Barbara Broccoli possibly thinks Tom Hiddleston is ‘too smug & not tough’

Empire Awards 2017

It’s no secret that Daniel Craig will likely play James Bond at least one more time. As much as people wanted to have the conversation about “who will be the next Bond,” we’ve been hearing for months that Craig is actually Barbara Broccoli’s first choice. All the talk about Tom Hiddleston and Poldark were for naught. And that’s why I almost didn’t read this Page Six story, because the headline (“Daniel Craig ready for more Bond after ‘slash my wrists’ diss”) made it seem like the gossip equivalent of “water is wet.” But this Page Six story has an interesting gossip-diss to Tom Hiddleston.

After saying he’d rather “slash my wrists” than do a final Bond movie, sources say Daniel Craig is ready to sign on to return as 007 after Bond bosses decided Tom Hiddleston is “too smug and not tough enough” for the role. Multiple sources tell Page Six that Bond franchise producer Barbara Broccoli has “just about persuaded Daniel Craig to do one more Bond movie.” This comes after Broccoli produced his hit off-Broadway production of “Othello” with David Oyelowo, which won Craig the serious acting plaudits he craved.

A Hollywood source said, “Daniel was very pleased with how ‘Othello’ went and the great reviews. Now Daniel’s talks with Barbara are going in the right direction. They have a script — screenwriting duo Neal Purvis and Robert Wade [who’ve penned several Bond movies] are writing and they’ll go into production as soon as Daniel is ready to commit.”

The source added, “Plus, Barbara Broccoli doesn’t like Tom Hiddleston, he’s a bit too smug and not tough enough to play James Bond.” British actor Hiddleston’s cringe-making romance with Taylor Swift sealed his fate with Bond producers, we’re told, followed by his self-righteous Golden Globes speech, pontificating about his trip to South Sudan, and how Doctors Without Borders “binge-watched” his series.

Another source added, “Daniel had such a good time in ‘Othello,’ produced by Barbara that he’s ready to do a final Bond.” Wade recently said the new film would be different from “Spectre.” “You’ve got to say something about Bond’s place in the world, which is Britain’s place in the world. But things are moving so quickly now, that becomes tricky. With people like [Donald] Trump, the Bond villain has become a reality.”

[From Page Six]

“Barbara Broccoli doesn’t like Tom Hiddleston, he’s a bit too smug and not tough enough to play James Bond…” OUCH. I mean… if that source really knows what’s in Broccoli’s heart, then that sh-t is harsh. BUT TRUE. Tom Hiddleston was never tough enough to play James Bond, let’s face it. He tried to butch it up in The Night Manager but I thought his physical-action scenes sort of fell flat? Like when Jonathan Pine had to fight that character who was like a foot shorter and it looked like such exhausting work? As for the “smug” assessment… I don’t think Tom is smug as much as he’s insecure. And James Bond isn’t insecure. You actually need an actor who comes across as smug to play Bond.

Tom Hiddleston seen arriving at the ABC studios

Photos courtesy of WENN.

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

112 Responses to “Barbara Broccoli possibly thinks Tom Hiddleston is ‘too smug & not tough’”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Digital Unicorn (aka Betti) says:

    Hahaha. Poor tommy Anne. I just don’t think he’s manly enough for a modern Bond. If we’re talking about the Bond of the 70s or 80s yes he would have been perfect but not now. Craig is the character of the books.

    • SilverUnicorn says:

      Bwahaha totally agree!

    • Oriane says:

      Poor Hiddles basically looks like a creampuff (or a young Hugh Laurie playing Bertie Wooster) – now Roger Moore had some sleaze which sort of served the part.

      Now, is David Oyelowo British? Because if Idris is not to be, we might have found someone for the post-Craig!

  2. KLO says:

    yep. He is smooth, he is pretty. But he lacks the kind of “assholeish” sincerity and sensibility which makes D. Craig lovable and beautiful to watch as Bond.

    the “smug and not tough” comment made me snicker 😀

    I have no criticism for Hiddles in this. He wanted it, he tried, they didnt want him.
    There is no reason to ridicule him for trying.

