about looks (because I’m a Fassbender-girl all the way).

      • Dommy Dearest says:

        No, no, no, no. You mean Movie!Loki is overrated. Comic!Loki is actually quite underrated as far as villains go in the Marvel world.

      • LondonGal says:

        @Betsy, that;s, with respect, bollocks. See “The Hollow Crown’ (Noble Prince Hal) and I saw ‘Coriolanus’ and there was *nothing* camp or creepy about either. Also ‘Archipelago’ (boyish, v hettie) the list goes on. Nowt wrong with having an opinion, or not liking an actor, but when you’re plain wrong….. you’re plain wrong.

    • Mario_Fatale says:

      LOL! Agreed @ Crank

    • Kelly says:

      Nooeeez, I luv Loki!
      Admittedly, Tom is a bit overrated. And Loki did turn intro a caricature in the Avengers. But I still think he was a wonderful character in Thor (the first film), and that was Hiddles’ best performance of him.

      • Secret Squirrel says:

        Hi Kelly. I don’t think Tom is overrated. He can actually act which is more than some can say (cough cough Shia cough).

        I think it is his fans’ opinion of him that is overrated! Nobody could be that pure!!

      • Kelly says:

        Ellooo, Squirrel! I do think Tom can pull off a great performance, but I gotta honestly say I haven’t been blown away by his acting ever since Thor numero uno. Granted, I didn’t see Coriolanus (but that’s a theater play, should that contend with film acting, which is supposed to be different and more subtle and nuanced?).
        OLLA was ok, but he wasn’t anything special acting wise there (fine, that wasn’t his fault as much as the way the character was written really).
        I guess his best performances remain Unrelated and Archipelago. Can’t believe I’ve just admitted to watching those….

      • jammypants says:

        definitely overhyped to me…overrated…naww

      • Isadora says:

        To me the beauty in his acting in OLLA lies within his chemistry with Tilda Swinton (which is great – subtle and still always present) and also the way he – as the ever happy Tom Hiddleston – completely vanishes in the character of Adam. For me that’s great because I’m sooo tired of actors who always play varying versions of themselves.

      • jammypants says:

        I agree Isadora. I only caught a glimpse of “Tom” when he danced with Tilda where you see him do a little hip thrust (lol!) but I didn’t watch it and think, “ha, that’s definitely Tom.” I was absorbed into the atmosphere of the film as well as the characters.

      • 'p'enny says:

        @Kelly “do think Tom can pull off a great performance, but I gotta honestly say I haven’t been blown away by his acting ever since Thor numero uno.”

        this is where Kenneth Branagh comes in, there is a great little scene on the Thor DVD where he talks about how Kenneth makes him go deeper into his acting. He gave Tom four takes for each scene, and with four different styles, think some of it was tongue in cheek. But the point is, directors make a huge difference to an actors performance. I would think Tom working with Ken again would really lift his performance.

        Where as Thea Sharrock who directed him Henry V, made an error [IMO cough] in taking Tom in a too soft direction. Where he brilliant in Henry IV 1&2

        And, I just watched mini- documentary on Film Four about the Deep Blue Sea, and the all the bits I don’t like about Tom in it, is because of Terence Davies direction. I can see it clearly, everything Terence was acting Tom to do!

      • Kelly says:

        penny – you’re right, a director makes all the difference in an actor’s performance, true; damn these directors don’t get nearly enough credit that they deserve!

    • Secret Squirrel says:

      Hi Crank. The bit that bothers me about Loki is that Marvel have made him all sweetness and light. The Norse mythological version is so much…meatier! Disney/Marvel went and made one of the biggest bad-a$$es in the myth all pretty and redeemable.

      Tarantino could make a version of the Norse myth that would rock the socks off the Disney puff-piece version!! ;)

      • Sixer says:

        I’d be inclined to say Loki is by far from the least accurate of the Marvel Norse characters. Myth Loki is a maverick and side-changer. Charming and untrustworthy. Not that far from the Puddletom Loki. Just without the whiny Marvel daddy issues.

        Thor, Odin – these two Marvel characters bear absolutely NO relation to the cruel and capricious Norse gods whatsoever.

      • icerose says:

        In the comics Loki always swings between good and bad. In one mission he goes on missions for Asgard. That’s what makes him such an interesting villain.You never know which way he will fall. He does however get more sex in the comics. Even in Norse mythology he is a bit of a player as opposed to a big baddie and he gets to have sex with a horse.

    • Crank says:

      @’p'enny: pretty much lol. I had to get it out of my system. Again, I like Tom. I’m ok with Loki, but Loki is definitely not the great menacing-enemy-best-villain-ever that many people try to paint. Tom’s harmless so who cares, just thought I’d rant lol.

    • icerose says:

      He won for Loki last year.

  3. Abby says:

    sayyyyy what…..this is so weird, creepy Luke ain’t doing his job properly or what??

    Though I have to say MTV nominations for this year are surprisingly good. Also I wouldn’t mind if Barkhad or Fassy win the best villain award rather than Cumby because those two were brilliant. I hope Barkhad wins it because the guy deserves more attention and love :)

    • lunchcoma says:

      This is the MTV awards, though. Cumby is going to win because his movie is the most familiar to the audience.

      • Abby says:

        I know that. Rooting more for Abdi only cz it might give him more exposure, PR but who am I kidding, he won’t get many votes.

      • GeeMoney says:

        Cumby for the win! YAY!

        Didn’t Hiddleston win last year???

