Ferrigno in King of Queens is truthfully the only person I can think of cast as “just some guy” that happens to be big as fuck. No they don’t make absolutely no mention of his size on the show, but they do it in the context that it would happen in real life(asking him to do shit he would do better than you, and random comments about how he’s a big dude).
I went to the bathroom real quick and took a picture of myself in my work threads before realizing this thread would be hijacked pretty bad, lol.
I don’t know, CC, I’m positive my height is partially the reason I get so many comments but that’s certainly not the only reason. I think big guys get comments pretty frequently. I’ve seen Professor X post (similar to me) that his size is usually the first things people speak about when they meet him.
I don’t think huge guys are a normal part of everyday life for most people and that’s why we don’t see them in movies more often. I’m not saying I wouldn’t like to see them, but I’m not surprised we don’t. 
[quote]LankyMofo wrote:
I went to the bathroom real quick and took a picture of myself in my work threads before realizing this thread would be hijacked pretty bad, lol.
I don’t know, CC, I’m positive my height is partially the reason I get so many comments but that’s certainly not the only reason. I think big guys get comments pretty frequently. I’ve seen Professor X post (similar to me) that his size is usually the first things people speak about when they meet him.
[/quote]
There are some areas/situations where I get comments a lot, but others where nobody comments at all, and I out-weigh the average guy I meet by at least 100 lbs most of the time… Though as I mentioned, at 5’10 I’m shorter than most here and always fairly covered up, even in the gym.
If you come into the dentists office(or whatever you call that, oral surgery room? I’m not sure) and he’s basically right in front of you and looking into your mouth, then of course you can’t fail but notice the guys size (especially since a lot of people are a little frightened in that setting anyway, or so I believe…
Not many like having someone place a drill or laser-“gun” in their mouth lol).
Plus even among serious trainees he stands out… And has huge traps and wide delts, far more-so than most… That makes a big difference in clothes. If you don’t look especially wide and powerful across the shoulders and traps then you can have 21 inch guns all you want, if you’re wearing something that ain’t tight and you’re not very tall, you just won’t look nearly as big as you do with your top off…
Here Arnold is ripped (but jeez, the guy has no tris…), but put a long-sleeve or a jacket on him and he won’t look particularly big… His shoulders were always a weakness esp. when relaxed, and his traps just don’t look all that powerful.
http://feministatsea.files.wordpress.com/2009/10/arnold-schwarzenegger-conan-the-barbarian-c10102051.jpeg
Wide torso (lats, ribcage, chest) but his shoulders and traps just aren’t there… And tris lacking big time again. Won’t look particularly huge in clothes…
Unfortunately, I couldn’t find the pic I was actually looking for… There he was wearing a polo-shirt or something like that, back when he was still fairly large… In the 80’s maybe? I dunno, might have seen it in his new encyclopedia of modern bbing, newer edition… Or was it Zane?
Anyway, basically looked almost narrow there… Not posing… Even the arms didn’t look large because the biceps were hidden by the sleeves and you could just see the gap between bis and elbows where the brachialis sits… And that really made him look almost like some average joe…
At least if I remember right.
[quote]
I don’t think huge guys are a normal part of everyday life for most people and that’s why we don’t see them in movies more often. I’m not saying I wouldn’t like to see them, but I’m not surprised we don’t. :/[/quote]
Fair enough. You’re right of course, we aren’t technically speaking a normal part of everyday life for most, but I’d like for people to consider us “normal” people basically if they do happen to encounter one or two of us every now and again. No big deal if they comment on my physique, but I’d just like to be considered a non-crazy guy-next-door type like everybody else, you know?
I would actually think that among black guys in the U.S., size would seen as less of an extreme thing (cultural differences?)? X if you’re reading this, do you get a similar amount of comments on your physique (when not wearing something “revealing”) in a black neighborhood as compared to a white one? Or in a setting where you’re not exactly sitting on top of other people (as opposed to while at work) ?
