Michael Fassbender

TPF may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, and others

#1,021
Morgane said:
Honestly,despite all the criticism,I didn't dislike The Great Gatsby and it was surely a better choice than Grace. The festival's opener is traditionally out of competition,so I hope this will not be the case :pbut yes,it would be very good to see them there.
I think that Slow West is finished. It was at Cannes in search for buyers, probably there was a private screening or they showed just some footage. I'm very curious to see it too. Let's see what happens with TIFF..
However I've just controlled the IMDb page and the release date for Macbeth is still 2014, 29 January 2015 in Germany.. but I don't know how the news are updated there.
Click to expand...

Well, I think The Great Gatsby is a good entertainment and everything but it's an average movie. Its performances are fine so as art direction, photography and costumes but it was too much for Fitzgerald's story. But I agree that it was far a better choice than Grace Of Monaco. Cannes didn't receive Gatsby very well but GOT was much worse based on what I read.

I can see Macbeth opening Cannes but on competition I don't know...Saint Laurent was running up this year so it's a possibility...let's wait and see! ;) Imagine Michael with that AMAZING cast over there...it would be a DREAM. On the other hand, if it's released this year, which I think is more possible, it might receive a premiere by the end of November or December, like TWOWT. I wanted it to be released on a festival but...

About Slow West, it's probably finished but on wednesday we'll know because TIFF will announce more films! And on the following weeks too. It's definitely a film to be screened over there!
 
#1,022
bhb2014 said:
hahahahaahaha I wouldn't know what to do!!! But he's so nice and friendly that I wouldn't be ashamed of taking a picture of him hahahahaha he would probably smile like in this picture or do some funny face :cool: Loved his slippers! Are they havaianas?!
Click to expand...


I have no idea? Maybe? I don't pay as much attention to his choice of clothing (unless he's in some suit or something) as I do when I stare at his face :D.
 
#1,023
Solemony said:
I have no idea? Maybe? I don't pay as much attention to his choice of clothing (unless he's in some suit or something) as I do when I stare at his face :D.
Click to expand...

hahahaahahha I love his face but I also love his clothes. He's also so elegant and sexy, even with slippers haahha but I agree that his shark smile is enough to make me happy :p Btw, do you guys know how tall is he? Sometimes he seems to be like 6'0 but other times he seems to be shorter than 5'11... :thinkin:
 
#1,024
Finally can post.
As I was saying, he looks pretty cool. I think some celebs wouldn't be so but I am being biased cuz its Michael LOL. Makes me wanna pack my bags and move to London
I think he might be 6', if not then an inch or 2 shorter, either way he's taller than me. I'm 5'9 so yeah I'd have to look up to him which works fine by me
P.S. he looks good in anything, dressed down or dressed up
 
#1,028
Blueberry12 said:
Hugh is 6' 2" and Ben is 6' according to IMDB and other sources.
Click to expand...

In this picture, Michael and Benedict look to have the same height! In the other one he's also a little bit taller than Chiwetel, who is like 5'10 or so...so Michael is like 6'0 of pure hotness, charism and talent!!! :cool: Perfect!
 

Attachments

  • michael-fassbender-chiwetel-ejiofor-12-years-a-slave-tiff-portraits-01.jpg
    michael-fassbender-chiwetel-ejiofor-12-years-a-slave-tiff-portraits-01.jpg
    282.3 KB · Views: 600
  • tumblr_mzkiruBUII1qdghnpo1_400.jpg
    tumblr_mzkiruBUII1qdghnpo1_400.jpg
    65.8 KB · Views: 592
#1,032
This is so odd but every time I see a picture of Michael wearing that costume in 300, I can't help but compare his lower half to a baby's diaper-clad bottom- with more finesse of course. Even though his body is great for ladies like us to ogle at, I think it's the most ineffective outfit to wear in a battle. Can anyone imagine if this was incorporated into today's men/women in the army or marine, etc? X3.
 
#1,033
Solemony said:
This is so odd but every time I see a picture of Michael wearing that costume in 300, I can't help but compare his lower half to a baby's diaper-clad bottom- with more finesse of course. Even though his body is great for ladies like us to ogle at, I think it's the most ineffective outfit to wear in a battle. Can anyone imagine if this was incorporated into today's men/women in the army or marine, etc? X3.
Click to expand...

hahahahahahahha it's true!!! Pretty weird! I also don't like this long hair, it also might be hard to fight with a hair that long on your face.
 
#1,035
Solemony said:
This is so odd but every time I see a picture of Michael wearing that costume in 300, I can't help but compare his lower half to a baby's diaper-clad bottom- with more finesse of course. Even though his body is great for ladies like us to ogle at, I think it's the most ineffective outfit to wear in a battle. Can anyone imagine if this was incorporated into today's men/women in the army or marine, etc? X3.
Click to expand...
Lets face it, if gear like those were worn in today's war, there would be no war at all -snap-
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top