      • lunchcoma says:

        Yes, he did, GeeMoney.

        If I were the only vote, I’d probably join Abby and pick Barkhad Abdi, because I also think he deserves and would benefit from more exposure, but Cumby is totally going to win this category.

      • icerose says:

        Sadly I think you are right Benny will win because of his Sherlock following and the Star Trek following. The two that should win are Michael Fassbender and Barkhad Abdi because they were by far the most innovative ,complex and intriguing villains of last year.

    • Kelly says:

      Benny’s nominated?? Does that mean he’ll attend the MTV movie awards?!?! AHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAA
      I can’t explain why the thought seems hilarious to me, but damn, Cumby at the MTV movie awards?!!! I never thought I’d see the day! I thought he was a too serious actor for that :P
      No wait, scratch that, he probably won’t attend, but he’ll record a silly thank you message more likely, damn

      • 'p'enny says:

        he was at last years, apparently partying away with Hiddles in the back :-p [don't know if it was true or not, could be just tinternet gossip]

      • 'p'enny says:

        i take that back – further research revealed it was -tunes festival. how could i mix them up.

    • Miss Melissa says:

      PS, did you catch Luke sitting next to Emma at the Oscars?

      I think that is so odd, especially since one of the oscar winners (Cate Blanchett?) gave a shout out to her agent who was up in the third deck.

      But Luke the publicist always gets the prime awards spot next to his client? Is that normal?

      • Janeite says:

        I saw that too. They were on camera a couple of times. I’m not sure how that all works. Could he have been Emma’s +1 for the evening? Are presenters even allowed to have a +1?

      • Lilacflowers says:

        It’s up to the actress/actor who gets to sit in the guest seat with them.

      • lunchcoma says:

        I don’t know if all the presenters get a +1, but at least some of them do. Will Smith, Chris Hemsworth, and Channing Tatum all brought their wives. John Legend was a performer and brought his wife. And wasn’t Cumby there with his female publicist?

        I don’t know if Luke was Emma’s +1, but it’s not unheard of for single celebrities to come to awards shows with agents or publicists, especially if for whatever reason they can’t or don’t want to bring a parent or sibling. I know Scarlett Johannsen has brought her agent to things in the past.

      • Isadora says:

        Cumberbatch’s publicist also sat next to him during the Oscars, I think. In “the dress” haha.

      • ZsaZsa says:

        Emma isn’t single. She’s dating that rather tasty rugby player. As she was only there for a day I’m surprised she didn’t take him.

        Luke always seems to get his clients dress up doll gigs. Emma hasn’t had a movie since Bling Ring so it’s no wonder that she told the press that she wanted to work with Douglas Booth. Hang on a moment! DB is also on Luke’s book. You can’t fall us luke!

        On the plus side it keeps him away from creeping around Tom

      • Lilacflowers says:

        @ZsaZsa, Emma has Noah, which is opening at the end of this month.

      • Isadora says:

        @ZsaZsa: “On the plus side it keeps him away from creeping around Tom” +1
        I mean, I have no background information but it sometimes really seems like Tom needs a different publicist. Nothing against Luke, he seems like a nice person and everything, but there were a few incidents where I had deep urge to just take over from the guy and handle the PR stuff myself. Not good. ;-)

    • icerose says:

      me to

  4. ncboudicca says:

    “Tom’s thunder” LOL. YES.

    will he be up for any theatre awards, does anyone think?

    • Sixer says:

      Olivier noms are out in a couple of days. But there’s some fierce competition there.

      • 'p'enny says:

        a lot of competition! i really really want him to get a nomination ‘fingers crossed’

      • Miss Melissa says:

        I saw the rebroadcast last night. It was excellent. Looking forward to NT’s King Lear in May.

      • Janeite says:

        Miss Melissa, me too! Simon Russell Beale is great!

      • Lilacflowers says:

        Was Beale’s Lear before or after the eligibility deadline?

      • Janeite says:

        I believe that since it didn’t start it’s run until 2014, it is too late to make the cut for current nominations.

      • Sixer says:

        The Olivier year runs March-February, IIRC. UK theatre awards are annoying as they all have different eligibility dates.

      • icerose says:

        There is a lot of competition this year and it will be interesting to see who is nominated. I am not getting to hopeful for Tom because as good as he was I think there were others who were also brilliant and there is a lot of politics involved in the process., I suspect it will be Rory Kinnear but would like to see Tom, Chiwetel Ejiofor and Tennant get a nod but Simon Russel Beale, Jude Law, Ian Glen and James McAvoy will also be in the running. I am hoping Leslie Manville will win for Ibsen’s Ghosts. I cried my eyes out at the end of that show.

      • Isadora says:

        Ooooh, I’ll keep my fingers crossed. I’m not too whiffed that he didn’t get nominated for the MTV awards because he already won last year and.. yeah.. it’s the MTV awards, fun and great, but it’s not exactly an Oscar.

        But a prestigious theatre award (or even “just” a nomination), that would be really great.

  5. Jaderu says:

    The MTV awards are not a badge of honor. And the “thunder” is what we here back on planet earth call a material fold. Otherwise his thunder has the circumference of a wine goblet.

  6. lunchcoma says:

    I think this is best for everyone involved. We really don’t need to see a repeat of The Speech.

    • jammypants says:

      truth

    • M.A.F. says:

      I have never felt second embarrassment before that night. It is freaking MTV, no one pays any attention to those awards.