    • vaultdweller101 says:

      I feel like T Hiddles is like a rare male version of Anne Hathway. He seems exuberantly earnest and ambitious, which has led to some really awkward, tone-deaf moments. But, I don’t see much to hate on, other than that the Gossip-sphere LOVES to shred on nice-ish, overly enthusiastic people with a low “too cool for school” filter.

  3. Lightpurple says:

    Broccoli doesn’t have to do much convincing to get Craig in the next Bond movie, he is still under contract for one more film. This has all been just clickbait for the tabloids.

    And who has it out for Tom at Page Six?

    • OhDear says:

      Page Six has it out for everybody, it seems.

      • Lightpurple says:

        And at this point, Paul Ryan has captured the word “smug” for his very own. The word should not be applied to anyone else. And Tom is no Paul Ryan.

    • Janice says:

      Craig’s contract doesn’t technically force him to do five films–it was option-based–so they could have been shopping around. There would be an exit clause for both parties, no penalty, if they couldn’t reach an agreement over the fifth film. That’s why they’ve been negotiating with him for so long.

    • dodgy says:

      Also, Craig can’t open a movie outside of James Bond, quiet as it’s kept.

  4. dot says:

    Careful now! Last time a “he’s not manly enough to play Bond” story came up Tommy put on a PR display with TS to prove his masculinity. And we all know that ill-conceived strategy backfired.

    • spidey says:

      Excuse the pun but I think you are connecting the dots where there aren’t any.

      • dot says:

        Uh no. People and the media have been speculating for ages that Tom dated Taylor to prove to the world that he was perfect for Bond.

      • third ginger says:

        And they were wrong . Hiddleston knew in July of last year he would not be Bond and said so. that is fact.

      • justme says:

        Actually @third ginger, he said he would not be Bond in June – at WizardWorld in Philly, even before he went out with TS. However since he and Swift got together in the midst of the JB rumors, the idea that he was horribly thirsty for Bond got transferred to his affair with TS and therefore it had to be why he went out with her. As Hugh Laurie once said “Tom Hiddleston wore socks last night. James Bonds wears socks!!! You figure that out!!” Every last thing he did was connected with Bond at that time.

      • spidey says:

        @ Dot “People and the media have been SPECULATING.” Which doesn’t make it fact!

      • Lightpurple says:

        Speculation and fact are not the same thing.

      • theHord says:

        @dot Tom has been reminding people, not only that it’s all speculation, but also that Craig is not out of the Bond franchise, since day one. Long before HS.

        This was all basically rumors, based off of brain-farts of TNM viewers who kept mentioning Bond on twitter, that got out of hand.

      • M.A.F. says:

        “People and the media have been speculating for ages that Tom dated Taylor to prove to the world that he was perfect for Bond.”

        For ages? This happened just this past summer. I didn’t realize months meant years.

    • dot says:

      @MAF That’s hyperbole darling!

  5. lizzie says:

    I agree with her. He doesn’t seem tough…at all.

    • spidey says:

      @ lizzie The one time I would disagree with you on that was Coriolanus. Have you seen it?

  6. Mia4s says:

    After Kong I could have told you he’d be a poor pick for Bond. He’s not remotely believable as cool as can be action guy. Maybe a 1970s Bond, but the world has moved on. Also as someone said above, Craig was always contracted for one more movie. Whoever the next Bond is we may not even have heard of him yet!

    And wow, who did Tommy boy piss off? His gossip coverage recently is nasty!!

    • third ginger says:

      Recently? Gossips hate him. I always wonder at the “disconnect” between his actual show business reputation [virtually impeccable] and the gossip view.

      • Spiderpig says:

        I don’t know about Hollywood but his rep here in the UK theatre/film world is someone extremely polite and nice and very professional and talented and all that, who is also so extremely ambitious and fame-hungry he makes Kim Kardashian look like Thomas Pynchon. He’s a great guy but I’ve certainly heard other theatre people laugh (not in a malicious way) about his thirstiness.

        The gossip/blogosphere on the other hand is odd, since there is no dirt on him except for, well, thirstiness. Which is hardly a crime nor unusual. There have been comments here before on the gender politics which I think are bang on – if Tom was a female movie star behaving like this no one would even blink.

