Hypocrisy in Hollywood versus real life

Ringo, you and I are buds and I'd like to keep it that way. My J.W. comments obviously struck a nerve and I apologize.

Let's both go back to reading our copies of The Federalist Papers and compare notes later over a beverage.

Cool?
 
GKC, there are plenty of actors and plenty of roles. We're all bound to hate at least one of 'em.

I'm backing out of this as gracefully as I can.

G'Day Mates.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GKC
GKC, there are plenty of actors and plenty of roles. We're all bound to hate at least one of 'em.

I'm backing out of this as gracefully as I can.

G'Day Mates.

I meant no offense by any of my remarks. I enjoy a spirited debate! That's all I have taken this to be.

I don't hate the person, of any actor. I just don't agree with many of them. I'm sure they are crying all the way to the bank over my opinion. :rolleyes:
 
Nonsense - where do you think the meat you buy in a grocery store comes from?

I was replying to his post about not being able to do that even in a movie.

I know where meat comes from and I still think hunting is wrong but point out where else here I've said this? I don't, never have. It's not my problem what you do or who you do it with

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk
 
You have a point, but I'd also say that their roles didn't glorify the Nazis...actually made fun of them. Still, if I was a Jew, I wouldn't have played the part.



I guess I missed that role. All I will say about that is if she wants to rape me, it will be impossible. You can't rape someone who is cooperating, can you?



That's one of the few John Wayne movies I haven't seen. However, I would guess that he is playing a historical figure, and I don't recall him ever saying in public that Kahn was a horrible figure, that he was totally wrong, and that no one should ever glorify him, etc. That to me is where the difference lies. It's one thing to play a role...but a different thing to play a role that glorifies the very thing that you are supposedly so adamant against.

On Dukes Khan role. Your not missing much but, if you watch the movie? do so because it has some great combat scenes
conqueror2.jpg

The_Conqueror02.jpg
 
Ringo, you and I are buds and I'd like to keep it that way. My J.W. comments obviously struck a nerve and I apologize.

Let's both go back to reading our copies of The Federalist Papers and compare notes later over a beverage.

Cool?

No need for any apologies, were havin a friendly discussion. :-)) If you supply me your snail mail? Ill send ya a Jar of Salsa Verde. :-)) PS, its still difficult for me to type with one finger from my left hand, my Cat is sleeping on my typing hand as we "speak." ;)
 
I find it rather funny they made there money from the movies using guns wether portraying war stories or western good & bad guys yet they can say they what they think being anti-gun.
I think all people in the lime light should shut up about there views on guns and gays.

With the gays I could give a rat's @xx either way I don't care just as long as your happy,happy.
 
On Dukes Khan role. Your not missing much but, if you watch the movie? do so because it has some great combat scenes

It's hard for me to watch John Wayne in anything but a western or a war movie. I don't know why, but it just seems like he is out of character otherwise. I didn't care for Brannigan. The Hellfighters was OK...we lived in Ft. Stockton when Red Adair came out there to fight an oil well fire, so I could relate.

There is one non-western or war movie that John Wayne made that I really enjoy, and that is The Quiet Man.
 
What I don’t understand is why so many people pay the amount of attention to these actors that they do? Don’t believe me, just look at some of the posts right here, and this is one of if not the sanest forums I visit.

All these Hollywood types are fairly normal people who are lucky enough to have a talent most of us don’t have. Just because they can act out a roll only makes them an expert in one thing, acting.

These ladies and gentlemen certainly have the right to express their views but it is only one person’s view, not the learned opinion of a panel of experts.

Remember Hollywood was built on and for play acting and exists today for the same thing. Nothing has changed in the last 75 years, except the names, faces, and the trendiest dining spot.
 
I can understand that actors are able, or not, to separate their on screen personae from their off-screen personalities. However, the problem arises when they use the "silver screen" to espouse those off-screen views. By that, I mean that their salaries, because they're so high, bias the perceived views of society.

Americans are, by and large, not anti-military nor conspiracy oriented. Yet, Oliver Stone in his productions of "Platoon", and "JFK", painted a profound misinterpretation of the facts surrounding American servicemen in Viet Nam, and the so-called conspiracy as touted by Jim Garrison.

