Taylor Kitsch in Battleship

Taylor Kitsch Shirtless in Battleship

Despite the massive flop of “John Carter“, Taylor Kitsch still has all the right ingredients to be Hollywood’s next leading man – he just needs something really amazing like a starring role in Scorcese’s next film, at least 15 rom coms a year (aka the Ryan Reynolds route) or better yet a prominent role in my bed. While I did force myself to sit through another CGI bomb that is “Battleship” and there wasn’t any skin scenes of the Swedish kind – this brief shirtlessness from Taylor Kitsch is basically what made me stay. Now that you’ve seen the caps, perhaps you’d want to sit this one out. You’re welcome.

Taylor Kitsch Shirtless in Battleship

Taylor Kitsch Shirtless in Battleship

Taylor Kitsch Shirtless in Battleship

Taylor Kitsch Shirtless in Battleship

  • Nick

    Taylor’s hot, but I can’t believe they had that hunk of man meat known as Alexander Skarsgård and did nothing with him. It’s a tragic lost on their part.

  • Christopher

    to Squarehippies-

    i do agree with you that Taylor K, is as i put it
    hunkalicious. but i wish people would stop
    referring to “John Carter” as a massive flop.
    i’m betting the vast majority of people who refer
    to the film using that term probably haven’t
    even seen it. everyone i personally know who
    has seen the film like i do find it a tad overblown
    but overall quite entertaining especially since
    Taylor is sort of barechested for most of the
    film. i find “John Carter” much better than any
    of the three “Transformers” films which are only
    thought of in good terms because they made
    a truck load of cash at the box office not because
    people actually regards them as good films.

    also a bit of info. the vast majority of big studio
    big budget action/adventure films barely break
    even at the U.S. box office.

    • @Christopher I hear you, I think I should start using “from what I’ve read” or “according to my sources” before anything.

  • Bob E

    Taylor does nothing for me, at least in the looks
    dept he doesn’t even bring my needle off of zero.
    To each his own.

  • Christopher

    to Squarehippies-

    i thank you for your reply . i know that “John Carter” didn’t exactly
    set the box office on fire but that doesn’t necessarily mean it was
    in fact a bad film.

    take for instance the much loved film “The Wizard of Oz”. when it
    was released by MGM Sept. of 1939 it got generally good reviews
    but the public never really bit. since movie studios still owned the
    theaters at this point MGM kept the film in its theaters as long as
    possible with different ad campaigns to perk the public’s
    attention but they still didn’t bite. the film only became the
    beloved classic it is after its first airing on t.v. in 1955.

  • Nick

    @Christopher I completely get your point about John Cater, but you also have to look at the fact that commercially John Cater was a total flop. When you add up all the promotion that started early last year, and the films timing the fact that it didn’t reach at the very least 300 million worldwide on a 250 million budget with added promotion funds is a disaster. I saw the film, and it was honestly entertaining, but that doesn’t make up for the fact that the film was indeed a flop, and likely won’t become a classic like say a Wizard of Oz.

  • Warren

    Whether deserved or not, John Carter has a reputation as a “flop.” I went to see it only because Taylor is in it, and as Christopher mentioned, he’s barechested through most of the movie. I enjoyed it for the most part, but with all we know of Mars today, I had a really hard time with the suspension of disbelief. I think the producers were trying to stay true to the source material but the story needed some updating. Still, Taylor Kitsch shirtless for 2 hours made up for the plot problems. 🙂

  • Square, you forgot another option. A sequel to The Covenant. 🙂

  • Mallory

    John Carter was a surrpisingly good movie. They didn’t decide to promote it, but to me it was a lot better than a lot of the shit that gets put out of Hollywood. Maybe not enough to say it was great or something, but soildly good. And Taylor is hot

  • Phil

    I have yet to see John Carter-but with a near naked hunk like Taylor what’s not to like…OK yes I’m a bit ‘superficial’…And just whom does that delicious butt in the white shorts belong too?…

  • Phil

    OK and the Appendix scar makes Taylor just that much more ‘real’…

  • Christopher

    hello again-

    i’m not saying “John Carter” will in the future be considered a
    classic per se. my point was its a much more entertaining film
    than its reputation. granted it didn’t set the box office on fire
    but just because a film does doesn’t mean its any good. look
    at the three ‘Transformers” films they are thought of in the
    film biz as *successful* films simply because they made a
    truck load of cash and for no other reason.

  • Pingback: Soldiers Support Prince Harry and More Links | Swoonworthy()

  • mt

    Nice body, but TERRIBLE face. Bleh…

  • Hey Square: Agree on the obscuring of Mr. Kitsch’s assets in “Battleship.” But you should check out his follow-up film, “Savages,” in which he spends quite a bit of time shirt- and pant-less (even in the opening credits!)

  • Donn

    Is that cum on his belly or a scar?

  • Chuck

    The stringy, rat-tail hair has to go. Until then, meh.

  • Steve

    Have to agree with Chuck. Taylor has a nice lean body but he desperately needs a good haircut. Letting the hair on his head get out of control in order to make up for the lack of manly hair below the neck is not a good strategy. That’s true even though the smooth chest came from his genes and not from a razor; therefore not his fault) .

  • Nick

    In a way, he’s kind of hot and not hot at the same time.

  • Bob

    I agree with Nick. Would like to see Taylor is a comedy

  • Pingback: Charlie Hunnam Shirtless in Pacific Rim - Squarehippies.com()

Back to Top