Films

icebreaker said:
Fair enough, Clive. I'm glad to read that -- that the affliction is treated with delicacy and understanding. And that the portrayal is sympathetic.
I might be persuaded to go and see on that basis.
Click to expand...

If you are uncomfortable about the whole thing then dont see it - but you will miss an amazing film which I agree treats the subject matter with dignity and respect. I doubt the whole family would have been involved as closely if they didnt agree to the portrayal. There were no scenes that I would say I found uncomfortable to watch and Eddie deserves all the plaudits and awards he has got. Felicity Jones shows how much the real Mrs Hawkins sacrificed to keep her husband both mentally and physically involved in life but it doesnt shy away from her own personal demons.

Perhaps its one for DVD Ice then you can switch off if you really cant bear it.
 
I must say that I find the idea that a person must be disabled in order to play a disabled person quite extraordinary. The only circumstances I can see that would justify such a stance would be some sort of positive discrimination.

Ultimately, an actor is a person who is paid money to depict a characterisation of a person whom they are not (with the notable exception of John Malkovich in Being John Malkovich). I can't recall having heard anyone frowning on Ben Kingsley getting "blacked up" to play Gandhi, Hoffman's depiction of an autistic or Robertson/McEvoy in Inside I'm Dancing.

I'm sure there are many other examples, but I think that's enough to make the point.
 
All acting is pretending anyway. Given this, anyone should really be allowed to play anyone.

Basically, there's two reasons people don't "black-up" any more. Firstly, black actors are no longer discriminated against, and secondly, no white actor in this day-and-age would ever want to do it (unless it was obvious spoof, a la Downey-Jnr in Tropic Thunder).
 
clivex said:
Might have been true that his body was collapsing on him before he knew maybe?
Click to expand...

Maybe but it seemed a bit exaggerated if he didn't at that point know/believe something was wrong, but I am being picky as usual .
People at work been watching American Sniper from a download or something technical, and thought it was brilliant. Someone has offered to loan it to me but not sure I could work out USB on the new tele.
 
I was wondering about American Sniper, given that I really liked Zero Dark Thirty.Can't make the trailer for Foxcatcher out at all; doesn't seem to give any clues as to what sort of film it is. But do like the look of that robot film, whatever it's called. Have always been fascinated by films and books about artificial intelligence and consciousness and stuff like that, albeit never having seen Blade Runner properly [gap in my education there methinks]...
 
Grasshopper said:
Given this, anyone should really be allowed to play anyone?
Click to expand...
That's the thing, tho, Grass, -- disabled actors really are prevented from playing able-bodied characters because of their disability. They are kinda limited to the gigs that they can get -- which would be playing a disabled part similar to their own disability. Which makes it a pity that when a genuinely disabled part in a big movie like Stephen Hawking comes up, it is given to an able-bodied actor. Would you think?

Firstly, black actors are no longer discriminated against,
Click to expand...
True, black actors nowadays will invariably be casted for black character parts. So, surely disabled actors are discriminated against when able-bodied actors are given the part of a disabled character, no?
 
icebreaker said:
True, black actors nowadays will invariably be casted for black character parts.
Click to expand...

Well there is chat of Idris Elba being the next Bond (a white Scots/Swiss half-caste). I think that portraying a white character might be a physical stretch for him but I can see the point that Bond has outgrown the original character to the extent that he is something of an everyman and therefore the colour of the actor portraying him is irrelevant. If that were to come to pass then it would be discrimination against white folk?

I reckon that the part should go to the actor best able to portray the character (both Bond and Hawkings), just as I believe that positive discrimination is a bad thing in all other walks of life.
 
In a momentary change of thread-direction, I heartily recommend you have a look for Bill Hick's piece about putting terminally-ill people in the movies, for a bit of light-relief (seriously!).
 
simmo said:
Well there is chat of Idris Elba being the next Bond (a white Scots/Swiss half-caste). I think that portraying a white character might be a physical stretch for him but I can see the point that Bond has outgrown the original character to the extent that he is something of an everyman and therefore the colour of the actor portraying him is irrelevant.
Click to expand...
A coloured James Bond would not be a mind-blower. It could well come to pass just as black actors regularly have leads in Shakespeare productions nowadays. Nobody blinks an eye at it. But there was a time that such a colour "contradiction" would have been incendiary.
However, would a wheel-chair bound actor have a chance of being cast as a Bond? Not in a lifetime -- same as the one-legged guy auditioning for Tarzan in Clive's clip above.
And there's the point I'm attempting to make: disabled actors get so few gigs that their only hope is to play a disabled character, but, even then they are overlooked for a genuine disabled part like Stephen Hawking. Now, that is real discrimination.
 
Last edited:
icebreaker said:
A coloured James Bond would not be a mind-blower. It could well come to pass just as black actors regularly have leads in Shakespeare productions nowadays. Nobody blinks an eye at it. But there was a time that such a colour "contradiction" would have been incendiary.
However, would a wheel-chair bound actor have a chance of being cast as a Bond? Not in a lifetime -- same as the one-legged guy auditioning for Tarzan in Clive's clip above.
And there's the point I'm attempting to make: disabled actors get so few gigs that their only hope is to play a disabled character, but, even then they are overlooked for a genuine disabled part like Stephen Hawking. Now, that is real discrimination.
Click to expand...

I would have a dwarf
 
Is the last page of this thread a spoof?

does it really need spelling out why a wherlchair bound actor can't play James Bond?
 
clivex said:
I would have a dwarf
Click to expand...
Funnily enough, dwarves have quite a good few acting opportunities open to them. There are many "little people" roles. And furthermore, a dwarf part is about the only one that a full-grown able-bodied actor can't sequester. He ( the full-grown actor) just "wouldn't fit" the part.
 
icebreaker said:
Funnily enough, dwarves have quite a good few acting opportunities open to them. There are many "little people" roles. And furthermore, a dwarf part is about the only one that a full-grown able-bodied actor can't sequester. He ( the full-grown actor) just "wouldn't fit" the part.
Click to expand...

Well in this film not all was small . Bloody weird I can tell you
 
That's true -- never considered that. Dwarves have the steady employment of midget porn to fall back on if the mainstream acting roles dry up for a while.
 
Back
Top