March 17 2011
Nathan Fillion is on the cover of latest Entertainment Weekly.
As the cover says: "Geek God".
This thread has been closed for new comments.
You need to log in to be able to post comments.
About membership.
Raggedy Edge | March 17, 15:28 CET
David Boreanaz? Maybe David Tennant in the UK.
Wow, was my response really worth the effort I just put in? Hmmm.
Kaan | March 17, 07:48 CET
[ edited by Beckilyn on 2011-03-17 15:55 ]
Beckilyn | March 17, 07:53 CET
And to be on topic: Nathan Fillion is awesome.
Kaan | March 17, 08:05 CET
Sunfire | March 17, 08:15 CET
hmbscully | March 17, 08:23 CET
PS. I'm from Alberta too!
merrylass | March 17, 08:34 CET
(and nice pic but a bit over-airbrushed. His left arm looks kinda weird too, like they may have repositioned it "in post". Or maybe he originally had a lantern ring to go with his t-shirt and they were meant to CGI something into the photo ?)
Saje | March 17, 08:40 CET
a little pez witch | March 17, 09:41 CET
Simon | March 17, 10:44 CET
BrewBunny | March 17, 11:04 CET
Simon | March 17, 11:07 CET
Photogenic much?
QuoterGal | March 17, 11:23 CET
cabri | March 17, 11:38 CET
embers | March 17, 12:37 CET
Jelly | March 17, 13:42 CET
Simon | March 17, 15:24 CET
NYPinTA | March 17, 19:19 CET
I was wondering about UK actors, actually. I certainly enjoy many things that make it over here from over there, but am left without really good context for how a BBC watching public receives them. David Boreanaz is similar in that way to Nathan because of Bones (my mother actually referred to him as "Cutie Pie" back when she watched it), but I also don't detect quite the same level of moony-eyed adoration from the nerd set. And to be totally clear, I'm not dissing on the man or on Angel, it's just an observation and comparison of the way that I see him perceived by fans versus the way Nathan is perceived by fans.
Raggedy Edge | March 18, 07:03 CET
David Boreanaz is (depending on taste) 1) but not 2) from above i.e. if you listen to him in interview he's clearly not a geek, not into sci-fi etc. which may partly explain the differing fan attitudes. He's also come across a few times as seeing playing Angel as a job (as i'm sure most actors do cos, y'know, it is) whereas Nathan clearly loved playing Mal, he's as big a fan of the character as we are.
(also not dissing the guy BTW, i've got a lot of time for DB in interview, he seems straightforward)
Saje | March 18, 08:12 CET
NF is extraordinarly good at playing larger than life characters who do what they do largely out of sheer love for the job, whether he's Captain Hammer, Castle or Mal (well, it's not the job he loves so much as ship and experiencing his idea of freedom), even Caleb, I suppose. I'll leave his ob-gyn from "Waitress" out of this one. Aside from his off-camera personality, I'd say his old-fashioned joy of performance is one of the things that makes him so beloved by fans.
I've never watched "Bones," but it seems to me that Angel was a guy thrust into a couple of jobs (vampire, hero) he never really asked for and didn't particularly want but also could find no way out of and therefore commits to the hilt. That conflict was an essential part of the character and if DB felt like playing a geek fave was a bit of a chore too at times, it probably was something that, as method-influenced actors like to say, he could "use."
Actors don't have to resemble the people they play, but I do think there's a reason certain people and personality types might gravitate to certain roles.
bobster | March 18, 11:00 CET
I think it's kind of amazing. I'm really happy for Nathan's success
okelay | March 18, 14:35 CET