      • jetlagged says:

        As an American, I’ve always wondered if some of the griping being done about ambition and thirstiness might be cultural? It seems to be a mock-able offense for a Brit to openly care about a) success b) money c) fame – they may have drive and ambition just like everyone else but God forbid they actually come right out and say so, and heaven help them if they appear to brag about their accomplishments. It seems worse for anyone that dares have ambitions beyond the UK – actors that flee for the greener pastures of America are often painted as too ambitious for their own good or betraying their “art”.

        Tom has been going on lately about it being “all about the work” for him, maybe he really thinks so, or maybe it’s a way to deflect that people in his homeland are finally calling him out on his (to them) unseemly ambition.

      • justme says:

        I also wonder if the unseemliness of his ambition is related to his being “posh” and privileged (which of course he is). If he were a working-class lad punching his way to the top that might be considered admirable. However someone like Tom is sort of still expected to be the gifted amateur, who succeeds seemingly effortlessly (would still get bashed for his privilege though – that’s a given). To be a posh Eton/Cambridge/RADA graduate and still be super ambitious looks like bad form.

      • Nanny to the Rescue says:

        @Spiderpig, did this info come from that friend of yours who is a teacher at Eton? Or somebody similarly made-up by you? Sorry, but after you have been exposed by several posters how you made that one up I just cannot take your takes on UK theatre/film seriously. It doesn’t matter if you say nice or bad things, your “insider info” just doesn’t sound truthful anymore.

      • Fluff says:

        NannyToTheRescue please don’t tell lies, Spiderpig is a longtime regular and has provided proof of their identity.

        And no they were not “exposed” in fact the opposite. Several posters confirmed that Tom did give the speech at Eton which Spiderpig mentioned, some claimed Spiderpig was presenting his words “out of context” (even though SP made a point of saying they were not there and didn’t know the context) but everyone agreed the speech itself happened.

      • Pim says:

        Tall poppy syndrome. Brits only want him to be so successful.

      • Cranberry says:

        “extremely ambitious and fame-hungry he makes Kim Kardashian look like Thomas Pynchon”

        See now that’s where it sounds to me like jealous theatre/film folk. Kim K made a real sex video and agreed to use it to become RICH and famous. I capitalize rich because I think that’s what’s truly important to her even more than being adored for her superficial beauty. She is very shrewd business woman and knows (lives by) the bottom line, money. Kim may not have had as many advantages as Tom did growing up (white, posh male), but she came from a very comfortable background and lived in a very privileged community with many influential and rich friends.

        Point is, to compare someone that actually has a creative talent, a craft that they’ve spend the time to develop and study, to someone that has figured out how to make $ marketing their selves is a tragic mistake. In fact if Tom were as good as Kim K. at marketing himself, he would never have made the rookie mistakes he made with TS.

        Whereas Kim knows when to shut up and just look pretty. In fact that’s usually all she does. She’s not known for saying much of anything or having opinions at all. She’s either pretty empty headed, or she’s smart enough to know that she’ll make more $ acting the victim and keeping real thoughts/opinions to herself – or maybe both. Anyway, Tom and Kim, two totally different species.

      • Spiderpig says:

        I honestly don’t know. I guess maybe it is a British thing. Or it might be because it’s about fame and Hollywood rather than being all “ohh it’s just about the art!”? I’m certainly pretty naked about my own ambition and I found it was fine when I was struggling (I don’t come from a privileged background) and really had to knock it off when I started to get a bit successful because it just doesn’t play here to be too overt.

        He agreed to be in my friend’s (who worked in casting at the NT) short film for like no money although the dates changed and it ended up not happening. I think that was after he started making films. So even though I sometimes mock him I think he is officially a good egg.

      • spidey says:

        @ fluff – the speech was widely reported as taking place at RADA hence the comment

    • Beth says:

      Gossips haven’t stopped being nasty about Tom since the Taylor Swift thing last summer. They won’t let it go.

      • spidey says:

        Which says more about them that about Tom methinks.

      • Mia4s says:

        Oh the Taylor Swift thing is not going away anytime soon! She’s far more famous than him so to gossip writers that means she’s the most interesting thing about him. They will bring it up for YEARS to come! It might calm down when/if he marries, but short of dating another super famous woman he is stuck with this narrative.

      • dot says:

        It’d be nightmare for Tom if he’s happily married with a wonderful woman and yet the media is still bringing up Taylor every once in a while.