      • lunchcoma says:

        It was even too much for me, and I usually enjoy his twee excitement.

      • Secret Squirrel says:

        I’ve only heard about it but refuse to watch the clips. I don’t need to actually see it to know it was cringe-worthy. Just hearing about it was enough. He misread the moment and become a fangirl of himself!

        We’ve all got those moment we look back on and cringe. His was just very public. I can forgive him that provided he doesn’t do it again (and again… and again…).

      • lunchcoma says:

        You’re wise, Squirrel. I kind of wish I hadn’t seen it.

      • M.A.F. says:

        I kept watching the clock and thinking “is he ever going to stop? Oh, well look at that, a 3 minute speech for a freaking ugly popcorn award.”

    • Lindy79 says:

      Haha Bless him and his over excitement about an mtv award

    • browniecakes says:

      And TH was completely overdressed.

    • Shopperetta says:

      So cringe. Ugh, Tom, why did you ever?

    • itsetsyou says:

      Oh, come on! :) He likes to talk and move his tongue a lot. Let him be ;)

  7. Marty says:

    Maybe this is a good thing. I still cringe when I think of him on stage with SLJ last time.

  8. smoothwhiskey says:

    Boo hoo. He didn’t do anything for it. Personally,I think there are too many awards out there already. The majority have no meaning and even the Oscars are meh.

    • itsetsyou says:

      I feel the same way. Just leave one for movies, one for TV, one for music.

    • Secret Squirrel says:

      Agree with both of you. I didn’t even watch the Oscars this year. Had better things to do!

  9. Froop says:

    Fassbender’s Edwin Epps up against Tommy’s Loki would have felt really strange to me.

    • 'p'enny says:

      yet, it is up against Khan from Star Trek :-/ ????????

      • Froop says:

        Yeah I know what you’re saying, but Loki is more of a humorous campy villain than Khan was. Maybe I’m just weirded out by Epps being nominated at all. he’s not exactly MTV friendly.

      • icerose says:

        I agree the villain category is a bit weird because there really is no comparison. Last year the MTV awards seemed to be geared towards action films etc but this earthy seem to have a more serious element.

      • Isadora says:

        @Froop: Yes, Epps (and Fassbender) is not exactly MTV material. Maybe they nominated him to cater to the female audience who thinks Fassbender is hot? I’m not sure. Anyway, I think that’s one of the reasons why Cumberbatch will win this. He’s perfect – it’s Star Trek, everyone knows him from Sherlock and he has trillions of fangirls.

  10. freebunny says:

    Who cares about the MTV awards anyway?

  11. Miss Jupitero says:

    Olivier nominations are going to be announced on 3/10. This is really more important.

    I agree that Loki is so over. He can’t keep playing that card.

    • jammypants says:

      He still has 3 more rounds to go with his Marvel contract. Hopefully at least 2 of them are just quick cameos.

      • JoAnn says:

        Loki is far from over. Disney/Marvel knows who helps pay the bills! Plus Tom loves the character and does a great job in the role.

    • freebunny says:

      It’ll be hard for him if he doesn’t get an Olivier nom.

    • Sixer says:

      There’s Whishaw, Tennant, Lester, Kinnear to contend with, just naming some that people here may know. Even Chiwetel. Even Radcliffe. I wouldn’t be surprised to see Puddletom get a nod but it’s a very long way from a shoe-in.

      • Gin Princess says:

        I think he deserves an Olivier nominations, truly. Fan girl antics and internet meltdown aside, he did a good job, in my humble opinion. I would be surprised if he didn’t get one but it is a tough field indeed. I think a nomination alone would still a very good achievement.

      • Leah says:

        He definitely deserves a nomination. He was riveting in that role.

      • Sixer says:

        The thing is, Gin Princess, there are more deserving performances than there are nominations. I don’t think the Puddletom deserves a nomination any more (or indeed any less) than others deserve a nomination. Like I say, he’s not a shoe-in. He did good work but so did a lot of other people. Puddletom wasn’t head and shoulders above the competition.

      • jammypants says:

        agreed. I thought he did very well as Coriolanus.

    • Miss Jupitero says:

      I have to agree with Sixer: there is intense competition from some really fine actors. Coriolanus was wonderful, and he did very well, but I don’t think his performance knocked it out of the park. I don’t see an obvious win here.

      • 'p'enny says:

        @ miss jupitero

        I couldn’t judge as i haven’t seen any of the other performances. have you? I haven’t even seen David Tennant’s Richard 11 at the cinema. But, it does seem as Rory Kinnear is the theatre darling, this year in the press. However, Lenny Henry won critics choice last December/Jan? and Chewie Ewie may get the vote anyway – because everyone knew he would be slighted for Oscars. If the voting is ‘encouraged’ to maximise full PR /Global value, then Jude Law would walk it for Henry V.

        So who knows.

        But, Tom has done his background campaigning and charming with the theatre luvies, last year, [i take a big guess] he attended the Oliviers in 2013 & mixed his way at the theatre awards in November. He’s done his campaigning – in true oscar tradition.

        FINGERS CROSSED FOR MONDAY

      • Sixer says:

        I can’t see the Lester/Kinnear Othello being ignored. And Ben Whishaw delivered not one nominable performance but two. If I had to bet on the eventual statuette, I’d put my money thereabouts.

      • jammypants says:

        The Telegraph (despite their obvious bias against Hiddleston) seemed to like Coriolanus and his performance the best out of the three Shakespeare runs. I’ll have to go look for the article.

