Jump to content
Forums forums
PRIMETIMER
Chas411

Future of Movie Stars: Who Will Shine? Who Will Fade Away?

Recommended Posts

Quote

Alongside the Cumberbatch comparison, part of the latter's appeal is that he is not "conventionally" attractive. Gruffudd has always come off as dreamy and he did best when playing into it with characters who were more ideal, earnest, and sometimes conflicted. He does have range but he didn't find the right roles. 

Quote

Grufford might just be a case of bad timing. He was in the leading man age range in the 2000's, and his general type (charming European fellow with kind of an odd posh look) was kind of falling out of favor during that decade as even Hugh Grant was getting away from those type of roles. 

Timing and physical appearance are so weird in the acting world. Do you have the right look for the movies people want to make and audiences want to see at a particular moment in time determines so much. I think Gruffuld is somewhere in that Hugh Grant/Pierce Brosnan zone. He's not like a Hugh Jackman who was already tall and fit and continued to bulk up for the superhero movies. And people stopped making the kind of mid-tier historical dramas, rom-coms, and slick spy thrillers you'd picture him in. I feel like there is a world where Ioan Gruffudd finds the right part. Like, his version of Sherlock or The Crown or The Bodyguard. There's a lot of luck involved. It's not even necessarily about finding good writing. You can stumble into a Big Bang Theory or Hawaii Five 0 reboot.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

In the reverse, Noah Centineo has exactly the right look at exactly the right time and in exactly the right vehicle. There was a definite vacuum going on for his type.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

I love Benedict Cumberbatch, think he's a great actor and I think he's cute but I like offbeat looking people. Anyway, I do think his current success is because he was in Sherlock. I agree that it comes down to that right, buzzy role at the right time.  Sometimes looks and talent have nothing to do with it. I think Paul McGann should have been a much bigger star than he is but he never did get the right thing to make it happen. It could have been Doctor Who but for whatever reason it didn't work out for that show to make its comeback at that time. Being the Doctor worked out for Tennant because it was the right time. 

Speaking of Tennant makes me think of Olivia Colman, who I LOVE, and I'm happy to see her star seems to be on the rise.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post

Jennifer Lopez makes commanding comeback in Hustlers

I have really mixed feelings about Jennifer Lopez, but I'd be hardpressed to deny that she hasn't worked her ass off to get the kind of comeback success she's seeing this weekend with Hustlers. She really has done whatever she could to keep herself in the game in the 20 years since she became famous.

Edited by methodwriter85
  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post

JLo is one of those actors I think I will always love and I'm thrilled Hustlers is doing well. In the hands of a different actor Ramona could have come across as kind and motherly on the surface while using you for her own benefit, and that would have been fine, but JLo playing her as genuinely caring about Destiny, Annabelle, Mercedes, and the other strippers was the right choice for the movie. I completely bought her love for her friends, for Mom, for her daughter, for Lily, for Nana, and the junkies she just wanted to help. All the while talking shit about, and ripping off, Wall Street assholes. I'll even say that Ramona was the best performance of her career, and I've loved her in a lot of different things.

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post

I am thrilled for Lopez too. And Wu continues with successful mid budget movies that feature diverse casts and gear toward female audiences. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

On 1/18/2019 at 12:28 PM, methodwriter85 said:

I just realized that if Kyle Gallner had been born a decade later, he probably would've had a much more successful career than just being that guy from Veronica Mars and a general "Hey, it's that guy" working actor. I mean, it does seem like he gets plenty of work, but I do think that his general look in his 20's (pale, babyface, soulful puppy dog eyes, curly hair) seems more popular now than it was back then. The 2000's seemed more about the Abercrombie-looking guy.

I always joke that had American Horror Story started earlier he would have played the weird, evil tortured roles that Evan Peters ended up playing. 

Speaking of Evan I've been saying to myself and a few friends for years now that I wish he would do another TV show or miniseries besides AHS because I feel he is a very good TV actor and more people should know him besides maybe the X-Men crowd.  He just booked an HBO limited series with Kate Winslet.  It does not hurt to be part of the Ryan Murphy world but still I hope this new miniseries opens him up to more people.  

Edited by ShadowHunter
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post

The funny part is that Evan and Kyle are only a year apart in age, but of course Evan took longer to become known. But yeah, right now the twink with soulful puppy dog eyes is getting pushed pretty hard right now- Twinkie Chalamet, Lucas Hedges, Nick Robinson, Tye Sheridan, Tom Holland, etc etc. Kyle would be cleaning up if he were 10 years younger.