[quote]red04 wrote:
Ferrigno in King of Queens is truthfully the only person I can think of cast as “just some guy” that happens to be big as fuck. No they don’t make absolutely no mention of his size on the show, but they do it in the context that it would happen in real life(asking him to do shit he would do better than you, and random comments about how he’s a big dude).[/quote]
I’ve only seen a few episodes of King of Queens (if I’m even thinking of the right show) and never noticed Ferrigno in there, thanks for pointing that one out. That would probably the kind of role (among others) that I mean and would like to see more of… Big guy in a regular role.
Edit:
- YouTube ← At the beginning, with the clothes he wears he doesn’t look particularly wide or big at all, just tall… Later on in the long-sleeve it’s more obvious though.
That’s kind of what I meant in my posts responding to Lanky’s about how even very large dudes don’t necessarily look like Hulk in clothes and sometimes can pass more or less as average guys (okay, more difficult with Zack Khan than Ferrigno, but you know what I mean).
[quote]Cephalic_Carnage wrote:
[quote]LankyMofo wrote:
I went to the bathroom real quick and took a picture of myself in my work threads before realizing this thread would be hijacked pretty bad, lol.
I don’t know, CC, I’m positive my height is partially the reason I get so many comments but that’s certainly not the only reason. I think big guys get comments pretty frequently. I’ve seen Professor X post (similar to me) that his size is usually the first things people speak about when they meet him.
[/quote]
There are some areas/situations where I get comments a lot, but others where nobody comments at all, and I out-weigh the average guy I meet by at least 100 lbs most of the time… Though as I mentioned, at 5’10 I’m shorter than most here and always fairly covered up, even in the gym.
If you come into the dentists office(or whatever you call that, oral surgery room? I’m not sure) and he’s basically right in front of you and looking into your mouth, then of course you can’t fail but notice the guys size (especially since a lot of people are a little frightened in that setting anyway, or so I believe…
Not many like having someone place a drill or laser-“gun” in their mouth lol).
Plus even among serious trainees he stands out… And has huge traps and wide delts, far more-so than most… That makes a big difference in clothes. If you don’t look especially wide and powerful across the shoulders and traps then you can have 21 inch guns all you want, if you’re wearing something that ain’t tight and you’re not very tall, you just won’t look nearly as big as you do with your top off…
Here Arnold is ripped (but jeez, the guy has no tris…), but put a long-sleeve or a jacket on him and he won’t look particularly big… His shoulders were always a weakness esp. when relaxed, and his traps just don’t look all that powerful.
http://feministatsea.files.wordpress.com/2009/10/arnold-schwarzenegger-conan-the-barbarian-c10102051.jpeg
Wide torso (lats, ribcage, chest) but his shoulders and traps just aren’t there… And tris lacking big time again. Won’t look particularly huge in clothes…
Unfortunately, I couldn’t find the pic I was actually looking for… There he was wearing a polo-shirt or something like that, back when he was still fairly large… In the 80’s maybe? I dunno, might have seen it in his new encyclopedia of modern bbing, newer edition… Or was it Zane?
Anyway, basically looked almost narrow there… Not posing… Even the arms didn’t look large because the biceps were hidden by the sleeves and you could just see the gap between bis and elbows where the brachialis sits… And that really made him look almost like some average joe…
At least if I remember right.
Dangit CC. Predator was one of my favorite movies growing up. I always thought Arnold was huge. Now that you’ve got me looking back through pictures, the illusion is lifted. Seriously, where the hell are his tris?
Yeah DD, I first watched predator as a kid with absolutely NO clue about big physiques (even though in all the comics etc, the heroes were reasonably big… Spidey was more like a too-tall gymnast, but others were, depending on the artist, positively huge… I totally didn’t realize that though… Just didn’t know what the hell I was seeing)…
And I just didn’t think about it back then… I watched it (and some other movies) again after getting into training during my first year or so at 20 y.o., and thought he was huge… And I read his encyclopedia etc and thought the lat spreads were icky haha.
But now, with much more experience under my belt, much better knowledge of human anatomy etc… I gotta say, even if the top-sized guys today were McGrath etc instead of Cutler and co, I’d still consider Arnie to look not at all powerful/huge in that movie… Ripped and bigger than average, with good bis and chest (though that actually kind of sucked in predator compared to the other pic I posted) and a big rib-cage of course, but that’s it.
