I am a fan of Tom Hardy as Shinzon

[Dick Whitman]

Yeah, I said it. I don't care if thats not the so-called consensus. I was a fan of him from the first screening in the theater. Clearly one of the best things about Nemesis. I am not at all surprised that his career has continued to rise and work with A-list directors after it.

Just curious how many others feel the same way? Now just liking his acting in the film, does not mean you have to like the film as a whole or even the idea of a clone of Picard or its execution in the script.

 

[RyuRoots]

Non-consensus opinions aren't exactly rare on this BBS (it's one of the good things about it). That said, I'm not a fan myself. I don't think he was the worst actor ever or anything, but I don't think he was up to par with the TNG regulars while I think that Alice Krige, F. Murray Abraham, and Malcom McDowell played their roles on a more even footing.

 

[JarodRussell]

The thing is I think that he was totally miscast as Picard's clone. He's a good actor but was totally wrong for this role.

 

[T'Girl]

While I did enjoy his performance in the movie Inseption, that is the only thing he has ever been in where I thought he was superior in the least. His performance in Bronson was beyond dull. Nemesis was, if anything, held back by his inclusion in the production. His performance was at best average and I don't think he should have been cast for the role.

It wouldn't be to hard to come up with a short list of actors who would have been available at the time (and for the same money) who would have excelled in the part.

 

[RoJoHen]

The thing is I think that he was totally miscast as Picard's clone. He's a good actor but was totally wrong for this role.

I agree with this. I think Hardy is a fine actor, and I've enjoyed him in other things, but he was the wrong actor for Shinzon. That said, I also feel that Shinzon was a terrible character, so I'm not sure anybody else could have done better.

 

[Amaris]

The thing is I think that he was totally miscast as Picard's clone. He's a good actor but was totally wrong for this role.

I agree with this. I think Hardy is a fine actor, and I've enjoyed him in other things, but he was the wrong actor for Shinzon. That said, I also feel that Shinzon was a terrible character, so I'm not sure anybody else could have done better.

Agreed. I liked Hardy in Bronson, and I have yet to see Inception, but it's already on my Netflix queue wishlist. He's a good actor who I think did fairly well with what he was given in Nemesis, but I just don't think it was the right part for him.

Of course, I feel this way about F. Murray Abraham in Insurrection as well.

 

[F. King Daniel]

I thought Hardy did a good job as Picard's mini-me. I didn't have any trouble seeing him as an evil version of the cocky young Picard who got into a bar fight with Naussicans.

But then again...I...like...Nemesis!

 

[JarodRussell]

I thought Hardy did a good job as Picard's mini-me.

That's the problem of Nemesis.

 

[Captain Mike]

Hardy was fine as Jean Luc's clone. Too bad it suffered under a terrible director that didn't know what the TNG was about. Why do you think he hasn't directed since?!?!?!?

 

[Gojira]

The thing is I think that he was totally miscast as Picard's clone. He's a good actor but was totally wrong for this role.

I agree. My thoughts are, if Brent Spiner could play Data and B4 then Patrick Stewart could have played Picard and Shinzon.

 

[Too Much Fun]

It's hard to separate the performance from the role, but looking back, I'm sure I just hate his character and love his performance, as odd and rare as that is. I know that when I first saw "Star Trek: Nemesis", I thought it was great and was really surprised and disappointed by the negative reaction on the Internet. I actually had a conversation with a friend where we were both saying, "wasn't Shinzon awesome?". I think what happened was I got so excited about seeing the TNG cast on the big screen for the first time and was so disarmed by the conviction of Hardy's performance that I was fooled into thinking I'd seen a good movie.

Once I thought about it, though, I realized that the character itself was a stupid idea and had some of the most forced and unconvincing back story of any villain in the history of Star Trek. The fact remains, however, that Tom Hardy brought intensity and charisma to his role enough to at least partially obscure the inherent flaws in the character. He showed excellent screen presence and delivered his dialog with passion. As an ignorant teen, I didn't understand how this could be done by someone playing a character that sucks. I think now I can more accurately identify what I saw as a tremendous actor acting the hell out of a shit role.

 

[ST-One]

Hardy's performance in Nemesis was really good. He's a high-point in that film - not necessarily his character, but his acting.

 

[Anachronus]

His performance was good, especially when given what he had to work with.

 

[Quinton O'Connor]

I liked Hardy as Shinzon quite a bit. It's like how I stand on Malcolm McDowell and Soren; given what they had to work with, they did very well.

I think I like Shinzon more than I do Soren, though.

 

[Doug Otte]

It's hard to separate the performance from the role, but looking back, I'm sure I just hate his character and love his performance, as odd and rare as that is. I know that when I first saw "Star Trek: Nemesis", I thought it was great and was really surprised and disappointed by the negative reaction on the Internet. I actually had a conversation with a friend where we were both saying, "wasn't Shinzon awesome?". I think what happened was I got so excited about seeing the TNG cast on the big screen for the first time and was so disarmed by the conviction of Hardy's performance that I was fooled into thinking I'd seen a good movie.

Once I thought about it, though, I realized that the character itself was a stupid idea and had some of the most forced and unconvincing back story of any villain in the history of Star Trek. The fact remains, however, that Tom Hardy brought intensity and charisma to his role enough to at least partially obscure the inherent flaws in the character. He showed excellent screen presence and delivered his dialog with passion. As an ignorant teen, I didn't understand how this could be done by someone playing a character that sucks. I think now I can more accurately identify what I saw as a tremendous actor acting the hell out of a shit role.

My experience was like yours, although I was not a teen and thus can't fall back on that excuse.

When I saw both ST V and Nemesis on opening nights, I loved them. My opinion of both films went southward on subsequent viewings.

However, I still think that Hardy did the best he could with the material.

Doug

 

[Alrik]

His performance was fine. It was the character that sucked. Not much he could do about that.

 

[sonak]

I thought his performance was fine, and that Shinzon was an effective villain. I really thought the many problems of "Nemesis" were in other areas entirely, not in Hardy's performance. Having Picard be retconned as bald in his younger years was just insulting and stupid, though.

Oh, and Nero from Trek XI is at least ten times more poorly conceived and poorly motivated than Shinzon could be.

 

[knine]

I liked Tom Hardy fine as Shinzon.

I also like good writing, plots that makes sense, actors that stay out of the way of writers, and directors that actually cares about Star Trek. Sadly, all those are missing in Nemesis.

 

[plynch]

Funny thread title.

 

[Quinton O'Connor]

Hardy did an excellent job. Shinzon was a highlight of the film.