@snood,
snood wrote:
chai2:
Quote:BTW, no actor has ever influenced my life, based on parts they played.. That would say something very said about me if I could be influenced that easily by someone, who by the definition of their profession, is Acting.
A bold statement.
I don't think it's necessarily"sad" if some actor has some influence over a person. I think it's natural. A couple of for instances...
So I don't think it's "sad" if someone is influenced by an actor.
I think it's sad if someone thinks themselves so above or immune to any such influence, that they think others "sad" for being influenced.
Please reread my statement Snood, and what you extrapolated from it.
I clearly said it would say something sad about ME.
When originally writing that, I knowingly said it would be say something sad about ME, and did not say it would be sad for someone else.
That is because I believe each person needs to decide for themselves what inspires them.
A bold statement? Well yes, I suppose it is. I'm a bold person. I don't take my inspiration from someone who is merely the instrument for playing a part that was written by someone else, based on another person, directed by yet another, etc.
Oh, watching the parts actors have played have inspired me to find out more about the actual person their role was based on. It's inspired me to find out the actual truth of what went on, who that person was.
But to surmise that the actor themselves must share those qualities is something else.
If Richard Roundtree had not played the part of Shaft, but instead was played by (I don't know, I'm just randomly reaching in a bag), Red Foxx, would you have felt the same about Roundtree, or Foxx?
Gibson's JOB is to act like the person the script and director call for. That's not the person he is.
Every so often, when things get really tough for me, I think about this guy (I'll have to find his name) who got lost in Antarctica, lost most of his fingers and face, and other body parts, but kept putting one foot in front of the other, envisioning his wife, Peach, for inspiration.
If they made that into a movie, it wouldn't make me think any more or less about Brad Pitt, or whoever played the part.
This explorer might have been a racist, but from what I know of him, he didn't act it out while staying alive.
One other thing.
It's been mentioned by several people that they believe mel has to want to get better.
What if he is incapable of that now.
Don't people get committed against their will every day?
Aren't people assigned guardians because they can no longer make decisions on their own?
Firefly, 2006 is not ancient history. My belief is that counts as a recent event, one that
may have been at the cusp when a person could make decisions for themselves, and when they could not.
I'm not defending the man.
I'm not condemning him yet either.
What concerns me is that is seems that some find it more important to announce they won't watch any more of his movies....as if he is ever going to make any more. Maybe he will, maybe he won't.
I'm going to announce right now that I will never watch another movie that has Sandra Bullock in it. Not because of who she is, but because I don't enjoy watching her act.
What if mel drops dead today, they do an autopsy, and find a whatis pressing on his whosits gland? What if they find his brain has been damaged to the point that probably prior to 2004 his judgement as far as public behavior was compromised?
Again, maybe gibson is a total jerk. But I wonder if any of us right now where physically in his body, if we would be acting the same way.
It's facinating to me that posters who under other circumstances look for the needle in the haystack as far as "why billy is acting up and mommy can't understand....maybe it has something to do with ADD or depression, anxiety, inability to appropriately express themselves, or one of a hundred other 'maybes' (maybe he isn't getting enough niacin, or isn't eating enough complex carbohydrates)", but aren't exploring in more depth "I wonder if there is something physically/mentally wrong with this man that can be worked on?"
If proof that he is in full control of his decisions is based on the sole fact that "no one in hollywood as stepped up and defended him, saying he was not like this 30 years ago", I think he's being short changed.
The people in hollywood that could say something might be looking out for their best interests, or they may be saving their sympathy and support for the favorite actor at the moment. I don't know.
That's the point. I don't know. But it would be fair to explore I believe.