        Honestly, the only people who can weigh in the performances are the ones who’ve seen em all. I know I haven’t.

      • Sixer says:

        Waiting for a comment to clear checking but I’ve seen a few of the likely suspects. I think the Tomster is in with a reasonable chance of a nomination – if there was a longlist, I think he’d get on it for sure. But the actual award? I think there are more likely contenders as noted above.

      • Lilacflowers says:

        I saw the broadcast of Tennant’s Richard II and, while I thought it was interesting, it didn’t actually bowl me over. His mannerisms (and hair extensions) were distracting and there seemed to be too much of an attempt to portray Richard II as Christlike. But that’s just my reading of it. It’s an odd play.

      • icerose says:

        I have seen Tennant who I thought was excellent. Also Tom, Ben Whishaw in 2 roles, Chiwetel Ejiofor (who was amazing) and Rory Kinnear. Kinnear did not impress me that much but critics love him and as he concentrates mainly on the stage and UK TV he is a popular choice. Adrian Lester played opposite him and they did share one award and I found him far more interesting. Ben was great in MOJO but it is a revival and he has played the part before. Peter and Alice did not get very good reviews and although both Ben and Dench did the best with what they were given the performances were competent rather than astounding. James McAvoy got excellent reviews but I did not see it myself and I could not bring myself to watch Jude Law. There is an abundance f Skakespeare so they may have to knock some out.
        Tom’s performance got better over time and the production and his performance was pretty dynamic. Simon Russel Beale is a critics favourite so he will stand a chance and I think the Duchess of Malfi may also be eligible so it’s just possible David Dawson might get nominated

      • Sixer says:

        Hey Icerose. I think I am the world’s only person to have disliked SRB’s cinematic Falstaff. My mother saw Tennant and hated the interpretation – but she did say there wasn’t a weak link cast-wise. I think it will see some nominations.

        Generally speaking, I like it when the nominations go to primarily theatre actors rather than those with a big name in film. But that’s just my bias.

      • Lilacflowers says:

        Sixer, I didn’t like SRB’s Falstaff either.

      • Sixer says:

        Then there are at least two of us. Loved Roger Allam’s and happily that’s on Sky Arts regularly.

        What about Heffernan for a concept nom slot?

      • jammypants says:

        I didn’t like SRB’s Falstaff either.

        Also, from my assumption above, turns out it was not The Telegraph, but New Statesman that talked about the three Shakespeare plays last season. Horribly rusty memory.

        “All three of these plays are sold out, or close to it, for their full runs; and deservedly so. We are at a lucky moment when there are actors around who can charm us as a floppy-haired Timelord or a helmet-helmed Norse god and also do justice to 16th-century verse. But if you can beg, borrow or plunder a ticket to one of these plays, let it be Coriolanus.”

        http://www.newstatesman.com/2013/12/tennant-law-hiddleston-shakespeare

    • icerose says:

      Well he is in the next Thor movie and he still has two more films to go and I cannot see Marvel letting Loki go at the point,

    • Lilacflowers says:

      Best Actor nominees are Tom Hiddleston, Rory Kinnear (Othello), Jude Law (Henry V), and Henry Goodman for Arturo Ui.

      • jammypants says:

        Nice! Mark Gatiss also garnered a nom for supporting.

      • Janeite says:

        Just saw this! Yay for both of them!

        Surprised to see no nomination for Ben Whishaw. Nothing for Daniel Radcliffe either. I would have liked to have seen one or both of them nominated as well.

      • Isadora says:

        I probably don’t have a life because I’m absolutely and inordinately excited about his nomination. Yay!! I really did like his Coriolanus.

        But let’s see what happens on April 13th. There is quite a competition in his category. I haven’t seen Jude Law’s Henry V. (would have loved to!), so… who knows… Still, I would have a blast if he wins his second Olivier. (Again, probably no life haha…)

      • Lilacflowers says:

        I wish they had done a broadcast of the Othello and Jude Law’s Henry V.

  12. Tiffany :) says:

    I guess the logical part of my brain understands the Massachussetts’ judge ruling…but it just seems SO WRONG! I hope the legislature works to fix that law ASAP!

    • Marigold says:

      I’m glad the logical part of your brain gets it because I’ve read one too many analyses on this where people seem to think the court was like “No biggie! Snap away!” when the reality is that the current law, when made, just didn’t consider that some effing pig would be putting a camera phone up someone’s skirt. The court can’t put words into a law that aren’t there. My understanding is the legislature is already on it.

      • LadySlippers says:

        Good to hear that the MA legislature is going to fix it because I cannot fathom how *anyone* could think it’s okay to film up a woman’s skirt…

      • Lilacflowers says:

        And the SJC was actually anything but “snap away”. They wanted to do more but were restricted by the statute. The House hopes to have a revised statute completed by tonight. Meanwhile, women on the T seem prepared for anyone.

    • Lilacflowers says:

      Both the MA House and Senate have passed new language. The bill is now on the Governor’s desk and he will sign it tomorrow. However, other states probably have similar problems but don’t realize it.

  13. Naddie says:

    Too sad my crush on him is so over.

    • 'p'enny says:

      why post here then

      • Naddie says:

        Because I’m free to do so. I didn’t say I don’t like him, anyway.

      • Miss Jupitero says:

        Why not? It’s a discussion, and saying your crush is over is a worthy part of that discussion. This isn’t Tumblr.

