What happened to Charlie Hunnam?

Charlie for the QAF reboot!!!!

Charlie needs to head back to TV. And no, not QAF but one where he gets to play the bad ass lead like Sons of Anarchy.

The pretty butterfly on his beautiful chest.

I wanted to see the movie but it didn't come to my area.

R3 I thought that was a bow tie

The first Papillon with Steve McQueen was a huge hit - this version with Charlie got very little release.

OP Saw it, forgotten already, I loved the original and all the humanity and care was missing from the remake. And Rameen noodles sucks

R5 Not a bow tie.

Didn't he have a mini breakdown after Sons of Anarchy ended and quit that baby whipping film?

I like Steve McQueen's butterfly better.

The only post-Sons career decision he's made that was smart was getting out of Fifty Shades of Insipid.

All his other choices on paper looked good, but had danger signs all over them.

R10 That's what he claimed in order to get out of making 50 Shades Of Grey - in hindsight he should have done the movie. It turned out to be a successful franchise. Not the best movie(s) but made lots of $$$$$$$$ and would have successfully kept him in the public eye.

R13 Just about say the same thing.

I loved Charlie in Pacific Rim.

I’d love to give Charlie a pacific rim.

I loved Charlie in QAF rim.

He is the WORST actor going. Seems like a nice guy but he is so shallow as an actor. I saw Papillon, what a waste of time and money that was.

R17 it looks real...............Is it?

R20 Acting love, from the original Queer as Folk

R20 he wore an “anal shield” in that scene.

R19 Charlie’s acting was excellent in “The Lost City Of Z”. Other than that....

Harvey girl?

The icing on the cake - Charlie's ass is begging for a rim job!

From Pacific Rim.

Does he look like any other stars?

R26 No, he's the one and only (you can't clone me).

Charlie doesn’t have sex appeal.

R28 Surely you jest - he does!!!

Sexy Charlie.

He looks like US Education Secretary Betsy De Vos at R30.

R31 You are hereby challenged to a fight...….

[quote] You are hereby challenged to a fight...

That King Arthur stinker seems to have been a real blow to his career momentum. The Papillion remake was unnecessary and did nothing for him.

He just comes off as unlikable for some reason.

Pretty, but not the greatest film actor. He played an officer at the beginning of [italic]the Lost City of Z[/italic] and was shown on horseback. He sat in the saddle like a sack of potatoes. Not convincing. Some actors can't pull it off; Terence Howard was not believable as an Air Force colonel in [italic]Iron Man[/italic]. Hunnam was appealing and competent enough that I watched the whole movie. Also, it's interesting subject material. I'd watch him in another TV show, but won't rush to the theater to pay for a ticket to see one of his movies.

He looked like a little boy playing dress up in SOA (a shit show, btw). Handsome as fuck but no charisma.

He needs a big dick up his pretty ass. Acting-wise, he is adequate. Gorgeous man whatever the case..

In years past this career downturn would have been explained by the fact that he's a shit actor. Now we just expect that people without talent will continue to get work.

He just makes awful career choices. Every move this guy makes is stupid. He doesn’t know how to stay in his lane.

Is he a fetish object of any DL trolls like Gale Harold was?

Maybe Charlie's just a medium-talent pretty boy. Maybe he was just a flash-in-the-pan, he'd hardly be the first one. There's always tv, Charlie, where your pretty vacantness will be appreciated, at least until the pretty wears off.

Luck is the biggest element to the success of ANY actor. Talent or not, Charlie has done well for himself if you ask me.

R34 King Arthur had a huge budget which was a red flag in the first place and when it flopped it was disastrous for everyone. Papillon was also expensive and did next to nothing at the box office. Charlie should look for an inexpensive, interesting little movie that may put him back in the game again. Forget the big budget crap.

Ok, I could criticize aot of things in King Arthur, mostly because of Guy Ritchie's style of film when he directs. But, I found it to be entertaining, over all.

I lust after Charlie r45, but King Arthur was egregiously terrible.

How long do they have to spend covering up his stupid tattoos for his films? The ones where they aren't character-appropriate, that is. Or is that all done in post these days?

I still wish he was playing Aquaman.

R47 Charlie doesn’t have any tattoos dumbass. His tats were stage makeup for Sons Of Anarchy.

R47 Charlie is much closer in looks to the original Aquaman.

My default contribution to every Charlie Hunnam thread on DL. This man is sex.

What’s his skin color?

Young:

I like him, but I never thought he was a good actor.

Who?

Hunnam

[QUOTE]My default contribution to every Charlie Hunnam thread on DL. This man is sex.

There’s millions of hot guys with abs who take sexy pics on Instagram. And for the vast majority of them, that’s where their fame ends: taking sexy pics on Instagram.

His American accent was so terrible, I could barely stand it in (the overall fun movie) Pacific Rim. But then his normal speaking voice was terrible in King Arthur. And that’s when I realized I hated his voice. True story.

His acting was even worse than Katie Holmes in that shit film Abandon (2002) and that's saying a lot.

Wanna Charlie Hunnam pillow coverslip?