Share this post


Link to post

Probably a UO - I think Stiles is a terrible actress. Save for 10 things I hate about you, I’ve never bought her in anything I’ve seen her in. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

I just listened to an episode of the Rewatchables podcast that discussed Ten Things I Hate About You, and it reminded me of how great Julia Stiles was in that movie. I honestly don't think I've ever enjoyed her as much in anything else.

Then again, the same goes for Heath Ledger and probably for Joseph Gordon-Levitt too. They're all so damned charming and fun in that movie.

Edited by Danny Franks
  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post

I finally got around to watching After, the teen romance drama that's been making the rounds on YouTube review channels ripping it apart.

It's not a good movie by any stretch, but Josephine (sister of Katherine) Langford really is giving it her all.

I don't know, my ears always perk up when I see an actor/actress appearing in a crap movie but really doing something with it, like when Dakota Johnson took Anastasia  Steele and made her into a real person. (As possible as it was given the strangehold that E.L. James had on production.)

Share this post


Link to post

That reminds me of Zoey Deutch doing a great job in the show "Ringer" (which I loved) and starring in the movie "Before I Fall".  The movie wasn't fantastic, but I just think she's great, and now she's enjoying some success with Set it Up and Zombieland 2.  (And now that I'm reading through this thread, The Politician.)

On 6/17/2019 at 9:56 PM, topanga said:

I loved her as the tough, so-called bitchy boss in that movie with... Michael Douglas(?) when he accuses her of sexual harassment (?). Please excuse my sh*t for brains. My point is that she’s great in CEO/ bad-ass boss rolls. 

"Disclosure"

The movie "Margin Call" was good.  She was in that, that was more recent.

Edited by Ms Blue Jay

Share this post


Link to post
On 10/7/2019 at 12:26 PM, methodwriter85 said:

I'd say Joseph Gordon Levitt's magnum opus was 50/50 with 500 Days of Summer as his close second.

That scene in 50/50 where he is being wheeled into surgery and starts reaching for Angelica Houston while calling "Mommy" I think is the best scene he has ever filmed. 

Such an underrated beautiful performance. Best thing he has ever done. 

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post

So the “ casting” of a CGI James Dean brings up some interesting implications.

If it’s success, up and coming actors may soon  not only have to complete with living names for Plum roles but with legends who died decades ago.

CGI creations have been the headliners  of movies for ages. I mean no one went to see Jurassic Park for the humans ( as good as they where), but this is different. CGI up until now was about making the impossible  possible on screen. You can’t get a real dinosaur to be in your movie but you can cast one of thousands of 20 something trained and talented actors to play this role they want CGI James dean for. It seems Unnecessary.  

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

I'll have to give Vanessa Hudgens this- she really is doing whatever she can to stay relevant and connect with an audience. Her attempt to be a "serious" actress didn't work out post-High School Musical and she's doing this kind of stuff instead and it seems to be working. Netflix clearly wants a Romcom Christmas movie lead and she's the right fit for that kind of stuff.

I'm guessing she got Netflix's notice after the positive press she got for the Grease Live bit?

Edited by methodwriter85
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
On ‎11‎/‎8‎/‎2019 at 5:41 PM, Pink ranger said:

So the “ casting” of a CGI James Dean brings up some interesting implications.

If it’s success, up and coming actors may soon  not only have to complete with living names for Plum roles but with legends who died decades ago.

CGI creations have been the headliners  of movies for ages. I mean no one went to see Jurassic Park for the humans ( as good as they where), but this is different. CGI up until now was about making the impossible  possible on screen. You can’t get a real dinosaur to be in your movie but you can cast one of thousands of 20 something trained and talented actors to play this role they want CGI James dean for. It seems Unnecessary.  

I find the idea of it very disturbing. Actors choose their roles, they decide to audition for something or not, and they live by their decisions when it comes to a movie being a success or a failure. A dead actor, reanimated by CGI, cannot make that choice, and I don't think anyone has the right to insert someone into a role that they never agreed to play. Will it impact on Dean's legacy? No, because I imagine most people will discount this, but it's not a decision we should even have to make.

A few years ago, when Snoop Dogg used that hologram of Tupac at Coachella, it was eerie and genuinely cool, and sparked the initial conversation about how we use the image and likeness and work of dead people. Then we had Peter Cushing inserted into Rogue One, and the effect was a little off, because computers just can't recreate that vitality of human life.