      • spidey says:

        If he is happily married it won’t matter.

    • theHord says:

      “The world has moved on”, in to this monolithic, even more stereotypical, overly-built and ultra-macho take of ideal masculinity? Worrying.

      • third ginger says:

        Agree. See mine and other comments below. I am more than old enough to be this young man’s mother, but I really feel uncomfortable with the challenging of an actor’s masculinity in 2017. As I say below, this is not the same as saying an actor is wrong for the part. That is certainly fair. Hiddleston was wrong for Bond,just so there is no misunderstanding of my point about stereotypical and ultimately destructive gender “norms”

      • theHord says:

        @third ginger Everything about this is so gender normative. The notion that Tom might not fit the part of Bond – that, granted, is basically a womanizing macho block-head with a pretense of class wrapped in a bow-tie and gadgets – is not just used as a simple critique on his acting chops. It’s being used as a judgement on his character, at how inferior, lesser, pathetic,… emasculated he is for not fitting in to the all macho cool guy box. I was silly enough to once think we would eventually be pass this, as a society.

      • Cranberry says:

        Agreed. The thing is the fact that he’s Not the stereotypical, gender normative macho man, is what I find attractive in him. He has the ability to be much more than just that. The ability to intrigue with his physicality as well as his acting if given the right roles and direction. Those are the type characters I go for. That’s what I’ve always sought after in Hiddleston, his ability to slide in sideways. A bit different, but still likable and very satisfying.

  7. Jay says:

    If he was ever in a bond film it would have to be as a villain. Cant see him as bond at all.

    • dot says:

      He is not that believable as a villain either. His puppy eyes give him away. Loki is more camp than villainous tbh.

      • third ginger says:

        Critics don’t think so. Do you ever read Hiddleston’s reviews? Critics think Loki is the only reason to make Thor movies. Don’t mean to be rude. You may be young enough to be my grandaughter. But on this one point, you are far in the minority.

      • dot says:

        Do you think Tom is capable of playing a villain as menacing as, say, Hannibal or Norman Bates? I don’t think so. Loki seems like the least dangerous kind comparing to the other famous villains. I don’t even think Tom can do what Andrew Scott is doing in Sherlock.

      • third ginger says:

        It is fine if you think Hiddleston is a terrible actor. I think that about many actors. However, our opinions on CB do not influence anyone’s career. Critics and awards groups do, and they have, for the most part, been kind to Hiddleston. It is true he did not get raves for SI, a silly but fun monster movie.

      • Lightpurple says:

        Loki is a psychopath who kills because it is fun.

      • Cranberry says:

        Marvel’s Thor and Avengers’ characters are all camp because they are Disney superhero-popcorn, “family” movies. Loki was one of the biggest successes of the Avengers phenomenon because they needed a villain that was intriguing and not too “offensive” or revolting to mainstream, child/family audiences.

        I think he can do more menacing characters. I think it is within his range, but I think he is not as comfortable with it. He wants to try for leading man protagonist roles which is why he’s tried to go the hero route even though the tough guy is not the best fit for him.
        For a long time he’s said he’d like to do comedy. He’d be good in a romantic comedy, but I think no matter what genre, he needs to work with a good script and the right production or director when it comes to new, high profile territory. Loki was an excellent fit for him cause his straight, subtle style made him the least ‘camp’ character of all the cast.

  8. seesittellsit says:

    Aidan Turner would have been my choice, I think Craig is getting way to pudgy and long in the tooth for Bond – but I think it likely that he’s just not a big enough name for them. Of course, neither was Craig at first, but . . . you really need to be able to project a huge screen presence for Bond. But for looks and dangerous charm . . . .

    • third ginger says:

      To prove how phony all these stories are, there were several saying that Turner actually had the role. Again, it is likely neither he nor anyone else was ever actually considered. Publicists were, of course, busy pushing rumors. My fantasy choice: Idris Elba.

    • Narak says:

      Idris Elba should be the next Bond. He would be perfect.

    • Lightpurple says:

      Bond actors usually are not big names when first hired.