      • Janeite says:

        No, this isn’t Tumblr. I am not cool with all of the dissing that Tumblr gets though. Yes, there is some weirdness on Tumblr but there is weirdness everywhere else on the internet too. Here, there, and everywhere. :)

  14. InVain says:

    Step down for Erin Andrews? Yes. Period. Wish she’d stick with sports broadcasting or reporting….maybe Fox isn’t a good fit for her, but still….boo.

    • Miss Melissa says:

      Blow to credibility, frankly. Even athletes can compete on the show, but a “serious sports journalist” to co-host? She’s now crossing over to starlet mode.

      And trust me, all women working in big time sports sidelines want to be taken seriously.

      Maybe she’s over it?

  15. Leah says:

    Well, Tom H wasn’t the villain in Thor the Dark World so why would he get a nomination for that?

    • Kelly says:

      Well when you put it that way, you’re right, LOL, can’t believe I haven’t figured it out like that, hahaahha, oh dear

    • Lilacflowers says:

      True. Malekith was the villain and they don’t exactly have a category for “Most Unpredictable Brother with a Grudge.”

      • browniecakes says:

        sounds like a category MTV would come up with though!

      • Isadora says:

        They should have one if there’s something as inane as “Best shirtless performance”…

      • Secret Squirrel says:

        Adopted brother Lilac!

      • Lilacflowers says:

        @Secret Squirrel. “Most Unpredictable Adopted Brother, Secretly Stolen from the Enemy Alien Race, with a Grudge and the Ability to Turn Blue and Shape Shift.”

      • Secret Squirrel says:

        Hmmmmmm, seems Loki is a likely winner on that one!

        But I wouldn’t rule out Grumpy Smurf as a hot contender either… :P

  16. 'p'enny says:

    This is a desperate attempt for a headline, to grab people in to chat about Hiddles. He would never be a contender for a MTV award. Loki was not the villian. groans at you!
    In the meantime, he is up for a Saturn award and he has been nominated for a best support actor in Empire magazine.

    Why don’t you, just every two weeks just post a Hiddles photo? and say…, your fortnightly chat hiddles-grab. We all miss him, so much so, we would just chat about him over nothing anyway, like this thread.

    • ZsaZsa says:

      Penny, the only reason he’s up for an empire is because it’s an open fan vote. All the obsessives on Twitter and Tumblr are going to vote multiple times. The sad thing is they are not voting for Tom and not his job which is portraying Loki. I feel for the man sometimes.

      • Miss Melissa says:

        Who votes for the MTV awards? Is that a fan vote too? Like the sexiest man thing?

        But the nominations are not?

      • icerose says:

        That is true of most actors with a large fan following not just Tom.

    • itsetsyou says:

      Haha! But at least they are trying :) He’s been so quiet lately. No song of the day, no nothing!

      • 'p'enny says:

        he’s working that kinky Victoriana hard, i hope Mia is enjoying herself ;-)

        @zsa zsa the Empire like MTV are public votes from now on. Initially, though, I think they [mtv/empire]set up the first stage. could be wrong – not that into it.

        I think Loki in Thor2 was really excellent, and think it deserves a nod somewhere. he pulled out some emotional stops in there. Even if his screaming scene end up on the cutting room floor, probably too good for Marvel. he ranked up the feels in the film.

      • Isadora says:

        Marvel cutting the screaming scene is still something I can’t wrap my head around… I mean… just … why?

      • Lilacflowers says:

        Marvel has cut great amounts of the Odinson family backstory out of both Thor movies. Rene Russo’s part was reduced by about 70% in the first film and the deleted bits showed a great deal about the family interactions between the parents and Thor and Loki.

    • icerose says:

      I had forgotten that Empire nominated him for supporting actor. MTV does not do supporting actor -they do villain instead which says it all.
      MTV is the populist fan vote. Empire not so much but you can pretty much count on Hiddlestoners and Cumber bitches or as Benny says Cumber persons to come out on mass along with any other actor who has a large fan following.

      • Miss Jupitero says:

        Stuffing the ballot box is pretty easy with both MTV and Empire. The fans even talk about exactly how to do it (vote, clear your cache, vote again; lather, rinse, repeat). Neither award means a thing, and I think Hiddles knows it. He needs and Olivier or a BAFTA at this stage.

      • Isadora says:

        Yes, he does. I mean, even the Twilight gang got MTV awards and they can’t act if their life depended on it.

  17. ZsaZsa says:

    Being honest PuddleTom didn’t really have a movie out last year other than Thor. Loki was a bit annoying and only given a larger role because of demand. Unfortunately the demand meant that Loki’s part seemed rushed. I’m glad he’s not in avengers 2 as we need a break from this character. It wasn’t a patch on the last two outings.

    I hope PuddleTom gets at least nominated for Coriolanus at theatre awards. It would be a very tough category but at least it’s a proper award he’s nominated for.

    • Janeite says:

      Zsa Zsa, why do you call him PuddleTom? And I think an Olivier award nomination for Coriolanus would be nice too.

      • ZsaZsa says:

        Hey Janeite. I don’t know why I call him puddletom. When I used to lurk here someone else called him that and I thought it was kinda cute so I did the same. I hope it’s nothing horrible.

        He deserves some praise for Coriolanus because it’s the strongest thing I’ve seen him do to date.

      • Janeite says:

        LOL, Zsa Zsa! I’ve seen other posters call him that too but I don’t know what it means either. Although I doubt it’s anything bad! If someone else wants to enlighten us, please feel free to do so.