Someone like McGrath can weigh the same as Arnie and look way bigger in clothes just because of the thicker, wider delts/better developed rear and side delts and huge traps and forearms.
[quote]Cephalic_Carnage wrote:
[quote]LankyMofo wrote:
I went to the bathroom real quick and took a picture of myself in my work threads before realizing this thread would be hijacked pretty bad, lol.
I don’t know, CC, I’m positive my height is partially the reason I get so many comments but that’s certainly not the only reason. I think big guys get comments pretty frequently. I’ve seen Professor X post (similar to me) that his size is usually the first things people speak about when they meet him.
[/quote]
There are some areas/situations where I get comments a lot, but others where nobody comments at all, and I out-weigh the average guy I meet by at least 100 lbs most of the time… Though as I mentioned, at 5’10 I’m shorter than most here and always fairly covered up, even in the gym.
If you come into the dentists office(or whatever you call that, oral surgery room? I’m not sure) and he’s basically right in front of you and looking into your mouth, then of course you can’t fail but notice the guys size (especially since a lot of people are a little frightened in that setting anyway, or so I believe…
Not many like having someone place a drill or laser-“gun” in their mouth lol).
Plus even among serious trainees he stands out… And has huge traps and wide delts, far more-so than most… That makes a big difference in clothes. If you don’t look especially wide and powerful across the shoulders and traps then you can have 21 inch guns all you want, if you’re wearing something that ain’t tight and you’re not very tall, you just won’t look nearly as big as you do with your top off…
Here Arnold is ripped (but jeez, the guy has no tris…), but put a long-sleeve or a jacket on him and he won’t look particularly big… His shoulders were always a weakness esp. when relaxed, and his traps just don’t look all that powerful.
http://feministatsea.files.wordpress.com/2009/10/arnold-schwarzenegger-conan-the-barbarian-c10102051.jpeg
Wide torso (lats, ribcage, chest) but his shoulders and traps just aren’t there… And tris lacking big time again. Won’t look particularly huge in clothes…
Unfortunately, I couldn’t find the pic I was actually looking for… There he was wearing a polo-shirt or something like that, back when he was still fairly large… In the 80’s maybe? I dunno, might have seen it in his new encyclopedia of modern bbing, newer edition… Or was it Zane?
Anyway, basically looked almost narrow there… Not posing… Even the arms didn’t look large because the biceps were hidden by the sleeves and you could just see the gap between bis and elbows where the brachialis sits… And that really made him look almost like some average joe…
At least if I remember right.
I think you pretty much hit the nail on the head when you said that certain features stand out more than others. Broad shoulders being one of them. I know guys who are competitive bodybuilders that fall into the Arnold category. That is, they only look big when they wear tighter clothes. I know a guy who stands about 5 inches shorter than me, with bigger arms, and I could not even tell his arms were bigger until he wore a polo shirt that only covered part of his arm.
I always assumed it was more socially acceptable in the black community to get big. I mean, I have had a lot of Black guys ask me questions about getting bigger, and actually had them train with me for that goal.
It seemed to me, that being “ripped” was typical, being big was better.
suppose Steve Reeves should be there, not sure about the acting though
[quote]Spartiates wrote:
[quote]BradTGIF wrote:
Jamie Fox, Will Smith, etc, got big for their roles, in my mind I don’t even consider them. If that were the case we’d be talking about Jackman as Wolverine, and that Lautner kid in New Moon.
[/quote]
Why all the hate on this site for Jackman?
How can you compare him to the Lautner kid? Jackman easily got as big as Smith, or any of the other “regular” actors in this thread… I think bigger, I tried some quick net research, and got 220 pounds for Wolverine, not HUGE, but I bet that’s 60 pounds on the twilight kid.
Is it the Wolverine thing? You all thought that a character who in the comic books was like 5’6" should have been played by a 6’6" tall monster, and he was just disappointing? Or is it just a reaction to all the hype, because he looked so “big” compared normal societal standards that every on this board considers puny?
He’s no Arnold, but out of the pool of actors available, he’s one of the larger ones, and can act.
