Was Tom Holland The Right Fit For Uncharted Role?

[laggyteabag]

I like Tom Holland, but it feels like he is in everything.

Its like Laura Bailey - she is really talented, and she does a really great job with pretty much every role that she is given, but if a game is going to feature a major character, who is a young woman, chances are she is going to be voiced by Laura, and is just gets pretty grating hearing the same voice come out of every character's mouth.

I feel the same way about Tom.

 

[BrawlMan]

I'm sure he can do Nathan Drake fine since there's nothing much that stands out about Nathan Drake either. I admit, Tom Holland would not be my first pick. I say Scott Adkins has a better fit for Nathan Drake. His acting skills he's definitely improved ever sinceThe Accident Man. Though I prefer he did Bruce Wayne and Batman.

 

[happyninja42]

Ok so, I just did a quick wiki on the character of nathan drake, and his birthday is almost EXACTLY mine. I am literally 1 month (and a few days), older than Nathan. And according to the dated timelines of when he started doing Indiana Jones-esque ruin diving, he would've been a TEENAGER, or early 20's at most. While I couldn't really synch up the events of game 1, with the wiki details, it specifically says , under the heading of "Searching for Henry Avery's treasure" (was that the treasure from game 1? i forget) was done in the late 1990's, which, again, would make him in his early 20s at most. It describes him bribing his way into a prison, dungeon diving, the works.

So, yeah, 24 year old Tom Holland is a perfectly accurate age to depict Nathan Drake, given how old the freaking character himself is established to have already been doing this shit. In fact, the wiki indicates he was already starting to do this kind of shit in his EARLY teens. So, LITERALLY a highschool kid, trying to be Indiana Jones, and just continuing to do it until middle age. So again, I don't see an issue with Tom playing him, especially if the whole idea is to have him playing a YOUNG Nathan Drake, at the start of his Uncharted career. The age choice, is in fact, a bit LATER than the canon age he started doing all this shit.

Nathan Drake

Nathan "Nate" Drake (born Nathan Morgan) is the main protagonist of the Uncharted franchise. In the video game series, he is the central character and playable protagonist. A professional treasure hunter, Nate is described as a "deep-sea salvage expert and action-pro" with a knack for surviving...

uncharted.fandom.com

So yeah, I don't see the issue. It's not off brand, it's 100% on brand.

 

[hanselthecaretaker]

Well, yes and no. It's not like there haven't been big muscly guys in movies before Arnold. And even other big muscly guys like Jesse Ventura or Hulk Hogan never made it big in the movies. Arnold just has a particular charm to his screen presence because of how he talks and how he acts, ontop of him being a huge, swole dude. And I mean Predator, Terminator, Terminator 2, Total Recall, True Lies are pretty damn good in my opinion. Even the first Conan harnesses Arnold's abilities very well.

Agreed, but want to see the movie that truly made Arnold? Watch Pumping Iron. Sure, it’s even more muscly dudes from the 70’s all sweaty and whatnot (although really, it was like the Bible for any college age gym rat even when I was in school), but man, does his charisma shine through. And the mind games...he was ruthless in psychological warfare. Not to mention of course simply dominating the sport physically, as if he needed anything else.

IIRC some movie exec saw it and the light bulb went on for Conan the Barbarian.

 

[Gordon_4]

Agreed, but want to see the movie that truly made Arnold? Watch Pumping Iron. Sure, it’s even more muscly dudes from the 70’s all sweaty and whatnot (although really, it was like the Bible for any college age gym rat even when I was in school), but man, does his charisma shine through. And the mind games...he was ruthless in psychological warfare. Not to mention of course simply dominating the sport physically, as if he needed anything else.

IIRC some movie exec saw it and the light bulb went on for Conan the Barbarian.

Arnold has presence and charisma, and in the sorts of roles he was good in he only ever needed one or the other; and he’s a smart bastard. And even though he grew a little as time went on, serious emotion was difficult in early movies; Conan excepted. Commando is a great movie, but it’s a little cringe watching him play dad to Alyssa Milano but then fast forward to Kindergarten Cop and he’s great with the kids in that movie. Same with Edward Furlong in T2; I’ll never not choke up when he explains he understands why John cries but knows he never will.

 

[Bob_McMillan]

Huh.

This specific quote is what worried me. That is a complete misreading of the character. Hell, the exact opposite of Drake.

But I don't mind Holland at all as Drake. He is completely capable of playing the character. I mean, it's just snarky dude who gets beat up a lot... If his depiction is bad, I'd say that is totally on the directors.

 

[Dirty Hipsters]

They really need an LOL button on this site. Was this really a publicity still? I don't think you saw his shirt in the movie looking anything like that.

ITMT: I looked for a physical description of Paul. Other than him being 15 when he goes out into the desert? Nada. Maybe if I keep looking.

I'm currently reading Dune. Duke Leto is described as being tall, thin, and having hawk-like features, and Paul is said to resemble him.

Leto Atreides I was a tall man with olive skin and black hair. He had a narrow face full of angles and planes, with a high-bridged nose that gave him the look of a hawk, and woodsmoke in his gray eyes.