This is the first paragraph of Vice's article on this:

Quote

A production company called Magic City got the rights to Dean's image from the late actor's estate and plans to bring him to the silver screen again thanks to the wonder (or terror) of CGI. Now, Dean, or the digitally resurrected version of Dean or whatever, will play the second lead in a Vietnam War movie called Finding Jack, with a living actor standing in as his voice.

Now tell me that doesn't sound dystopian and furthering the commodification of human life.

I hope this movie absolutely bombs, but I suspect it won't, because the macabre spectacle will drive the publicity (and I suspect that's a large part of the reason they're doing it at all).

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

I'm not overly concerned that this becomes "a thing."  I know we say this all the time, but who is really asking for this?  The poor man's been dead for 64 years.  My parents were toddlers in 1955.  Does anyone actually want this?  I know there's always going to be a curiosity with someone who died so young, especially with the filmography that he was able to accumulate in such a brief period, but we'll never know what could have been and creepy CGI renderings don't change that.  For better or worse, we don't know what Dean would have matured into and anyone who cares enough to check out one of his films can always flip on TCM (Giant is like, always on) or rent them any time they want.  (and with all due respect, he's pretty much a product of his time.  "YOU'RE TEARING ME APART!" is as much parodied/mocked today as it is revered.)  Further, they could do the best CGI in the history of the art form and it still doesn't change the fact that it's not him.  He is not the one making the creative choices so much as a team of animators and a voice actor.  It might look real and it might sound real but it'll never actually be real.

Edited by kiddo82
  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
23 minutes ago, kiddo82 said:

I'm not overly concerned that this becomes "a thing."  I know we say this all the time, but who is really asking for this?  The poor man's been dead for 64 years.  My parents were toddlers in 1955.  Does anyone actually want this?  I know there's always going to be a curiosity with someone who died so young, especially with the filmography that he was able to accumulate in such a brief period, but we'll never know what could have been and creepy CGI renderings don't change that.  For better or worse, we don't what Dean would have matured into and anyone who cares enough to check out one of his films can always flip on TCM (Giant is like, always on) or rent them any time they want.  (and with all due respect, he's pretty much a product of his time.  "YOU'RE TEARING ME APART!" is as much parodied/mocked today as it is revered.)  Further, they could do the best CGI in the history of the art form and is still doesn't change the fact that it's not him.  He is not the one making the creative choices so much as a team of animators and a voice actor.  It might look real and it might sound real but it'll never actually be real.

Beautifully said. It's grave-robbing, plain and simple. I mean, I'm old enough to remember when Natalie Cole got mocked for recording all those duets with her dead dad (yet it somehow isn't as icky as the James Dean thing).

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
20 hours ago, Wiendish Fitch said:

I mean, I'm old enough to remember when Natalie Cole got mocked for recording all those duets with her dead dad (yet it somehow isn't as icky as the James Dean thing).

Awe, I actually loved that duet. But it was him really singing that song. This is not James Dean really acting in a movie. It is an image of James Dean someone else is voicing. They might as well have just gotten a James Dean impersonator. I still don't get it. It has not made me want to watch this movie, whatever it is, in the slightest, because despite being an old movie buff, I have no need to see dead movie stars resurrected for... I still don't get why. Is it just to prove they can? 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, Mabinogia said:

Awe, I actually loved that duet. But it was him really singing that song. This is not James Dean really acting in a movie. It is an image of James Dean someone else is voicing. They might as well have just gotten a James Dean impersonator. I still don't get it. It has not made me want to watch this movie, whatever it is, in the slightest, because despite being an old movie buff, I have no need to see dead movie stars resurrected for... I still don't get why. Is it just to prove they can? 

Oh, I know it was really Nat "King" Cole singing, so that's why it isn't as egregious as the whole NOT!James Dean debacle. I mean, why stop there? Are they going to have Grace Kelly appear in a Judd Apatow comedy? Will Humphrey Bogart play the sage mentor in a Hallmark Christmas movie? Will Charlie Chaplin and Buster Keaton star in Kathryn Bigelow's next war flick? Should I stop this sarcastic rambling before I give some Hollywood hack ideas?