Can anyone explain the hate to me?[/quote]
For me its just the fact that Jackman is 11 inches too tall to play Wolverine.
[quote]Bunyip wrote:
[quote]Spartiates wrote:
[quote]BradTGIF wrote:
Jamie Fox, Will Smith, etc, got big for their roles, in my mind I don’t even consider them. If that were the case we’d be talking about Jackman as Wolverine, and that Lautner kid in New Moon.
[/quote]
Why all the hate on this site for Jackman?
How can you compare him to the Lautner kid? Jackman easily got as big as Smith, or any of the other “regular” actors in this thread… I think bigger, I tried some quick net research, and got 220 pounds for Wolverine, not HUGE, but I bet that’s 60 pounds on the twilight kid.
Is it the Wolverine thing? You all thought that a character who in the comic books was like 5’6" should have been played by a 6’6" tall monster, and he was just disappointing? Or is it just a reaction to all the hype, because he looked so “big” compared normal societal standards that every on this board considers puny?
He’s no Arnold, but out of the pool of actors available, he’s one of the larger ones, and can act.
Can anyone explain the hate to me?[/quote]
For me its just the fact that Jackman is 11 inches too tall to play Wolverine.[/quote]
What 5’3 195 pound actor could pull off that role? Russel Crowe was supposed to be Wolverine and even he’s 5’11.
Danny Devito…
http://www.casafree.com/modules/xcgal/albums/userpics/16603/normal_x.jpg
Couldn’t find a good picture, but Edward Norton looked pretty good in American History X and that was also an incredible performance. I wonder how he’d look if they really let him muscle up for a role.
I’d say Ryan Reynolds is bigger in The Amityville Horror than in Blade. Still not huge, but decent. It has to be said though, when Van Wilder is pretty much the most jacked guy in Hollywood weâ??ve got a serious problem.
Dwayne Johnson can act well enough. Walking Tall and Welcome to the Jungle (The Rundown) were actually pretty good, at least imo. Too bad he’s just getting smaller and smaller by the movie.
Also, about requiring big guys to be great actors - if they’re put in the right movie, they don’t need to be. Vin Diesel in Pitch Black was great. Not so good in Riddick, but whatever…
Can’t say we have any Goldberg sized actors with the talent of Jim Carrey though, sad to say. (I know people say Jim Carrey is being typecast, and that’s probably true, but watch the Majestic and try to say he doesn’t have range. You can’t.)
It’s true though, there’s no Arnold there. The biggest is barely the size of Stallone, and he’s how old now?
Us younger guys don’t have much inspiration on screen to get big now, that’s for sure. But at least I can still watch some older movies like Predator and Conan, but as bad as they’re aging, I don’t believe they’ll be watchable when my younger brothers are my age (in 10-15 years time).
[quote]ZeroSleep wrote:
http://www.casafree.com/modules/xcgal/albums/userpics/16603/normal_x.jpg
Couldn’t find a good picture, but Edward Norton looked pretty good in American History X and that was also an incredible performance. I wonder how he’d look if they really let him muscle up for a role.
I’d say Ryan Reynolds is bigger in The Amityville Horror than in Blade. Still not huge, but decent. It has to be said though, when Van Wilder is pretty much the most jacked guy in Hollywood weâ??ve got a serious problem.
Dwayne Johnson can act well enough. Walking Tall and Welcome to the Jungle (The Rundown) were actually pretty good, at least imo. Too bad he’s just getting smaller and smaller by the movie.
Also, about requiring big guys to be great actors - if they’re put in the right movie, they don’t need to be. Vin Diesel in Pitch Black was great. Not so good in Riddick, but whatever…
Can’t say we have any Goldberg sized actors with the talent of Jim Carrey though, sad to say. (I know people say Jim Carrey is being typecast, and that’s probably true, but watch the Majestic and try to say he doesn’t have range. You can’t.)
It’s true though, there’s no Arnold there. The biggest is barely the size of Stallone, and he’s how old now?
Us younger guys don’t have much inspiration on screen to get big now, that’s for sure. But at least I can still watch some older movies like Predator and Conan, but as bad as they’re aging, I don’t believe they’ll be watchable when my younger brothers are my age (in 10-15 years time).[/quote]
Norton is my favorite actor. While he wasn’t huge in american history x, he did put on 20-30 pounds for the roll, so he deserves some props for that.