 

[Eacaraxe]

...especially if the whole idea is to have him playing a YOUNG Nathan Drake, at the start of his Uncharted career. The age choice, is in fact, a bit LATER than the canon age he started doing all this shit.

Not everyone can be River Phoenix.



I can absolutely see Holland as Nathan...provided they play up his perpetual bad luck, inexperience, and naivete, making it an action/comedy rather than a straightforward action/adventure flick. But from Holland's commentary, it doesn't sound like they have, which makes that a writer/director problem rather than a Tom Holland problem.

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

Ok so, I just did a quick wiki on the character of nathan drake, and his birthday is almost EXACTLY mine. I am literally 1 month (and a few days), older than Nathan. And according to the dated timelines of when he started doing Indiana Jones-esque ruin diving, he would've been a TEENAGER, or early 20's at most. While I couldn't really synch up the events of game 1, with the wiki details, it specifically says , under the heading of "Searching for Henry Avery's treasure" (was that the treasure from game 1? i forget) was done in the late 1990's, which, again, would make him in his early 20s at most. It describes him bribing his way into a prison, dungeon diving, the works.

So, yeah, 24 year old Tom Holland is a perfectly accurate age to depict Nathan Drake, given how old the freaking character himself is established to have already been doing this shit. In fact, the wiki indicates he was already starting to do this kind of shit in his EARLY teens. So, LITERALLY a highschool kid, trying to be Indiana Jones, and just continuing to do it until middle age. So again, I don't see an issue with Tom playing him, especially if the whole idea is to have him playing a YOUNG Nathan Drake, at the start of his Uncharted career. The age choice, is in fact, a bit LATER than the canon age he started doing all this shit.

Nathan Drake

Nathan "Nate" Drake (born Nathan Morgan) is the main protagonist of the Uncharted franchise. In the video game series, he is the central character and playable protagonist. A professional treasure hunter, Nate is described as a "deep-sea salvage expert and action-pro" with a knack for surviving...

uncharted.fandom.com

So yeah, I don't see the issue. It's not off brand, it's 100% on brand.

Good casting takes more than "age is about right". Tom Holland is adequate for Marvel ensemble stuff where he can play off the people actually carrying the movie, but I think he's a pretty weak lead. He's puppy level adorable but doesn't have much presence; only reason he's Drake is because he's hot with the four quadrants right now.

 

[happyninja42]

Good casting takes more than "age is about right". Tom Holland is adequate for Marvel ensemble stuff where he can play off the people actually carrying the movie, but I think he's a pretty weak lead. He's puppy level adorable but doesn't have much presence; only reason he's Drake is because he's hot with the four quadrants right now.

Oh I'm VERY aware it's more than just the age. But the complaint from multiple people in this very thread is 'Waah, he looks too young! He looks like a highschooler! I don't believe someone that young would be an action/adventure star doing Indiana Jones stuff!" and yet that is EXACTLY what Nathan Drake started out as, according to his own background. A young, wet behind the ears KID, thinking he's cool and skilled enough to be doing life threatening adventure stuff. In fact I'm pretty sure his mentor character brings up his earlier adventures and mishaps, to tease him and bring him down a few pegs over the course of the games.

So I still don't see the problem. Or, more accurately I see the problem, but it's an incredibly shallow, and superficial problem that they need to get over. NONE of this shit is realistic, but the line in the sand is that they don't think the MC is sufficiently old/manly looking to play a fictional character. Give me a break.

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

Oh I'm VERY aware it's more than just the age. But the complaint from multiple people in this very thread is 'Waah, he looks too young! He looks like a highschooler! I don't believe someone that young would be an action/adventure star doing Indiana Jones stuff!" and yet that is EXACTLY what Nathan Drake started out as, according to his own background. A young, wet behind the ears KID, thinking he's cool and skilled enough to be doing life threatening adventure stuff. In fact I'm pretty sure his mentor character brings up his earlier adventures and mishaps, to tease him and bring him down a few pegs over the course of the games.

So I still don't see the problem. Or, more accurately I see the problem, but it's an incredibly shallow, and superficial problem that they need to get over. NONE of this shit is realistic, but the line in the sand is that they don't think the MC is sufficiently old/manly looking to play a fictional character. Give me a break.

You're still going on about his age and appearance. I didn't bring any of that up.

 

[Agema]

Or has this project always been a misunderstood disaster waiting to happen, like *I lost count of* so many other VG-to-film adaptions?

Is he a good enough actor? If so, he'll be fine. Granted, there are some limitations: John Candy would never have successfully played Rambo. But by and large, any capable, versatile actor can take on pretty much any role. Obviously, assuming the director and everything else functions okay.

I have to wonder if there is an agenda to it? You've got a fairly tiny looking fellow playing Paul Atreides in Dune. Played Henry V. "Wayne" on Amazon Prime, another tiny dude, beats up many much larger people. Now you have little Tom Holland (5'7" 140 lbs) playing someone who I think we were to be reminded of the very large Nathan Fillion (6'2" 215 lbs). And Gina Carrano is cancled. They trying to tell us something?