Nat and Natalie's duet of "The Christmas Song" is really nice, BTW.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

Funny thing is, they are constantly remaking movies with new actors so we modern people can relate more and now they are taking a dead actor that very few people can relate to at this point and putting him in a new movie. Maybe they got confused. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, Wiendish Fitch said:

Oh, I know it was really Nat "King" Cole singing, so that's why it isn't as egregious as the whole NOT!James Dean debacle. I mean, why stop there? Are they going to have Grace Kelly appear in a Judd Apatow comedy? Will Humphrey Bogart play the sage mentor in a Hallmark Christmas movie? Will Charlie Chaplin and Buster Keaton star in Kathryn Bigelow's next war flick? Should I stop this sarcastic rambling before I give some Hollywood hack ideas?

Speak for yourself.  I can't wait to see James Stewart star in "Mad Titan", the raw, realistic reimagining of a young Thanos' origin story.  From failed tightrope walker to a man obsessed with maintaining balance.  "Oh, golly gee, I am inevitable."  

  • Laugh 5

Share this post


Link to post

I know personally, I cant wait to see Audrey Hepburn in a gritty remake of "Breakfast At Tiffany's" that imagines her as a high-end call girl struggling to find a rich husband after leaving her abusive past behind as a child bride, with Ryan Gosling taking on the role of Nick, her hunky BFF.

Or Natalie Wood could star in a gritty remake of "Sleeping with The Enemy" where she fakes her death drowning in the ocean to escape an abusive, psychotic husband.

  • Like 4
  • Surprise 1

Share this post


Link to post
On 11/11/2019 at 8:51 PM, kiddo82 said:

I'm not overly concerned that this becomes "a thing."  I know we say this all the time, but who is really asking for this?  The poor man's been dead for 64 years.  My parents were toddlers in 1955.  Does anyone actually want this?

How many of today's filmgoers know who James Dean was? Even if anyone wants it, comparatively speaking Dean is an obscure figure to choose since his three main roles were filmed so close to his death. Other than that, all of his credits seem to be bit parts in TV shows. We're coming up on the sixty third anniversary of the release of Giant, where the filmmakers had to him make him look a little older to portray Jett Rink's slow descent into alcoholism and ruin.

Side note: According to IMDB's trivia section on the film, Carroll Baker once told an interviewer that lots of people thought the announcement of Dean's fatal car crash was a publicity stunt. A near-riot happened at the movie's premiere when he didn't show up. Found that oddly appropriate to mention here.

  • Like 1
  • Useful 3

Share this post


Link to post
On 11/12/2019 at 10:56 PM, Mabinogia said:

Awe, I actually loved that duet. But it was him really singing that song. This is not James Dean really acting in a movie. It is an image of James Dean someone else is voicing. They might as well have just gotten a James Dean impersonator. I still don't get it. It has not made me want to watch this movie, whatever it is, in the slightest, because despite being an old movie buff, I have no need to see dead movie stars resurrected for... I still don't get why. Is it just to prove they can? 

I do suspect that they're doing it simply because they knew it would cause a huge stir, and help them market the movie. As you say, there is no reason whatsoever to use Dean's digitally constructed image, then have another actor record the dialogue. It makes the movie massively more complicated, for no discernible reason.

Yes, it's a tragedy that James Dean only made three movies, and people will always wonder what might have been. But the thing is, this isn't it. It's just a macabre simulacrum of an actor who is locked in everyone's memories as the handsome, tragic tale of lost potential.

If someone wants to honour Dean and bring his name into modern cinema, then write a biopic. Get a great director and cast someone who can do the man justice. Though even that wouldn't be without controversy, because whatever interpretation the writer had of Dean's sexuality, they'd be criticised.

On 11/13/2019 at 6:42 AM, methodwriter85 said:

I know personally, I cant wait to see Audrey Hepburn in a gritty remake of "Breakfast At Tiffany's" that imagines her as a high-end call girl struggling to find a rich husband after leaving her abusive past behind as a child bride, with Ryan Gosling taking on the role of Nick, her hunky BFF.

Or Natalie Wood could star in a gritty remake of "Sleeping with The Enemy" where she fakes her death drowning in the ocean to escape an abusive, psychotic husband.

You're thinking too small, here. I want Audrey Hepburn, Grace Kelly and Marilyn Monroe in a sexy crime caper, about three grifting dames who take suckers for all they're worth.

Then they can resurrect River Phoenix and stick him in a movie with his brother, Joaquin, and his best friend, Keanu Reeves. It would be so much fun!

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Danny Franks said:

Then they can resurrect River Phoenix and stick him in a movie with his brother, Joaquin, and his best friend, Keanu Reeves. It would be so much fun!