  9. third ginger says:

    This is my vote for worst entertainment story of the year: the mythical search for a new James Bond. There has never been any confirmation of talks, meetings, or approaches to any of the so-called “candidates” Hiddleston denied being in contention way back in July. He denied it again recently, also informing the interviewer he was not going to be the new Dr. Who. Maybe he should issue a third denial just in time for Easter [not unlike St. Peter]

    • justme says:

      He’s denied it even more than that. I strongly doubt that Page Six has any new information, but a diss of Tom as Bond always brings out the clicks. It looks as though there might be a second season of Night Manager anyway, which is more interesting than trying to breathe new life into the very old concept of Bond.

      • third ginger says:

        Just can’t stand a lack of logic, even in gossip. This Bond nonsense is all rumor, conjecture, and publicists’ plants. How people go on accepting it is beyond me. Craig was always going to come back for at least one more film.

      • spidey says:

        @ justme I read that first as brings out the d***s! 😳

      • Lightpurple says:

        He has been denying it since last March.

    • Secret squirrel says:

      Maybe Tom is up for the role of Easter Bunny to his nieces. He should make the shortlist on that one!

    • spidey says:

      @ third ginger 🍸🍸 again. He has denied for ages that he was going to be the next Bond, and it only came up because of the timing of TNM and Craig throwing his toys out of the pram.

      Tom can be accused of a lot of things, over eager, misjudging his audience, verbose, but smug is not a word I would ever have associated with him.

      Broccoli might possibly just think…………….says it all.

    • Latte says:

      The regular leak about who’s being cast and who’s dropping out and who’s thinking about taking a knife to their wrists is part of the marketing. The Broccoli team’s as lame as their Bond movies are and as cheesy as the awkward product placement in their movies.

  10. justine says:

    a goog james bond….vilain !

  11. LisaT says:

    It’s incredibly interesting how the narrative has turned. For the longest time it was about how Tom’s team was trying to steer his PR. Now it is abundantly clear that others are trying shape his image in the gossip sphere. Darn it, I wish I still had acquaintances at the trades.

    • third ginger says:

      I read all the trade papers!! where did your friends work?

      • LisaT says:

        @ Third Ginger, at The Hollywood Reporter and Variety . Some of them are freelancers now or have moved out of the entertainment press. I worked in advertising sales. I’m in a completely different industry now though.

  12. milibili says:

    hmmm I’m 20 and let’s see how many jb movies I have seen. Oh yes, ZERO. Will I ever see one even Tom is in it as bond or not? NOPE. I hate cocky, playboy characters ie tony stark, human torch, jb.
    And actor and characters are not same. If is supposedly insecure what does that have to do with his acting? Jonny d is a wife beater, does that affect any of his character or acting capability?

  13. MI6 says:

    Thank God for small miracles. Tommy is WAY too good for Bond. I just don’t get the ‘smug” part. That’s not who TH is, but whatever. I’ll take it.

    • Secret squirrel says:

      JB needs to be…rested!

      Maybe the next JB film could be JB (Craig) going rogue and the other spies having to track him down and bring him in. That way we all get our Tom and Idris and Aidan etc without it being the main character. Film makers seem to be so stale and afraid of straying to far from the formula these days.

      Just so I know, is there a smugness scale? E.G. on a scale of 1 to Paul Hollywood, Tom would be a 4?

  14. milibili says:

    and anyone heard about joss whedon’s tweet about tom as frollo and ariana grande as esmarelda? Is he hinting something or just kidding?

  15. spidey says:

    Meanwhile, on a more positive and factual note, Skull Island box office now at Worldwide $478,935,658 and still going. 🙂

    • third ginger says:

      It is making back much of its money back in China. No one will blame Tom or Brie L. for making a bomb.

      • dave says:

        I read somewhere it needs to make $450/500m to break even on £185m production and $136m marketing?

      • third ginger says:

        Doesn’t sound like crazy money? In this atmosphere [in the US market] if a film doesn’t make at least 100 million in the first few weeks, it’s a failure. That does not apply, of course, to Oscar contenders, which have a gradual platform release. Recent failures: LIFE and GHOST IN THE SHELL.

  16. jetlagged says:

    I approved of her choice in Craig, but all the rumors about how Broccoli feels about different actors make me question her taste at times. Way back when, it was said she rejected Hugh Jackman because he wasn’t manly enough either.