        And he does deserve some recognition for Coriolanus! As others have mentioned elsewhere in the thread, there have been a lot of good dramatic male theatre performances this year so competition will be intense. Which is why I’d be happy just to see him nominated!

      • jammypants says:

        @Janeite I agree. A nom would be rather nice.

      • Sixer says:

        I am the guilty party for the Puddletom monicker, I’m afraid. For the non-Narnians amongst us, Puddleglum is the heroic – and leggy – marshwiggle in The Silver Chair. And on the days when I like Puddletom, it’s mostly for his legs. In my head, the tall, leggy actors on my lust list are taking the spots reserved for the marshwiggles. Most of the other spots on my lust list are taken up by the Blokes, so I need to differentiate.

        It makes sense to me.

      • Janeite says:

        Sixer, thanks for the explanation! I have only read The Lion, The Witch, and The Wardrobe so Narnia references more advanced than that are beyond me!

      • Sixer says:

        You are missing out! If I ever start calling the Tomster a dufflepud, you’ll know he’s really p!ssed me off.

      • Janeite says:

        Sixer, I know! I have the entire series but have never gotten around to reading it. I also just looked up the dufflepuds; one-footed dwarves do not sound particularly appealing!

      • Miss Jupitero says:

        She calls him PuddleTom because the eternally witty and smart Sixer coined the name, and it is a good one. I am liking it even better than TommyAnnE.

    • icerose says:

      I thought Loki in Thor 2 was way more interesting that in the Avengers where he was written as a archetypical villain and if it had not been for Tom’s performance would have lost a lot of his uniqueness. And he pretty much saved Thor 2 .

      • lunchcoma says:

        My ranking would be Thor > Thor 2 > Avengers for Lokiness, though Avengers was the best of the three movies overall.

        I’d agree that Loki’s part being smaller would not have helped that Thor 2. The main problem with it was the lack of an interesting villain, with some ongoing problems related to the Jane Foster character.

      • itsetsyou says:

        I only saw Thor The Dark World. Is Thor worth watching?

      • Lunchcoma says:

        If you enjoyed The Dark World, you should definitely see Thor.

      • joe spider says:

        Don’t you think there was a bit too much of a “designed by committee” thing going on with Thor 2 icerose?

      • Lilacflowers says:

        joespider, Thor2 had too many writers who were all still tinkering with the script after the trailers were in theaters.

  18. icerose says:

    Miss Melissa I have tickets for Lear as well but I have been picking up some poor feedback from people who have seen it.He based his performance on someone people with Lewey Bodies dementia so I am interested to see what components he used. I loved Beale in the Hollow Crown but was very disappointed in his performance in the Hot House. However John Simms ,John Heffernam and Indira Varma were excellent

  19. Putnam Princess says:

    I thought Tom was really good in Coriolanus. If he wants too be taken more seriously, then he needs to do more interesting movies.

    • Isadora says:

      I think that’s exactly what he’s trying to do. ;-) However the business doesn’t work that way, there are loads of roles a young actor doesn’t get if he’s not famous enough as the studios don’t want to bet hundreds of dollars on some nobodies that won’t gather enough of an audience. That’s why also really good actors do something like comic adaptions (Fassbender in X-Men?), small roles in franchises like Twilight or Pirates of the Caribbean and so on.

      Hiddleston himself said that his role as Loki opened many doors to him and now the quality work starts (hopefully). I feel that he doesn’t get enough recognition for Only Lovers Left Alive though. I’m probably biased because I’m definitely a Jim Jarmusch fan (and without that movie I wouldn’t ever have heard of Hiddles), but everybody seems like “oh.. that little vampire movie he did”. I don’t know why, probably Jarmusch isn’t as much of a houshold name as I thought. However I got eight friends of mine into this movie just by mentioning the names Jim Jarmusch and Tilda Swinton. Most of them had no idea of the story or that it’s about vampires. And still everybody loved it.

      • Lilacflowers says:

        Jarmusch has a small but dedicated audience and the same can be said of Tilda Swinton. The film won’t open here in the United States until April and will probably do so in limited release in art cinemas. It will be interesting to see if it gets an extended run in those art cinemas or if it breaks into the more mainstream market in the major cities. And with that would come more recognition.

      • Isadora says:

        @Lilacflowers: Thanks for the info! So let’s hope OLLA hits big in the US.

    • Secret Squirrel says:

      Surely “Interesting Movies” is relative though?? What is interesting to some is boring/questionable to others. Does interesting mean popular?? I think he has chosen some interesting roles already that are not necessarily popular movies (or at least have limited popularity). That said, I have seen some absolute shite movies win Oscars, so whose to say he won’t win for “Thor 3: Loki loves Chachi”.

    • joe spider says:

      I think Tom would like to do both theatre and film, and finance aside, I can’t help wondering if he actually enjoys theatre more.

      Does anyone else wonder if the reason he hasn’t had more film roles is that he relocated back to the UK before he got “known”.

      • 'p'enny says:

        He moved back after Avengers, to film Hollow Crown, Thor 2 was filmed in the UK too, so in a way it’s been in his favour to stay in the UK till now. I know that a lot Brit actors especially Dan Stevens, Tom Hardy, Dom Cooper are committing fully to the American scene.