Since remaking old Disney cartoons into live action is all the rage now, River, Joaquin and Keanu as The Three Caballeros! Or Marilyn Monroe as Jessica Rabbit in a remake of Who Framed Roger Rabbit where the human characters are now animated and the animated characters are played by dead movie stars! Grace Kelly as the even newer Cinderella. Audrey Hepburn as the new Belle. Bogie and Bacall in The Big Sleep(ing Beauty). 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post

They could finally have Audrey Hepburn play Anne Frank like they wanted her to back in 1958 but she turned down because you know, she actually lived through the Nazi occupation of Holland and thought a movie adaption of Anne Frank would be too traumatic to play. But now it can totally happen! River Phoenix could be Peter, Jimmy Stewart can be her father, Vivien Leigh can be the mother,  and Liz Taylor can be her sister Margaret.

Edited by methodwriter85
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
12 hours ago, Danny Franks said:

Then they can resurrect River Phoenix and stick him in a movie with his brother, Joaquin, and his best friend, Keanu Reeves. It would be so much fun!

River what a shame. I was young when that happened and I remember sitting at my kitchen table looking at a picture of him in a magazine and just thinking Why? 

Even back then I thought they played the 911 call way too much. Damn.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

On 11/14/2019 at 9:54 AM, Danny Franks said:

You're thinking too small, here. I want Audrey Hepburn, Grace Kelly and Marilyn Monroe in a sexy crime caper, about three grifting dames who take suckers for all they're worth.

With Tony Kurtis, Steve McQueen, and Paul Newman as their respective love interests!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

River Phoenix...what a loss. He was a trendsetter to other kid actors young or old who to this day should be thankful to expand other career choices. River did his choice playing a narcoleptic john in My Own Private Idaho and that was due to something that no one expected him to play before. I mean, I am sure Finn Wolfhard, Jacob Tremblay, and others are following what River Phoenix did that shows his range as an actor with talent. River would have been the go to guy when it comes to acting. There was no one else like him. Not even the Coreys did that back then.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

I once rooted for Blake Jenner after he did Everybody Wants Some and Edge of 17. Now I'm glad he's pretty much cancelled now. What a piece of shit.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, methodwriter85 said:

I once rooted for Blake Jenner after he did Everybody Wants Some and Edge of 17. Now I'm glad he's pretty much cancelled now. What a piece of shit.

I’d like to say that’s true, but haven’t Michael Fassbender and Gary Oldman been accused of pretty heinous things by exes? But their exes weren’t famous. And Chris Brown still has a career, and we watched that unfold in real time. 

  • Like 4
  • Sad 2

Share this post


Link to post
On 11/16/2019 at 7:49 PM, Robert Lynch said:

River Phoenix...what a loss. He was a trendsetter to other kid actors young or old who to this day should be thankful to expand other career choices. River did his choice playing a narcoleptic john in My Own Private Idaho and that was due to something that no one expected him to play before. I mean, I am sure Finn Wolfhard, Jacob Tremblay, and others are following what River Phoenix did that shows his range as an actor with talent. River would have been the go to guy when it comes to acting. There was no one else like him. Not even the Coreys did that back then.

That he did NOT get the Best Supporting Oscar for  his cathartic (and semi-autobiographical ) performance  in Running on Empty while Kevin Kline did for that smarmy, snotty role in that obnoxious flick A Fish Called Wanda is something I've never forgiven the Academy and its voters for- and should have not been allowed to have happened! 

BTW, Mr. Kline has worked steadily since but it's been a long time since he's been considered a leading performer. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, absnow54 said:

I’d like to say that’s true, but haven’t Michael Fassbender and Gary Oldman been accused of pretty heinous things by exes? But their exes weren’t famous. And Chris Brown still has a career, and we watched that unfold in real time. 

Those people didn’t go up the ranks in today’s social media climate. It has the power to kill an artist’s involvement in projects anytime after initial announcement. Blake Jenner isn’t established enough for producers to weather any controversial out and he is still relatively young and his potential fan base have zero tolerance for problematic people  

Edited by Pink ranger
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

On 11/29/2019 at 2:07 PM, Blergh said:

That he did NOT get the Best Supporting Oscar for  his cathartic (and semi-autobiographical ) performance  in Running on Empty while Kevin Kline did for that smarmy, snotty role in that obnoxious flick A Fish Called Wanda is something I've never forgiven the Academy and its voters for- and should have not been allowed to have happened! 

BTW, Mr. Kline has worked steadily since but it's been a long time since he's been considered a leading performer. 

