Why Tom Hiddleston should have kept his trousers ON
WANNABE 007’ S UNDERWEAR LEFT US SHAKEN, NOT STIRRED
HE is the celebrity millions across the e globe have dreamed of undressing. When charming Tom Hiddleston shot too worldwide fame in spy drama The Nightt Manager, he set plenty of pulses racing. And when we got a cheeky glimpse of his bum in a sex scene so steamy it was censored in the US, he even caught the eye of those looking out for the next Bond. So this week, his fans would have been forgiven for thinking all of their Christmases had come at once when they heard he had stripped to his boxers for a magazine shoot. But the shots of Tom in his pants? Quite frankly, they were just pants. Sporting his uninspiring £33 briefs, puny Tom showed neither the eye-watering bulge of David Beckham nor the ripped torso of hiss Taylor Swift love rival, Calvin Harris. The posh actor looked so uncomfortable e you’d be forgiven for thinking he’d ratherr be reciting Shakespeare in a tweed suit. One fan summed up the disappointment nt when she tweeted: “For some weird reasonn seeing Tom Hiddleston in underwearr makes me feel nothing. Nothing at all.”
Credibility
And then there is the effect on hiss credibility. Commentators were bemused ass to why sophisticated, Cambridge-educatedd Tom felt compelled to join Beckham and Calvin in the so-called “underwear elite”. With chiselled good looks, bags of talent and perhaps the most famous girlfriend in the world, he hardly needs to raise his profile – let alone take his trousers off for us. Another bemused fan tweeted: “I was always proud that Tom Hiddleston never did an underwear shoot. What is he doing?” Pop culture expert and commentator Miranda Sawyer was also scathing, calling the shoot “bland and completely asexual”. She wrote: “I don’t know who is doing his PR but I think he is being badly advised. “He’s obviously charming and a great actor – but these photos look reallyly cheap. It just looks like he’s in a Travelodgeodge off the M4.” Why enigmatic Tom didd the shoot is unclear. He’s already gone viral once this month, in photos hotos of him and Taylor sharing a snog on rocks near her Rhode Islandsland home. Their whirlwind romancemance has even seen her sweep him off his feet in her private jet for a visitt to meet his mum in Suffolk on Friday. The liaison, just weeks after the singer called time on her fling with DJ Calvin, sent fans into a frenzy – and upmarket Manhattan magazine W seized the chance this week to release the underwear snaps.
If he was hot property before, this should have seen him shoot into the stratosphere. After all, it’s not just female celebrities who have seen a spike in popularity after daring to bare.
When Clark Gable stripped off his shirt in the 1934 film It Happened One Night, America went wild. Sales of vests are said to have nose dived.
And ever since Mark Wahlberg’s Calvin Klein shoot in 1991, posing in tight white briefs has become a key career move.
Forget a mansion or flashy sports car. Nothing says “I’ve made it” more than stripping down to your smalls for the world to see.
Just as Kim Kardashian’s nude
cover for Paper magazine “broke the internet”, we went crazy when David Beckham posed for his first Armani campaign in 2008. When he modelled a Beckham range for H&M in 2013, profits rose more than £60million. Essex model David Gandy’s 2014 M&S campaign had a similar impact.
The undies were sellout favourites and pre-tax profits went up for the first time in four years.
Beckham’s fellow footballer, Cristiano Ronaldo, has gone a step further – launching his own brand after he also modelled for Armani. Calvin is expected to follow suit.
Yet while those shoots sent pulses racing, the reaction to Tom’s photos has been more muted. One mum took to social media to say her daughter mistook the actor for chat show host Jeremy Kyle.
Commentator Miranda added: “The pants are like school regulation underwear. They’re not sexy at all.
“In The Night Manager, there was something illicit and dirty – there’s nothing illicit about these photographs.
“If he wanted to be classy, like an old- school Bond, he should have kept his clothes on. Bond is tough and a bit scary. Instead, he looks like he’s audi- tioning for One Direction.” Some have suggested Tom looks a bit reluctant without a character to hide behind. As ex-soldier Jonathan Pine, he seemed more than comfortable baring his bum.
He even expressed outrage that the scene was cut from the American version of the series, insisting: “My butt is not dangerous.”
But as plain old Tom – an old Etonian with a double first in classics – he’s more comfortable in a suit than spreadeagled on a bed in boxers.
And of course, there are the pants themselves. When David Beckham and Calvin Harris posed, they left little to the imagination.
But Tom’s shorts? Armani they are not. Loose fitting and lacking sex appeal, they cost £33 from New York based label Special Delivery.
On Instagram, Tom’s pants pic struggled to attract 10,000 likes – while one of Calvin in Armani briefs last year gained over 300,000.
When men’s underwear sales rose in the UK last year, it was tight briefs that got a 23 per cent boost. Loose boxers like Tom’s fell 14 per cent.
So could it be all a cynical ploy to cement Tom’s place as Daniel Craig’s replacement?
After all, when Craig was photographed in his trunks on the Casino Royale set in the Bahamas, it certainly didn’t do his career any harm.
Can Tom cut it as 007? Perhaps – but maybe he should put his trousers on first.