That’s kind of the point. The theme of the movie is along the lines of “what can go wrong next?” If the gods were smiling, the dwarf actor *would *be happy. Buscemi cast him as an actor, not as a dwarf. Then he (Dinklage’s character) wonders why there’s a dwarf in the scene.
Here’s the passage quoted from IMDB.
And then he walks off the set, to the stunned bemusement of Buscemi.
Tito is assuming that because it’s a dream sequence, his job is to play a dwarf. However, the script does not call for a dwarf, IIRC, just an actor to dance around, or with, the woman in the dream. It’s clearly a dream before Tito even comes in.
Again, my memory may be cloudy, and the scene may be offensive. It just seemed funny to me, but I am not that attuned to whatever issues dwarves/dwarf actors have.
Sorry, not a TV person here (the TV hasn’t been on for months). I’ve never seen Pushing Daisies and don’t know anything about it, but no matter. I would have seen Penelope anyway just because I love James McAvoy, and like Christina Ricci and Reese Witherspoon. It’s nice to know that you liked it. Your calling it a “lovely little rom-com fable” is more than enough to make me look forward to seeing it, so thanks!
And I heartily agree with all the good things said about The Station Agent. It’s a wonderful film. Ditto Living In Oblivion, the movie that taught me a bit about the magic of how actors do what they do (Catherine Keener’s many takes).
Not entirely off topic, but I feel compelled to report that the weirdest live sex show I’ve ever seen here, hands down, was between a drop-dead-gorgeous cutie and a little person. She was the “babysitter”; he was dressed in diaper, bonnet and pacifier. She gave “baby” a bath onstage. “Baby” started being naughty, so “baby” got a spanking. Before you know, they were having full sex.
Just another day in the Big Mango.
But Peter Dinklage is great. We loved him in *Living in Oblivion * and The Station Agent.
I know I had seen Dinklage before The Station Agent, but I didn’t notice him until The Station Agent. I was already a big ass fan of Patty Clarkson, and I was gaining on Bobby Cannavale but Pete got me.
It seemed like this movie could have centered around anyone, not a little person, but any lonely puke. Dinklage just gave a that performance that made people think maybe that could be them. I surely did take notice of him and still do. Character actors are my favorite people in Hollywood, wish more “stars” felt that way.
Yes, I understand the attraction to Dinklage. He appeared in a sex dream of mine once, telling me sleeping with a housewife wasn’t as bad as he thought it would be. Even with that, I still find him attractive. Go figure.
He came off to me like a sanctimonious jerk. And not in the good way that the other sanctimonious jerks come off. I found his attitude annoying and his persona insufferable. In short (heh), I hated him.
I haven’t read the whole thread, but I’ve seen the “get past X” issue come up a few times this week and just have to put in my two cents.
Speaking from experience as someone who married someone physically different from the average (no, he’s not a dwarf) there seem to be two reasons for dating/mating/marrying someone “different”.
Fetish. A lot of people seem to leap to this conclusion - you wouldn’t date someone different unless you had a kink for that. Well, there ARE people who have a kink for X or Y or Z, just there are people with a kink for shoes or dressing up in the opposite gender’s underwear. While these folks might seek dates with possessors of their fetish-object I don’t think they get married to them very often because they aren’t focused on the person and that’s one of the requirements of a successful long-term relationship, getting to know the person.
You like the PERSON, not the difference. And I think for marriages this is the more common situation. I did NOT date or marry my husband because of his disability, I married him because I love HIM, the person inside the meaty shell. If I could wave a magic wand and make him physically normal I would and never look back - meanwhile, we cope as best we can.
So, the sentiment expressed in the OP to me is that more of a potential #2 - you realize there are issues with this person you wouldn’t face with someone physically closer to average, but you’re intrigued by other aspects of the person that you wouldn’t cross them off the list just because they’re extremely short and/or may have other physical problems.
Or, to put it a slightly different way - should something happen to my husband that terminates our marriage, while I wouldn’t seek out someone with a disability, it’s not on my list of requirements for a mate, I would certainly consider a disabled person with traits I find attractive to be on the list of potential candidates.
More sympathetic than a sanctimonious dwarf with a conscience.
Besides, I don’t watch Nip/Tuck for its solid moral underpinnings or its sympathetic characterizations. I watch it for the outrageous surgery of the week and its occasional yet gratuitous male nudity.
Voices are so important to me when it comes to sexual attraction…that’s another downside for the type of little person who is tiny proportionately: tiny little voices. if one must deal with being a dwarf, that must be the worst (if you’re male…I echo the sentiment that it’s much easier for women)
Or, you know, had - he may have changed it in the last couple of years. He’s one of the first of many celebrities I met at my previous job, and I have to say I was way more excited about meeting him than many of the other ‘bigger’ (in more ways than one) stars. Indeed he is devastatingly handsome in person, and seemed like a pretty nice guy from our limited interaction. If he had asked for my phone number I would have gladly handed it over. Hey, I’m only 5’4" - not that huge of a difference.
Maybe. But if the girl ever passed by while he was hanging out with his friends, the lucky guy could have pointed to her and said, “See her? I get to do her every night.” She was quite a looker.