And the whole story as to what happneed in those final hours of his death makes it more tragic

  • Sad 4

Share this post


Link to post
On 11/29/2019 at 2:46 PM, Pink ranger said:

Those people didn’t go up the ranks in today’s social media climate. It has the power to kill an artist’s involvement in projects anytime after initial announcement. Blake Jenner isn’t established enough for producers to weather any controversial out and he is still relatively young and his potential fan base have zero tolerance for problematic people  

In Chris Brown's case, I think part of why he weathered that controversy is because he immediately pivoted to a harder, tougher look instead of his Baby Usher image before. I also think people just didn't care enough about Rihanna because her image was the sexpot "bad girl" instead of a more sympathetic wholesome girl next door. And you're right- this was also before current social media.

In Blake's case, he's not really a name yet (he's essentially a male ingenue who hasn't hit on that defining role yet), and Melissa outing him like that likely ensures that he won't be.

Share this post


Link to post

Blake is hitched to Richard Linklater, and that's about it. It will be interesting to see if he drops him from Merrily We Roll Along. They just started filming in the last year, so that's only one sequence to reshoot, but at the same time, the movie won't come out for 20 years, so he might gamble on this blowing over by then. It's definitely a huge elephant in the room, and I wouldn't be surprised if crew members start protesting Blake's inclusion in the cast.

Share this post


Link to post
11 hours ago, absnow54 said:

Blake is hitched to Richard Linklater, and that's about it. It will be interesting to see if he drops him from Merrily We Roll Along. They just started filming in the last year, so that's only one sequence to reshoot, but at the same time, the movie won't come out for 20 years, so he might gamble on this blowing over by then. It's definitely a huge elephant in the room, and I wouldn't be surprised if crew members start protesting Blake's inclusion in the cast.

It's definitely something to watch. I do think that Richard Linklater is a generally very loyal director to his actors, especially the ones who don't mind staying in small movies. 

He's probably wishing he had cast Glen Powell instead though. LOL.

Although yeah, taking on filming for 20 years means you get a lot of unknowns, and this is definitely one of them.

Share this post


Link to post
On 12/2/2019 at 4:22 AM, methodwriter85 said:

In Chris Brown's case, I think part of why he weathered that controversy is because he immediately pivoted to a harder, tougher look instead of his Baby Usher image before. I also think people just didn't care enough about Rihanna because her image was the sexpot "bad girl" instead of a more sympathetic wholesome girl next door. And you're right- this was also before current social media.

In Blake's case, he's not really a name yet (he's essentially a male ingenue who hasn't hit on that defining role yet), and Melissa outing him like that likely ensures that he won't be.

I disagree that people didn't care about Rihanna. When the story first broke and TMZ published those pictures of her bruised and battered face, all of the sympathy was for her. 

I thinking it's more a matter of society being quicker to forgive men for violent transgressions when the victims are women. Especially if they're women of color. See: the NFL, Brock Turner, and many other high profile rape and domestic violence cases.

  • Sad 4

Share this post


Link to post
On 12/4/2019 at 8:57 PM, topanga said:

I disagree that people didn't care about Rihanna. When the story first broke and TMZ published those pictures of her bruised and battered face, all of the sympathy was for her. 

I thinking it's more a matter of society being quicker to forgive men for violent transgressions when the victims are women. Especially if they're women of color. See: the NFL, Brock Turner, and many other high profile rape and domestic violence cases.

In Chris Brown's case, it didn't help that some of his most vocal defenders were other women. Or, at least, very online teen girls who thought he was hot. I'd guess that then makes it a lot easier for anyone to disregard his actions, if they want to.

  • Like 2
  • Sad 3

Share this post


Link to post

2 hours ago, Danny Franks said:

In Chris Brown's case, it didn't help that some of his most vocal defenders were other women. Or, at least, very online teen girls who thought he was hot. I'd guess that then makes it a lot easier for anyone to disregard his actions, if they want to.

Yes women are very quick to say "what did she do to provoke him" when the man in question is their crush.  Case in point, JK Rowling and her decision not to fire Johnny Depp as Grindewald.  I don't know if she flat out admitted that she has had a crush on him since 21 Jump Street, but it was heavily implied.  

  • Like 1
  • Sad 4

Share this post


Link to post

Rihanna also reunited with him Didnt she? Or am I imagining that.. it was so long ago I just remember how shocked I was as I thought he’d been pretty squeaky til that.

  • Like 1
  • Sad 2

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Customize font-size