Comic writer Mark Millar says so and he’s a whole lot better connected than I am. If it’s true, I like it.
Comment with Facebook
About John Campea
You may like these posts
3 thoughts on “Jim Caviezel is Superman?”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Jim Caviezel is TOO GOOD AN ACTOR to play such a ONE-DIMENSIONAL character. I hope he turns it down or he will be forever type-cast as Superman. I say this with considerable regret as it would mean an opportunity to see him on the big screen in such a popular role and probably in several sequels, and he is absolutely magnificent on the big screen–I adore watching him. But he is way too gifted an actor, perhaps the most gifted young actor of our time, with an enormous emotional reserve, and a ‘persona’ that is absolutely magnetic!!! (Remember him in High Crimes, Bobby Jones, and Angel Eyes!) I just don’t see him as Superman(although the thought did occur to me in the early scene in High Crimes when he is wearing the glasses and his hair is so polished and neatly combed–I think he was channeling Clark Kent at that moment!) But rather than Superman, I see him as a powerful “Heathcliff” from Wuthering Heights! Isn’t it about time someone reproduced this haunting novel? The most recent version with Ralph Fiennes was a poor imitation at best. It’s a great and complex role for Caviezel who literally incarnates that “eerie dark beauty” as others have described it. Of course, it would mean some violent scenes, something he is evidently averse to. What a man of contradictions! Gibson’s Passion was the most violent film I’ve ever seen! And therein lay its power! Jim Caviezel should most unequivocally decline the role of Superman! Imagine–from playing our Lord Jesus Christ to playing a comic book hero! Gimme a break!
Yeah, I saw that too … there’s a question mark in the title for a reason. I won’t believe any casting story until they actually start shooting. I only posted this one because the guy’s connected and he seems just dead sure …
Aint it cool is reporting otherwise…..but we’ll see I suppose.