    • third ginger says:

      I think I remember that. I dislike all the so and so is not manly or masculine talk. That is not the same as saying someone is not a “tough guy” actor. That’s fair, and has to do with screen persona. However, when people take hits at someone’s so called “masculinity,” I cringe. We have had far too much traditional masculinity and femininity in the culture. Time to ditch those old ideas. [ Now, my gay daughter with the gender studies degree may be influencing me.]

      • Beth says:

        It sounds like your daughter has influenced you correctly.

      • OhDear says:

        It could be because I like the guy, but the commentary around his not being “manly” enough because he’s a dorky, sensitive person annoys me as well. Traditional masculine traits such as toughness is seen as acceptable in women (which is not a bad thing, obviously) whereas men with traditionally feminine traits are seen as “not masculine.” It implies that there is something lesser in what is seen as feminine traits as compared to masculine traits.

        (Does this even make sense?)

      • third ginger says:

        Thank you, Beth. My little girl really is terrific. Oh dear, you make perfect sense to me.

      • Lightpurple says:

        @ohDear, you are making a great deal of sense.

      • Beth says:

        @OhDear,that’s perfect sense. I love Tom because he’s gorgeous, his personality, and his attitude. There’s nothing wrong with a guy being sensitive and sweet and not macho. He’s manly and masculine without being rough and tough. You’re absolutely correct

    • Latte says:

      “all the rumors about how Broccoli feels about different actors make me question her taste at times.”
      With every Broccoli leak her people trawl the internet sites and blogs like this to get a sense of who agrees and which names they should look at. She needs to give up the franchise to someone more in tune with the times.

      • jetlagged says:

        I wondered about that, sort of like a virtual worldwide audition or focus group. It makes sense, but if you ask me some of the reasons for liking or not liking a particular actor are pretty silly, bordering on obtuse. I guess that could be by design – to get people to engage if they feel strongly enough about their fave. Still makes her look like she changes her mind on a whim though, not exactly a good look for a Hollywood power player. Maybe she’s powerful enough she truly doesn’t give a crap about how she looks to outsiders.

  17. ShinyGrenade says:

    Hope the next one will be better as Specter was a boring mess.
    The vilain motivation? Bouhou, his daddy liked James better!

  18. Chef Grace says:

    I don’t think Piddles comes across as smug.
    Maybe clueless and a beat behind, but no to smug.
    That GG speech was a bit pompous, but honestly harmless.
    The vest is still causing my eyes to shimmy sham, but that too will pass. 🙂

  19. feebee says:

    I’m glad Craig will be back for another. Hiddleston definitely not the one unless they toned down the hand to hand combat/ Jason Bourne-like take that suited Craig. I enjoyed The Night Manager but Tom doing the fight scenes didn’t jibe.

    As for the Bond villain – they could score one for the ages making it the American President. Of course yes, the times are moving fast… Doofus will likely be out of office before they get half way though a script. (And if we’re really lucky before summer).

  20. WendyNerd says:

    I totally get the “not tough enough” part, but… Too smug? Not that Tom isn’t smug but… Who, honestly, is too smug for James Bond? Bond is the ultimate in smugness. That’s like, half his character.

    • third ginger says:

      You are correct about Bond. It is also highly likely no one ever actually said this.

  21. Beth says:

    I’ve honestly never considered Tom as smug. Maybe he’s too polite and Broccoli has confused that with being smug. There’s definitely smug celebrities out there, but he really doesn’t seem like one of them

  22. virginfangirl2 says:

    I think he won’t get the part because he’s not smug enough.

  23. Guest says:

    Craig is the worst Bond ever. No charm at all. Stopped watching Bond after his first Bond movie. And how anyone could mention Turner is beyond my understanding. At least Hiddleston has charm. And anyone who says that Loki is not a good villian has no clue. Sorry. The Thor movies are not about Thor, not for the audience. Hiddleston overshadowed everyone. Even Hopkins who is a legend. I remember reading a RS Review and it started with: not enough Loki… Which basically says everything…. As for Bond: my friend is a huge Bond fan, long before Craig appeared and she said: saw Hiddleston’s pics in which he was wearing that black suit and sun glasses (think she meant the kimmel pics) and I would totally root for him. Her words. Not mine. She is 45 years old and has always loved Roger Moore and Pierce Brosnan. I think she got Bond right. Bond is about elegance and charm. Not about smugness and muscles. Mentioning Hiddleston and smug in the same sentence is similar to Kardashian and brain. Doesn’t work. Hiddleston is way too good for Bond.

