How is it contrarian to pose a hypothetical about the casting of a single character in a movie? I don't recall reading any part of this article that stated definitively that it would be better with Gibson. I don't agree with the writer, but it's at least a passingly interesting idea

The LEAST important of ALL of the characters in the first three movies? Really? You don't think that's a little over the top?

Of course, silly of me. Thanks

Ahh makes sense, thanks

Maybe not here, but in a general sense I think it's a pretty accurate assesment

Not to mention the A for 13 hours and C- for hail Caesar. Oy vey

You were expecting a different outcome?

Hardy is good, but no one plays 'man on the edge of madness' like Mr Gibson. Maybe at this point he's well past the edge, but that energy could have added a lot to the character of max

I tried urban dictionary to figure out what FOC is, but none made any sense. Can you define? Thanks