        But, I love the Brit pack acting scene, and I’d rather he stays here and build on it. His UK profile is still low – he has a got a long way to go to reach the awareness level of the cast of Eastenders. ;-) I’d love to see him do some gritty British TV drama. If it’s good enough for Tom Hardy, Cillian Murphy, Idris Elba and Dominic West, it’s good enough for Tom.

        He might have been able to slot into more American quick turnaround supporting roles if he was on hand living in Hollywood/LA. But, I get the feeling he isn’t interested – he wants project focused roles. [rightly or wrongly for his career]

        Tom is quintessentially English, he probably hates people like me saying that. He can do a mean American accent, but I’d hate him turn into the male version of Kate Winslet, dreary-drama Brit [us accent] in American indy films. ‘yawn’

        Damien Lewis and Idris Elba/Jude law [I think] still lives in London.

      • joe spider says:

        Agreed p’enny, would rather he was happy doing the work rather than signing on for anything. I also got the impression he didn’t really enjoy his year in LA before he got Thor and would rather be back in London near friends and family. And tbh I can’t blame him for that.

      • Lilacflowers says:

        More and more “Hollywood” films are being filmed in London and other locations. Thor1 was filmed in New Mexico. Avengers was filmed in Cleveland and New Mexico. Thor 2 was filmed in London and Iceland, even the “indoor scenes” were filmed in London. Toronto gets lots of film work. Boston is getting more and more – American Hustle is set in New Jersey and New York but was filmed in Boston (which made most of the scenery rather distracting for me.) Most of the younger English actors seem to be staying put in England, which allows them the opportunity to do stage work that is not available in Los Angeles.

      • Isadora says:

        @penny: +1
        I hope you’re right. And I have a feeling he wouldn’t mind being called “quintessentially English”, he said several times how much he loves London (ad also working there) and, well, quintessentially English things like tea and oatcakes and stuff like that. Things like the Jaguar ad paint him even more the Brit. And I actually think that works for him regarding PR.

        @Lilacflower: The director from Thor 2 once said that filming in the UK was considerably cheaper than filming in Hollywood. Plus they could do more on location work there. I think that’s the reason why more and more Hollywood films get “outsourced”.

        I don’t mind. Being European myself I think it’s really good if the film industry here gets a boost. And the last years have shown that also non-Hollywood films get recognition, even at the Oscar’s, like “The Artist” (sorry, I can never remember the director’s name haha) or Michael Hanekes “Amour” or “The White Ribbon”.

  20. aquarius64 says:

    There are a lot of deleted scene that should have made it to Thor 2. It would have fleshed out the overall story more. Instead, TPTB packed it with Loki scenes to get that fan base in the theaters and run up the box office numbers. Frankly if they kept some of these scenes the box office would have been higher.

    As for the MTV Movie Awards, I’m glad it stopped being the TWILIGHT Movie Awards. I got tired of the Twi-hards stuffing the ballot box to get their fantasy couple in a corner so to kiss. Never been so happy to see a cheating scandal derail that “Robsten” nonsense. I’m glad variety is back at these awards.

    • Zsazsa says:

      I agree with you. If they included loki’s deleted scenes it would give him more of a purpose then a character only there because fans want him.
      If Loki is not needed, don’t use him. They and Tom don’t owe it to us to put him in.
      I also really really don’t want them not make a Loki movie. It won’t work, will ruin the character and be embarrassing.

    • 'p'enny says:

      @ aquarius64 I must be dense, because I can’t work out what TPTB stands for.

      Are you saying that they made a mistake packing Thor 2 with more Loki scenes? because judging by what’s been released in the documentaries there is a lot of Loki/Thor stuff that ended up cut, and replaced with alternative scenes. There are fans on tumblr who have drawn up a tight list of all his edited scenes – the one in fur is driving the community mad. ‘where is the fur’.

      Disney have just released a new Thorki deleted scene which is funny.

      Besides Tom’s screen time is reportedly less than 30 mins in all. Someone worked out that Darcy has more.

      • Secret Squirrel says:

        I’m guessing that TPTB stands for “The Powers That Be”

        If Tom’s/Loki’s time on Thor 2 was only around 30 mins (if you are correct), he certainly commanded all of the focus whenever he was on screen.

      • 'p'enny says:

        @secret squirrel

        I’ve not added the screen time up myself, as yet, and put it to test but someone on the IBDM threat clocked it at 23 mins and another at 19mins. Which I think isn’t right LOL. If I am bored at the weekend, I may have a go and set the clock. Really depends how they time it just Facetime or Scenetime.

        He definitely commanded all the focus – very well indeed.

        I think they should have an award in MTV that says ‘Best Scene Stealer’

      • Isadora says:

        What I don’t get about the whole thing with Loki in Thor 2 is the way it was promoted. I mean, the sent him to Comic Con as Loki, the trailer is practically packed with Thorki (and not much else) and everyone gushed about how the two brothers finally work together. It was all about Loki and nearly nothing about the real villain, meaning Christopher Eccleston’s character. If Loki’s screentime is indeed that short (haven’t seen the movie, so I don’t know) because the cut his scenes than the whole marketing and PR is kind of.. skewed.

  21. jess says:

    The MTV movie awards stopped caring about actual talent years ago. No wonder he’s not nominated.

  22. frat says:

    James McAvoy was nominated last year for Macbeth.

  23. betsy says:

    “Dropping almost 50% in its second weekend, Only Lovers Left Alive bit into a further $70,000 (£41,784) from its 34 sites for $382,000 (£228,000) to date through Soda Pictures.”

