Foolish Friday: Sensual

Richard Armitage as Francis Dolarhyde displaying the latest in skintight briefs. From the series Hannibal.

Hello class.  How’s your week been?  Did you enjoy last week’s nose study?  Well, we wouldn’t be at out objectifying best if we didn’t examine other…erm…areas. For science, you know.  During my blogging absence, I continue to track Richard Armitage’s roles, including that of Dolarhyde in Hannibal.  Luckily or not (your mileage may vary), I was already watching the show.  In preparing for class, I came across an article describing the character as “sensual and empathetic,” not words I would have used. 

But what’s important is that RA was “half undressed most of the time.”  No I’m not criticizing his acting; it was quite good.  However the character proved quite intense and violent which made viewing a bit daunting.  Hence, I enjoyed the time he was on screen clad in nothing but nice tight black briefs. 

This isn’t the greatest screen shot but RA here still appears as fit as he was as Guy 10 years ago, but let’s be sure.  Shall we?  Perky pecs? Check. Chiseled abs? Oh yes.  Waxed chest? Yes please.  Long finely muscled arms? Mmm hmm.  Looks slightly heavier than the lean Guy days but perfectly acceptable. 

But wait – is that a slight burgeoning love handle?  Personally I think the briefs are so tight that they are cutting him in just a tad at the waist.  The verdict?  I think RA still looks pretty fine at his age, or for any age.

What do you think class?

 

8 thoughts on “Foolish Friday: Sensual

  1. A fine man for any age! In spite of waxed chest 😀 I think you are right, there is an incipient avoirdupois at the waist. That’s perfectly all right; perfectly natural. Speaking of which, I miss the elegant original nose – individual, like that of Audrey Hepburn just my preference. And on the subject of “natural” – a wee touch of chest hair. Nevertheless, a fine figure and face!

  2. Lovely. Those tight black briefs are just lovely.

    I do think I’ll need to do a bit more research, extra credit maybe? 😉

  3. One thing that I’ve definitely “learned” from fandom (I knew it before, but now I’m convinced) is that what photographs, stills, films, etc., show us seem to have a very ambiguous relationship with what we’d see if we were in the same room. It struck me, after seeing him on stage as Proctor, that he was so small and slight by comparison at the stage door, and I had a similar feeling in NYC. Personally, I think this is a case of the pants cutting into his soft flesh, but in any case, if it were the beginning of a “love handle,” he was at least twenty pounds lighter than this photograph in New York and that was not really visible on stage at all. This photo is two years old now. I would be happy if he were still at this weight, though; I think he looks great here.

    • Serv, I agree with you wholeheartedly! I’ll never forget how absolutely irritated I was, when I saw RA in person for the first time, standing only about 2 meters away from him (Berlin 2013 – TH premiere).

    • Serv, I agree with you wholeheartedly! I’ll never forget how absolutely irritated I was about his body frame, when I saw RA in person for the first time, standing only about 2 meters away from me (Berlin 2013 – TH premiere).

  4. Serv, I agree with you wholeheartedly! I’ll never forget how absolutely irritated I was about his body frame, when I saw RA in person for the first time, standing only about 2 meters away from me (Berlin 2013 – TH premiere).

Leave a Reply to fitzg Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *