Alan Webb is the clear choice to play Ovett! Looks just like him. The odds are about the same for Webb to pick up good acting skills and a British accent than they are for Radcliffe to pick up good running form. Most importantly, it's a sure-fire way for Webb to become world class again.
Paulson wrote:
Couple shots of him running:
http://cdn01.cdnwp.celebuzz.com/wp-content/uploads/legacy-imgx/2/9/4/8/6/8/1/orig-2948681.jpghttp://cdn04.cdn.justjared.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/11/radcliffe-running/daniel-radcliffe-running-in-the-rain-05.jpgHe might want to tie his shoes a bit better.
The heel strike in the second one is going to have to be changed as well. Also, Harry is going to have to use a slimming spell to drop a few kilos; elite runners in the mid-d are much thinner than a normal actor.
could be twins wrote:
http://www.heyuguys.co.uk/images/2013/10/Seb-Coe-Daniel-Radcliffe.jpg
That picture reminds me of Lionel Messi
http://media.meltybuzz.fr/article-961206-ajust_930/lionel-messi-footballeur-pour-le-club-de.jpgJoe Gilgun would make a good Ovett. Bloody good actor too.
Dea luck wrote:
Oh, that's a shame! 1.75 is a bit small to play Ovett, who was 1.83m. Still think Nighy is a good choice to play Peter Coe.
Agree with Nighy, hes brilliant.
Dea luck wrote:
Oh, that's a shame! 1.75 is a bit small to play Ovett, who was 1.83m. Still think Nighy is a good choice to play Peter Coe.
From Born To Run:
Peter Coe: "here we go again!" while he swings his arm and smiles triumphantly
Deanouk wrote:
ukathleticscoach wrote:He was crap in Green Street
I'm pretty sure Daniel Radcliffe wasn't in Green Street!?
I think Bill Nighy would be excellent as Peter Coe and Luke Treadaway looks similar to Ovett IMO.
You're right it Elijah Wood is Radliffe any better at acting?
Saw this guy on the tube the other week who looked just like Ovett when he was 20
Sounds like they are going to turn this film into a Coe film rather than the real story which was Ovett v Coe
no, he actually looks like him
Dea luck wrote:
Scandinavian Fellow wrote:Luke is 1.75 high....
As for Radcliffes new movie:
You can just type in radcliffe + darling in the adress bar and the full name of the movie will magically appear as a suggestion below.
You would think but the reality is the actors don't necessarily have to be anywhere close. They made a movie about Banister called "4 Minutes" and got some 5'8" guy to play basister who was like 6'2". All the extras had to be shorter. It was not realistic.
I agree that the Sherlock Holmes guy would be an excellent Ovett, maybe too old though as pointed out.
Oh, that's a shame! 1.75 is a bit small to play Ovett, who was 1.83m. Still think Nighy is a good choice to play Peter Coe.
I'm waiting for Will Smith as Dennis Kimetto.
Hugh Laurie for Ovett!
Seb Coe's Hair wrote:
When I first read the title of the thread, I was a little disappointed. But the more I think about it, the more alright it seems. I really can't think of any actor who looks much like Seb Coe, and as someone pointed out, their builds are somewhat similar, so how much can you complain. He'll likely bring some attention to the film that normally an athletics movie wouldn't attract. I bet that formula 1 movie Rush benefited from casting the actor who plays Thor.
I agree, it's nice to have that kind of attention. However, what if general audiences dislike the movie? I heard Radcliffe played Allen Ginsberg in a recent movie. I was reading some women's fashion/lifestyle magazine (Don't ask why) and even they panned his performance in that movie.
stride will be tough to imitate
Dea ohm wrote:
I actually think Radcliffe is a good choice. I think he looks the part, similar height...
Are you crazy? Radcliffe is 5'5" and Coe was 5'9". How is that "similar height"? 5 foot five is like midget territory for a guy and five foot 9 is basically average. How can a midget play Coe? That's ridiculous.
Everyone is talking about all this height stuff like so and so can't play so and so because so and so is 1.83 meters tall and so and so is only 1.75 meters tall, but why is nobody complaining about Radcliffe the munchkin playing Coe, who wasn't a munchkin????
That actor is a homosexual I think.
let's hope he keep his kit on this time. Bill Nighy should play Andy Norman.
Who is going to play George Gandy, the guy who turned him from a club runner with his dad to a world record holder?
JPRWizard wrote:Rono barely held off an injured Elliott and a sub par Cram
get a clue
he controlled the race completely last 2 laps & was waiting for an attack that never came because he'd run the finish out of them
he even speeded up last 300m, running it at 52.3 pace compared to last lap of 52.9
elliot at the time was no great shakes at 1500, still basically a 800 runner who ran 1500 with a pathetic 3'35pb before '88 & a 3'32.9pb that year
if 100%, he may have been good for mid/high-3'31 in '88, but that doesn't look anywhere as good as rono's form
his peak was '90 when good for 3'28/3'29 in his auckland win
It was nowhere near as impressive a performance as Moscow, LA or Barcelona
nonsense
in '80 coe finished last lap in 52.2 in a poor 3'38.4 compared to rono's 52.9 in 3'35.9
the runs were very comparable given the finishing times
coe was in no better than about low/mid 3'30 shape in '80 which was very comparable to rono's calibre of run
as for '92, the final time was a pathetic 3'40 even with a 50+
cacho was unlikely a sub-3'30 guy at the time, again probably low/mid-3'30 but good basic speed ( although never ran a serious 800 )
the only one of those performances definitely better was '84 when coe was probably in 3'29-flat/low
Coe wouldn't have considered going if he wasn't in at least 3:31 form
what is that rubbish supposed to mean ???
he wouda gone there in any 1/2-fit shape he couda mustered if picked & hope to maybe "fluke" a win
do you seriously believe if he was "only" in 3'32/3'33 shape prior to games but picked he wouda turned down the place ???
Just because he hadn't run that fast in 88 didn't mean he wasn't capable of it. If he hadn't run in Rieti right at the end of the season in 86, then there was little evidence from all his other races that year that he was in 3:29 form.
seeing as he ran a decent 1'43.9 in koblenz for 2nd & only a poor 3'35.7sb for 3rd just 3/7 later in rieti, it decent appear there was any 3'29 in him that year
Joe Binks wrote:Odd then that his all-time pb is 3.34.54 and he never won a major race either before or after that fluky Olympic win, despite him being only 21 at the time.
leading the last 800 with a 52.9 finish in a 3'35 is NO fluke
nils in '00 800 is a "fluke"
only a fool goes looking at pbs as definitive evidence of ability especially if injury/illness follows
noah had a big win at similar age but injury finished his chances of a possible 1500wr as he matured ( & i wouda given him a significant non-0 chance of the 800wr in his mid-'20s if he'd stayed uninjured )
as for others who had better, but not always better luck with illness/injury
- abdi looked in 3'28 shape in '87wc but never broke 3'30
- mj ran 19.32 - what was his next best ???
- hicham had a 1'47pb - i'm sure you think that is fair value for his 800 ability
there is well known phrase
"best shape of his life !!!"
apply it to rono that day...