"Bonnie and Clyde" romanticized the criminality of the 1930's, downplaying the actual amorality of the pair.

In "Kingdom of Heaven", Ridley Scott badly portrayed characters in the movie, who in reality, were actually nothing like their movie personae.

Cissy Spacek and Jessica Lange actually got face time before a congressional committee because they played farmers' wives.

Ken Burns successfully romanticized a war in which over 600,000 Americans died, and touting slavery as it's primary cause. There was nothing romantic about the 1861-1865 war.

And Kevn Costner's portrayal of the Lakota, well...

The list goes on.

And the "media" doesn't help, touting these folks as though they had PhD's in their movie subjects.
 
However, the problem arises when they use the "silver screen" to espouse those off-screen views. By that, I mean that their salaries, because they're so high, bias the perceived views of society.

And the "media" doesn't help, touting these folks as though they had PhD's in their movie subjects.

Two very good points...thank you.

Unfortunately, many people tend to think that if someone is rich and famous, their opinion automatically has credibility on subjects unrelated to how they became rich and famous. They also have a means and a method to communicate their views that most of us don't have.
 
I hunt and eat the end result, therefore I am.

I have my own morals and values taught to me by my parents, children of America the great. One of those values is a firm belief in the constitution as it stands.

If a person takes money to dabble in our constitutional uses and then slams honest children of America I have issues with that person.

I then choose to not watch nor support their spin on bigotry.

My wife feels the same way.

The bible had Sodom, we have our Hollywood.

The pictures I like to see are honest ones with family values, like folks showing their families and selves enjoying life in America. Ones such as Sebago showing his grandson's first ice fishing trip at 1 year of age. That folks is America the Great.

Hollywood is full of greed, too many egomaniacs seeking their 15 minutes of fame on a pedestal. I do admire some of them, the problem is there are too few Robert Stacks or Jimmy Stewarts.
 
Rock Hudson was a love interest (for women) in every movie he made. Jody Foster has played parts with romance in them. Neil Patrick Harris plays a skirt chasing dog.

I do things in my job that I don't like. It's all about who is paying the bills.
 
It's hard for me to watch John Wayne in anything but a western or a war movie. I don't know why, but it just seems like he is out of character otherwise. I didn't care for Brannigan. The Hellfighters was OK...we lived in Ft. Stockton when Red Adair came out there to fight an oil well fire, so I could relate.

There is one non-western or war movie that John Wayne made that I really enjoy, and that is The Quiet Man.

Same here on all accounts, it just aint natural. :-))
 
  • Like
Reactions: GKC
"Why, I'm Temujin, Pilgrim...."

or maybe

"KHAAAAAAAAN!"

It was certainly a movie worth missing.......:D

The movie was so bad, he insisted that it not be released until after his death.

It is hilarious, in a so-bad-it's-awesome sort of way.:D

No matter who you are, they're not all going to be home runs, eh?
 
The movie was so bad, he insisted that it not be released until after his death.

Sometimes a movie star's early, bad movies can come back to haunt them once they are rich and famous. Look at John Travolta and "Battlefield Earth" for example...which is generally regarded as one of the worst movies ever made, by anyone. :p
 
What I don’t understand is why so many people pay the amount of attention to these actors that they do? Don’t believe me, just look at some of the posts right here, and this is one of if not the sanest forums I visit.

All these Hollywood types are fairly normal people who are lucky enough to have a talent most of us don’t have. Just because they can act out a roll only makes them an expert in one thing, acting.

These ladies and gentlemen certainly have the right to express their views but it is only one person’s view, not the learned opinion of a panel of experts.

Remember Hollywood was built on and for play acting and exists today for the same thing. Nothing has changed in the last 75 years, except the names, faces, and the trendiest dining spot.

That's all true Old B. The problem I have is when these people use their celebrity status to preach and pontificate how the rest of us should live. You and I aren't invited on the Tonight Show or Letterman to expound our views on life. Anyone who lives in a million dollar plus mansion, is part of a gated community, has armed security and have "people" to handle their grunt work, lost their grasp on the real world a long time ago.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top