    • virginfangirl2 says:

      I agree. Thor is a bore without Loki. Loki has all the personality, and Tom does his job so very well. I liked Moore and Brosnan over Craig as well. Their are lots of muscle rolls, but Bond was different: smooth, smart, charming, handsome. But I hope HIddleston is not Bond. Then you’re locked in that roll and have little time to do anything else.

    • Latte says:

      “Bond is about elegance and charm. Not about smugness and muscles.” So true! And on point about Loki stealing the show in the Marvel movies.

  24. Neo says:

    Not smug. cloying, yes, but too innocent and try-hard to be smug. Hiddleston os a top shelf beta to Craig’s Alpha, so he won’t do, but he might be the better actor.

  25. spidey says:

    Don’t you just despise “journalists” sometimes?

  26. Latte says:

    Hiddles must be hurting over this leak. He reads everything written about him. I love smart spy thrillers but find the Bond movies so boring and wish they’d switch it up. The tough-man Bond is just…boring, along with the silly story lines with big plot holes everywhere. I think they raised Jack Houston as a possibility. Just someone cerebral and smarter stories and I might think about watching them again. Until then, not paying to see another dumbed-down Broccoli production.

  27. TotallyBiased says:

    So on the Kong: Skull Island front, an friend in the industry saw the movie a few days ago and hit me up on FB in a pm to express his surprise at how well Tom pulled off an action figure role–in his opinion, and in the overall opinion of the group of industry-connected folk he was with, anyway. He knows I’m a fan, but I can’t see him making this up just to make me smile.
    He isn’t the only industry-connected friend (I spent years in the LA area, one acquires them :)) who has passed on positive Tom stories, either. So I think his reputation is pretty good in Hollywood as well, and people there care less about how thirsty someone appears than they do how good a job they did in the role, how well they treat others on set, and how cooperative they are promoting the film.

  28. Casey says:

    I clicked on this because I wanted to know who y’all were calling “Barbara Broccoli” cause I thought it was like, an insult about someone, but now I’m just concerned that this is a real person whose parents named her Barbara Broccoli.

  29. mikajoe says:

    smug and tom doesn’t go hand in hand. So bs story.

  30. anonla says:

    Most executives in L.A. financial circles have always only said one thing: “Daniel Craig has a 5 picture deal, period”. He may or may not have an exit clause as stated above – but it was well known he was signed for 5 pictures – so all of this conjecture over all this time was gossip and tabloid fodder. Also Kong is not going to make the kind of money to be a blockbuster – all companies concerned have already said “they will be happy with 500 million dollars” – they pretty much know it won’t hit the $$$ mark to be a blockbuster or make any money return- and the Chinese market has slowed down – due to Chinese holidays, etc. Kong is thought to be a set-up for the coming Godzilla franchise anyway. There are articles on the front page of the Hollywood Reporter reporting all of this as well.

    • third ginger says:

      I love that you read the trades and have actual facts. I commented above on the “crazy money”, but that is Hollywood today. Of course, the studio wanted KONG to make more money. I commented above that for the young human participants, Larson and Hiddleston, they avoided making a “bomb” I am 64 and have to get used to the fact that a movie making half a billion dollars is underperforming, but that is the 2017 reality. Best to you.

    • Guest says:

      Well, just comment on the China holiday part since I am a Chinese. Yes, we just ended a long-weekend holiday, which generally is good for box office, for any movie. Last night, Kong hit the bar of 1B RMB ($145M) for 13 days. Given that there will be no new major foreign movie to start this weekend , I wouldn’t be surprised if it reach 1.2B RMB($174M) or even higher eventually. And, Tom is certainly The “star” factor for this movie based on the feedbacks on Chinese social media. So, all in all, this movie should not be any negative for Tom.

  31. Hmmm says:

    Several journalists have come to his defense recently (like Justin Kroll), basically saying this is nonsense. Eager to please =! smug.

  32. ash says:

    sooooo “Plus, Barbara Broccoli doesn’t like Tom Hiddleston, he’s a bit too smug and not tough enough to play James Bond.”

    but Idris was deemed “too street, too grime”

    i cant