I can’t go Tom Cruise in anything. What a jerk.
Since I don’t have to deal with these people on a regular basis, I don’t care about the personality-faults or alleged transgressions of any noted actors, comics, or singers provided they didn’t commit any serious felonies or publicly spout any racist or bigoted viewpoints.
Say whaaaa?
Even in Tropic Thunder, as “Les Grossman”?
Cruise definitely played an outside usual norm in that and made the character an unlikable person in such an over the top goofy way that at least, to me, the character is over the top and goofy that it is actually funny in its over-the-top-ed-ness goofy way.
Drunky, I am willing to be convinced. I will watch that and see.
Slightly off-topic, but I have a hard time enjoying the humor of a comedian who has suffered a recent tragedy in his or her life (such as losing a child).
Excellent cite, thanks!
My opinions about certain aspects of a performer’s life will affect how I view his/her body of work. However talented, if I know the person did something really disgusting or holds incredibly offensive opinions, I can’t separate the actor from the character. I certainly won’t pay to see the work of someone in that category.
Petty? Maybe, but that’s how it is.
I don’t care if I disagree with someone’s politics or if they are a grandstanding narcissist or serial cheater or general idiot. They are actors, not grade school teachers or parish priests. It appears that I draw the line at rape.
Can’t suspend my disbelief enough for that.
It’s worth noting that she’s apologized repeatedly for her actions in Vietnam, and that many of the claims (not the ones you cited, but others) about her actions in Vietnam are false.
(I can’t find an apology for the specific outrage here–that she denied that POWs were tortured–but given her broader apologies, I suspect this one was apologized for as well).
How many civilians did the US kill in Southeast Asia during the Vietnam conflict? 100,000? 200,000? How many hundreds of thousands wounded, maimed and poisoned? How many hundreds of thousands of children born with birth defects because of our chemical warfare? And we’re supposed to be outraged by the actions of some misguided actress? I don’t fucking think so.
I can’t think of anyone where I retroactively disliked their stuff. That said, if someone came out tomorrow and (for example) vocally supported the zero tolerance/separation policy on the border, it would make me much less likely to buy their new work. I’d still enjoy the stuff I own or that’s been out but I wouldn’t really want to continue supporting them.
Exactly.
Because it is totally impossible to be upset about two different things at any given time. Completely humanly impossible.
I don’t understand the rush to strawman for Jane Fonda. It feels like such a knee-jerk reaction.
Tom Cruise is a talented actor. Especially when plays something besides Tom Cruise, which he did this one time.
That was after his well-publicized disagreement with Steven Speilberg, over Spielberg’s wife and scientology. Watching Tropic Thunder which I love, I thought Cruise was pretending to be Spielberg, and being a mean little shit, but maybe I’m reading too much into it. Yeah, Tom Cruise bugs me. So does John Travolta. Ditto Kevin Spacey and Bill Cosby. In fact, I don’t think I can ever enjoy Cosby again. I haven’t found Roseanne Barr funny for a long time.
Chuck Berry’s a well-known pervert, but I still respect him as a guitarist. In fact, most of my favorite music is made by terrible human beings.
Yah, and the same assholes who lose their shit over Fonda never acknowledge American crimes in Southeast Asia. So you know what they can do with their opprobrium? Shove it.
I believe the Les Grossman character was heavily based on Harvey Weinstein.
I just love that I had one of the only positive interactions with this man that I’ve ever even heard about. Like my great-grandfather taught me: I’d rather be lucky than good.
You can believe that if you want, but this fun article says otherwise.
And like a lot of others, I can appreciate any person’s work without actively liking them but an active dislike will cause me to not want to view their work at all, thus negating any possibility of appreciating it.
ETA: I also have several people who’s work I don’t like at all despite the fact that I actively like them.
That doesn’t make any sense. You put forward her terribly incorrect statements, without mentioning that she’d apologized for them in face-to-face meetings with former POWs. I simply added some relevant facts about her apologies–and prophylactically mentioned that charges other than yours had been laid, falsely, at Fonda’s feet. Where’s the straw-manning?
Back to the original question – no, I do not have to “like” a performer/creator personally to appreciate their work. Often the creation becomes greater than the creator (Roddenberry was mentioned earlier).
However if it involves more than mere disagreeability, the appreciation does not prevent me from recognizing their fault. To follow on an earlier mention again, yes, Rosemary’s Baby and *Chinatown *are great films… AND Roman Polanski must be dragged before a California judge to take what’s coming to him like a man. The two sentiments are not mutually exclusive.
Of course, there can be the individual case wherein someone goes so far as to ruin their retroactive body of work because I become unable to suspend for long enough. We see in this thread how to many that’s the case with Cosby. (Me, I have not listened to Cosby’s stand-up or rewatched his TV episodes since the 00’s anyway, so I have no idea if I’d find them “ruined” were I to check them out now.)
Truth be told I have never bought on to the notion that once “informed of the facts” about what a horrible person some person in public sight was/is, the only answer can be to turn against them and abhor anything connected with them with no hesitation. People should have the right to find it painful, and to compartmentalize and hold on to “the good” if it makes it easier – as long as they do not deny the truth about the artist.
Most people seem to be addressing the works just as pieces of art. As I alluded to above, what if your “patronage” of the disgraced artist’s work directly benefits him/her, either monetarily or by convincing producers and publishers that they are bankable enough to continue to hire or publish?