[quote]BBriere wrote:
Since nobody else mentioned it yet (it may be an obscure fact), Mariusz Pudzianowski starred in the Polish remake of Conan the Barbarian.[/quote]
Did you say you were done posting after tribunal dude told you your dad was from IL?
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]LankyMofo wrote:
You got a ton of those movies in the 80s and 90s. [/quote]
Also…no, we didn’t. Most big guys in movies in the 80’s were either the action hero, the villain or “thug 1”. Not portraying these guys as ‘AVERAGE EVERYDAY PEOPLE’ is what we are discussing. That is what keeps really big guys from simply being cast as the “new doctor on House” or “The nice ambulance driver who isn’t killing people”. Big muscles are still seen as an “abnormality”. Name one single role in the 80’s or 90’s where some guy my size played a role that had NOTHING to do with his muscles at all.[/quote]
Not from the 80s or 90s, but I thought Eric King’s Sgt. Doakes in Dexter was a character who just happened to be muscular rather than it being his raison d’etre. I’m not sure anyone ever commented on his size in the show. Good actor too.
[quote]Mattlebee wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]LankyMofo wrote:
You got a ton of those movies in the 80s and 90s. [/quote]
Also…no, we didn’t. Most big guys in movies in the 80’s were either the action hero, the villain or “thug 1”. Not portraying these guys as ‘AVERAGE EVERYDAY PEOPLE’ is what we are discussing. That is what keeps really big guys from simply being cast as the “new doctor on House” or “The nice ambulance driver who isn’t killing people”. Big muscles are still seen as an “abnormality”. Name one single role in the 80’s or 90’s where some guy my size played a role that had NOTHING to do with his muscles at all.[/quote]
Not from the 80s or 90s, but I thought Eric King’s Sgt. Doakes in Dexter was a character who just happened to be muscular rather than it being his raison d’etre. I’m not sure anyone ever commented on his size in the show. Good actor too.[/quote]
Good Point, Doakes has some size on him.
[quote]Mattlebee wrote:
[quote]Professor X wrote:
[quote]LankyMofo wrote:
You got a ton of those movies in the 80s and 90s. [/quote]
Also…no, we didn’t. Most big guys in movies in the 80’s were either the action hero, the villain or “thug 1”. Not portraying these guys as ‘AVERAGE EVERYDAY PEOPLE’ is what we are discussing. That is what keeps really big guys from simply being cast as the “new doctor on House” or “The nice ambulance driver who isn’t killing people”. Big muscles are still seen as an “abnormality”. Name one single role in the 80’s or 90’s where some guy my size played a role that had NOTHING to do with his muscles at all.[/quote]
Not from the 80s or 90s, but I thought Eric King’s Sgt. Doakes in Dexter was a character who just happened to be muscular rather than it being his raison d’etre. I’m not sure anyone ever commented on his size in the show. Good actor too.[/quote]
Good mention. That is honestly the only one I can think of also…even though he really isn’t that big at all. It is just that everyone else co-starring around him is so damn small. I really doubt his arms are much over 15". He’s just lean…but yes, he does register as “muscular” on screen and they don’t make him an idiot because of it.
Will Smith has acting range and did bulk up for Ali. I will always see him as the Fresh Prince but again he did put on some size.
really big and can act seems rare but really big is rare so i don’t know if its disproportionate
anyway - Charles Bronson in Hard Times - not huge but at age 54 this is an impressive physique
[quote]gswork wrote:
really big and can act seems rare but really big is rare so i don’t know if its disproportionate
anyway - Charles Bronson in Hard Times - not huge but at age 54 this is an impressive physique[/quote]
Much love for Bronson, but today I would hope 54 isn’t holding that many people back. We just mentioned Michael Clarke Duncan who is also in his late 50’s and I would rate that is slightly MUCH more impressive.
Nothing against what you wrote, but I do think the days where “50” marked the end of impressing people around you with physical performance are in the last.
60 is the new 50.