I don't think Hamm is anything at all like Don Draper. Draper is a man with gravitas and I think it's a credit to Hamm that he can pull that off, given that he isn't really that guy. Trouble is there aren't many shows or movies, at least not blockbusters that call for that type of quiet magnitude. Hamm has shown he can do comedy but I don't think that's what people want from him. I think he'd fit in nicely to the type of stuff Ed Harris or William Hurt usually do. Also, he'd make a fine Jack Ryan IMO.

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/zxLNTWmW-jo" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

While I won't disagree with your characterization of him, I've never seen anyone other than John Hamm in everything he's done. While it's true that the Don Draper character is certainly much "weightier" than his comedy or other dramatic roles, I just can't get past the idea that it's John Hamm.

I've never seen him "disappear" into a character like all great actors do.

Huh. When I look at Draper I don't see Hamm at all. I think he dominates every scene he's in that doesn't include Sterling.

Yeah, I had the same problem with "The Town", "Million Dollar Arm" and especially "Bridesmaids".

His delivery and facial expressions just don't change, IMO. His voice is always the same, as are his speech patterns. While I think he's great as Don Draper, I just haven't been able to shake Don Draper from any of his other performances.

He completely disappeared into Don Draper. The fact that you think that is who Jon Hamm is is evidence of how good he is with that character.

Ironically, combined with his looks, that is the trait of MOVIE STARS.

Tom Cruise is always Tom Cruise. Will Ferrell is always Will Ferrell. RDJ is always RDJ. Bruce Willis is always Bruce Willis. And all of them have bombs at least as bad is Hamm has on their resume. In various ways they also have as bad or much worse bad behavior on there.

I suspect that you showed your hand when you characterized a roughing up that occurred a quarter century ago and for which much of the serious charged were dropped into something more akin to a CIA black site enhanced interrogator of unspoken, possibly recent, vintage.

First off, John Hamm is not a "Movie Star" and there's nothing to indicate that he could carry a film on his own, regardless of the Disney flop.

Secondly, there's a big difference between being a "Movie Star" or even a "TV Star" and being a great actor. For example, Tom Selleck is a TV star but he's neither a Movie Star or great actor.

My comments have been directed at Hamm's ability to act, not to discredit him as a TV star.

Yeah, I just don't see it that way. I think that Don Draper is a great character but I just don't see any type of huge departure when I see Hamm in other roles.

One distinction - every character that Hamm plays outside of Don Draper could be just as easily played by Craig Kilborn.

Don Draper couldn't be.

I know, it's a lousy way to actually explain the difference in Hamm the actor and Hamm as Don Draper, but it's the best real world example I can come up with. Kilborn had no real acting career to speak of but he played that preening, pretty boy wise-ass to great effect. It's who he was on the Daily Show, it's who he was on Sportscenter, it's who he was on his talk show and his bit parts.

That tends to be the roles that Hamm's getting and ultimately, Kilborn can do all those. He does not, however, have the gravitas to pull off Draper.

I don't think Hamm's a particularly skilled actor or a legitimate possibility as a movie star. There's just not much of a role for a 'heavy' in todays cinema and I think that's where he ultimately fits. But being versatile isn't the same as having a perfect 'character' for your personality. He's not a versatile actor, but he can play that brooding heavy as well as anyone out there, IMO. In baseball parlance, he's not a 5-tool superstar but he may be a 30 HR slugger with holes in his swing.

If he could get his hands on a role like Tom Hanks had in Road to Perdition, I think he could be outstanding in it. Maybe something like Phoenix's role in The Master. I feel like he could pull off a couple of Bale's easier jobs, but maybe not.

Maybe you're right - maybe he can't carry a film and I'm sure people smarter than I have not given him a chance to carry a good one for that precise reason; the scouting report is out there, so to speak. I just feel like he's not quite as one-trick as you think he is and that perhaps he just hasn't had the right role yet.

This may be very true. The problem for him is that given his track record, producers of big budget movies won't be willing to give him a chance because it's far more likely than not that they'll lose money.

His best bet would be to find a great indie script that could really showcase his talent. Or, continue to mine the same territory and be happy that he's actually working and earning a living.

At the end of the day, that's all anyone in Hollywood really wants (me included).

I'm currently on season 4 of Mad Men and just saw clips from tonight's episode. I am SHOCKED that Peter and Trudy are still married.

a KC BORN CRAIG KILBORN REFERENCE! JUMANJI