JA from MNPP here. The picture on the left is Paul Bettany walking the streets of New York (no, not Walking The Streets; just walking on the street) yesterday (via) and looking delicious; the picture on the right is Bettany on the set of the movie for which he's shaved his head, Creation, in which he plays Charles Darwin (via) - co-starring his wife Jennifer Connolly as Darwin's wife and obviously coming soon to an Oscar campaign for 2009 near you!
I suppose Charles Darwin wasn't much of a dish, but Paul Bettany certainly is, and it wouldn't be the first time they sexed up a biopic role with an actor prettier than the person being bio-picked was. So why must he wear that matted mange on his head in the movie when he looks so pretty without in on the street? Bald can be beautiful, Hollywood.
I suppose Charles Darwin wasn't much of a dish, but Paul Bettany certainly is, and it wouldn't be the first time they sexed up a biopic role with an actor prettier than the person being bio-picked was. So why must he wear that matted mange on his head in the movie when he looks so pretty without in on the street? Bald can be beautiful, Hollywood.So I guess what I'm saying here is,
I want a sexy Charles Darwin dammit!
It's survival of the hottest, y'all!
.I want a sexy Charles Darwin dammit!
It's survival of the hottest, y'all!
Posts
2 comments:
so do I!
I love Paul Bettany and they always cast him as spooky or unattractive friend (i mean aside from Wimbledon) when in reality he's a babe.
but if they're going to change history to make biopics more entertaining (which they do all the time) shouldn't they go all the way and not worry about verisimilitude with the bad hairdos?
Re: this whole topic
No comment.
Post a Comment