    So Hiddleston’s film didnt even make it into the top 10 films in its first week at the UK box office. You’d have thought however small the roll out that his fans would have stopped it dropping 50%. Where was the fanbase ?

    • Secret Squirrel says:

      Perhaps they haven’t forgiven him yet for not responding to their birthday messages. ;)

      To be fair its not a mainstream film either, so you really are appealing to a much smaller target audience.

      Unfortunately I have heard OLLA has also been illegally leaked online, so I wonder how many people are downloading it rather than paying to go see it. I would like to see it on the big screen as I missed it the first go around. Doubt my local cinema will get it back though.

    • joe spider says:

      Well tbh honest I wouldn’t expect it to be in the top ten films. It isn’t exactly mainstream and had limited release.

      Having said that, I did enjoy it.

    • Lilacflowers says:

      On how many screens did it open? 34? That’s almost miniscule distribution. And where were those screens located? Jarmusch films open very small and would never be expected to make the top 10 films anywhere. Mr. Sherman & Peabody will open on more than 34 screens today in Massachusetts alone for comparison. Jarmusch films are measured by how much influence they have on others in the industry, not by box office.

    • Kelly says:

      Come on it’s an artsy indie film with a limited release. No one expects it to be a box office hit.

    • 'p'enny says:

      It was only on 69 screens for the first week, 35 is for the second. Its now only playing in art-house cinema in the manchester. I want a second viewing! I contacted Cineworld in they said, they couldn’t extend it, it was not their decision but Soda. The film supply chain is complicated but I think Soda, have dropped the ball big time. They apparently nabbed it off Hanway, who would have done a much better job. I am actually really annoyed about the mess up, because it was a really better film than some of the pants on screen at the moment. It got a really big PR positive write up in the press, it could have done a lot better.

      Soda pictures messed up the distribution somewhere. France and Germany reached 100 approx. screens, why are they giving OLLA bigger distributions than UK?

      Major films get up to 500 screens in the UK, just goes to show how low it was. Coriolanus was over 130 screens for one night.

      it has a very small distribution.

      But, considering it is on 35 screens it is still raking in more money than Winters Tale on 150 screens on week two of its release and Nymphomaniac.

      No doubt about illegal downloading will hit ticket sales, esp by the time it gets to US. I can’t wait to get the DVD now.

      Pirate Fairy though is raking in the millions, though. I hope he got a good pay cheque for that one.

      • Hiddles forever says:

        OLLA was not even showing up in any cinemas up north in UK…. so if it made that money out of 35 screens, that is good news, not bad….
        Winter Tale has Colin Farrell and R. Crowe in it, but it seems a snorefest therefore waiting for the Dvd….

      • 'p'enny says:

        @ Hiddles forever

        Where’s your north?

        It’s not cultured north of London, you know? ;-) Manchester is my North and it was only on the city’s main cinemas/and art house cinema where it is still playing next week.

      • Isadora says:

        @penny: The big distribution of OLLA in Germany is probably because the film was in large parts financed through Germany. That’s maybe also the reason why parts were filmed there (I still haven’t found out which parts, because all you actually see in the movie is Detroit and Tangier lol) and part of the crew was German.

        Having said that it’s just sad that Soda didn’t do a stellar job with OLLA. Hopefully it sells like hell on DVD, the film would deserve it, especially as it took so long to find people who believed in it enough to make it really happen.

    • jammypants says:

      None of Jarmusch’s films ever made that much money. The film is doing fine. His fans have nothing to do with anything. As much as I like Hiddleston, the majority of the audiences went to see it for Jim and Tilda. This is an extremely tiny indie film. In this scenario pointing out BO numbers and “fandom” isn’t going to make much of a point. Most fans can’t even go see the film since, as you’ve seen, the number of screens showing is very small. So where are the fans? probably upset they have no means of seeing the film, unless they fly to major cities that are playing the film. There’s your answer betsy.

  24. browniecakes says:

    If you just have to see or hear Tom on the big screen and you live in LA, here you go: The Pirate Fairy is going to screen at the Disney owned theatre, El Capitan, in Hollywood. Followed the next weekend by Muppets Most Wanted. http://elcapitan.go.com/
    Not jumping in line for these, but I would only want to see OLLA on the big screen. April I think it comes to LA.

  25. ZsaZsa says:

    Some people are getting excited because OLLA is screening at the Miami film festival and the automatically think that Tom’s going to be there. I doubt he would get released from filming to promote another film. It was different with Thor 2 and Coriolanus because rehearsals only started when he got back plus it was already organised before he signed with Coriolanus

    • 'p'enny says:

      He was confirmed for Miami website, [i think] a couple of months ago. And, i am wondering if he will show up for New York prem of OLLA. He can’t be working 24/7 on the film for ten weeks. A few days in Sunny Miami would prob be nice :-D who knows? often these appearances, are often in small print, depending on work schedule.

      • joe spider says:

        ” A few days in Sunny Miami would prob be nice”

        Definitely, have you seen the temperatures in Toronto in the last couple of weeks?

      • ZsaZsa says:

        He probably gets the odd day off but it would be strange for them to let him go when they are paying him to be on set.
        He promoted this film half to death last year so there is really not much point him being there. Also Tilda should promote it for a change.

        I can understand if it was a blockbuster as it would demand more work.

        Maybe I’m bitter because I can’t see it till it comes out on DVD

      • jammypants says:

        ZsaZsa, it’s not confirmed but some sites are guessing there will be limited theatrical release as well as VOD on April 11.