5'8 (-ish?) Tom Cruise has already played Jack Reacher, who's supposed to be a man-mountain way over 6" and built like a brick sh**house.

Incidentally, from the book source material, Paul Atreides is definitely not a big guy. One of the characters describes him as small for his age (early in the book, when he's mid-teens). Undoubtedly he could go through a late growth spurt, but the implication is modest size. His build is definitely described as slender: wiry and fast.

 

[Agema]

I'm sure he can do Nathan Drake fine since there's nothing much that stands out about Nathan Drake either. I admit, Tom Holland would not be my first pick. I say Scott Adkins has a better fit for Nathan Drake. In his acting skills he's definitely improved ever since The Accident Man. Though I prefer he did Bruce Wayne and Batman.

I think my feeling is that I prefer people to look athletic without the obvious gym effort.

Look at Chuck Norris in his karate champ, early film career days and that's a guy who can do amazing things and kick the living crap out you, but he really does not have the absurd muscle definition of modern movie stars. Your average winner of World's Strongest Man is fucking huge, but there's a sort of softness or flabbiness to their build, because those fat reserves matter for sustained exertion. Most regularly athletic people just look fit. The fine sculpting of movie stars is the victory of form over function: showy, but surprisingly ineffectual.

In particular, a great climber wants a really good power to weight ratio, with lots and lots of stamina. This absolutely does not favour super-huge muscles, and the sorts of muscles they may have particularly well developed will be very different from the conventional gym freak pecs and abs appearance.

 

[BrawlMan]

I think my feeling is that I prefer people to look athletic without the obvious gym effort.

Look at Chuck Norris in his karate champ, early film career days and that's a guy who can do amazing things and kick the living crap out you, but he really does not have the absurd muscle definition of modern movie stars. Your average winner of World's Strongest Man is fucking huge, but there's a sort of softness or flabbiness to their build, because those fat reserves matter for sustained exertion. Most regularly athletic people just look fit. The fine sculpting of movie stars is the victory of form over function: showy, but surprisingly ineffectual.

In particular, a great climber wants a really good power to weight ratio, with lots and lots of stamina. This absolutely does not favour super-huge muscles, and the sorts of muscles they may have particularly well developed will be very different from the conventional gym freak pecs and abs appearance.

I agree with you, but Scott Adkins was just what came to my mind first. if you got somebody that's just athletic build that could fit for Nathan drake, go right ahead.

However the first time I saw it Chuck Norris in Way of the Dragon, he looked almost unrecognizable to me. I believe I first saw that movie when, I was about eight.

 

[deleted20220709]

DELETED

 

[Agema]

I agree with you, but Scott Adkins was just what came to my mind first. if you got somebody that's just athletic build that could fit for Nathan drake, go right ahead.

I also have to admit, at first I confused him with Scott Adsit (30 Rock), and couldn't possibly imagine why you'd seriously recommend him.

 

[Agema]

I've got two co-workers who are into bodybuilding and feats of strength, one being a few years older then me and mostly retired from the scene, the other in his mid 20's and getting really into it. Something they repeatedly talk about is the "lifting belly", the unavoidable side effect of eating a mountain of high energy food every day to maximize muscle, but also the perquisite for sustained effort like you say. Their diets are also very particular in different ways, because if you want to look shredded like a Julienne Salad you need to exclude anything that can result in actual weight gain while also cutting off the drinking a day or so prior to showing off your utterly ridiculous muscle definition. It is a far cry from the "lots of proteins and fat at least nine times a day" they do for actual muscle gain.

My wife watches some reality TV shows, and she finds it hilarious in one that there are these vain, buff airheads who love showing off their muscles, but the minute they try to do something physical, it goes horribly wrong: like setting off on a run and collapsing exhausted within a few minutes.

 

[gorfias]

5'8 (-ish?) Tom Cruise has already played Jack Reacher, who's supposed to be a man-mountain way over 6" and built like a brick sh**house.

Incidentally, from the book source material, Paul Atreides is definitely not a big guy. One of the characters describes him as small for his age (early in the book, when he's mid-teens). Undoubtedly he could go through a late growth spurt, but the implication is modest size. His build is definitely described as slender: wiry and fast.

Yeah, Tom has "small man disease" for sure.
I'm told in this thread Paul looks like his dad, who is tall. In the book, at least early on, Paul is only 15. The kid portraying him looks like a small adult.
In fairness, Henry V does not look like a very large person.

 

[Agema]

Yeah, Tom has "small man disease" for sure.
I'm told in this thread Paul looks like his dad, who is tall.

Maybe - but this could just be referring to his facial features. As said, I'm pretty sure there's a reference to him being small in the book as well - although of course this could represent slight build rather than low height.

In fairness, Henry V does not look like a very large person.

From historical record, he was reported to be very tall even by today's standards - well over 6'. Given the average height of an adult male in the era was about 5'6" (low nutrition for commoners restricted their growth), he would have been huge.

 

[Wintermute]

His Rihanna is pretty good though.