I got about 100, 000 words on this one...be careful what you wish for
Seriously anyone with any questions about this one...I probably have the answer!
Is the casting of Russell Torvey the most ridiculous thing ever? I mean he is plain Jane at best
As Baemax said (couldn't double quote!) "He's the Malboro man!" is a quote from the play. He's supposed to be a bit of bland plain kind of guy (though hello Patrick Wilson in the HBO version) but also personally I LOVE Russell Tovey and find him very attractive...not just when he takes his top off! I think he has the right 'look' for Joe, in that-like the comments that got Tovey himself into trouble- he doesn't have a 'camp' look about him neither is he a 'butch' guy either.
In terms of acting, I think he's widely underrated and will do a great job with what is a difficult role-someone mentioned him in 'Looking' as a good example, and also his work in A View From a Bridge on stage was brilliant (I understand he's done other good work on stage but that's all I've seen).
Talking of casting, thoughts on Nathan Lane anyone? I trust Marianne Elliot's decision there but he's not who I would have first thought of.
I can't shake my memories of Greg Hicks in the role, and Al Pacino did a very credible job in the miniseries. Adding Nathan Lane to the mix just makes me think "one of these things is not like the others.....". I'm sure he'll be fine, I just can't see it without actually seeing it.
He's probably pricey, yes, but he's done theatre before, he's certainly aware that you do the screen work for the money and the stage work for the love. For the prestige of playing in what is a big deal production at the National Theatre in London, I doubt he's been offered, say, Producers-level wages, and I suspect he's okay with that.