Actors/Headscratchers: Difference between revisions

Remove bogus category
(Remove bogus category)
(2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 22:
** I get what you're saying, and this is a true sore point for me w/Pacino, but [[Meet the Parents]] was pretty darned good and [[Insomnia]] wasn't too half bad.
** Man, I know what you mean. I see Leslie Nielson in Seltzerberger movies and I throw up a little bit. Not quite on the same tier as your other examples, but still...damn.
*** [[Did Not Do the Research|Leslie Nielsen has only been in one "Seltzerberger" film.:]] ''[[Spy Hard]]''.
** Two words: [[Ham and Cheese]].
* Why is it people seem to think Actors don't do any "real" work. That acting is something that A) is something that anybody can do and B) requires less effort than most other jobs. These stereotypes are a load of rubbish and need to be dispensed with. Actors who are worth their salt spend endless hours studying techniques and doing research for roles, devote time to character study and the necessary memorisation of lines (for shows with lines). Not to mention the fact that work days for an actor can be incredibly long and tiring, for certain roles on TV or film you may be needed on set pretty much all day, early morning (7am or earlier) to late evening (whenever), if you're in a complex costume or makeup then even longer (some makeup or prosthetics for more SF shows can take upwards of 4/5 hours to apply and slightly less to remove). And on stage you may be expected to give the same performance with the same level of energy, twice a day for a period of months on end! It's seriously hard work and deserves more respect than it gets.
Line 145:
 
{{reflist}}
 
[[Category:Home Page/Headscratchers]]
[[Category:Pages needing more categories{{BASEPAGENAME}}]]
[[Category:Actors{{SUBPAGENAME}}]]
[[Category:Headscratchers]]
__NOTOC__