Whose success (or at least fame) do you simply not understand?

[Cluricaun]

I know that he’s popular, but I don’t get Adam Sandler. I’ll give you that Opera Man was pretty decent once or twice, but his whole schtick seems to be…making weird faces and yelling gibberish or talking like some sort of retarded child. Oh, and writing songs that aren’t funny or clever or really even songs.

[Chronos]

See, most people don’t know Jim Parsons. They know Sheldon 'cos they watch him on TV. That’s all most “famous” actors have, a role (or series of roles) people find familiar. In Jim Parson’s case, he’s just a guy who plays a fake Aspie on TV. How is that a fame thing?

See, the difference is, the reason that Jim Parsons is on TV is that he’s good at portraying a genius with Aspberger’s. Some casting director watched a bunch of guys try out, and decided that Parsons was the best man for the job. With reality shows, though, you’ve basically got a casting director deciding who’s the most pathetic loser.

[Irishman]

@kidchameleon

Wasn’t she a buddy of Paris Hilton? I thought that’s how she first got some press coverage and then exploited the heck out of it.

I don’t know, but it wouldn’t surprise me - both LA gals with money. It’s all about the connections.

[msmith537]

@Rrose_Selavy

Justin Timberlake.

He’s not that good looking, in fact a bit wimpy, He still looks about 13 - his moves and music seem derivative - he hasn’t got a particularly impressive voice - the high pitched wining doesn’t work for me.
His performances continue to underwhelm me.

I still don’t get his success.

Really? Because I find his guest appearances on SNL to be one of the few redeaming qualities of that show.

[Baffle]

@kayaker

Mean Girls. Not a bad movie.

That is because it has Rachel McAdams in it, and everything she touches turns to gold.

[Superdude]

@Baffle

That is because it has Rachel McAdams in it, and everything she touches turns to gold.

Note to self: Do NOT ask Rachel McAdams for a handjob.

[Baffle]

And regarding Kim Kardashian or however it’s spelled, the creator of OkCupid has a blog where he runs statistical analyses on the data set his database provides. One of his posts attempts to explain the unbalanced attention received by different types of “hotness”. His conclusion was, if you’re a 7 out of 10 in hotness on average, it’s much better for there to be disagreement (ie, seven people think you’re a 10, and three think you’re a zero) rather than agreement (all ten people think you’re a 7) from the raters.

Here’s the link to the whole post; the entire blog is a fascinating, Freakonomics-style look into the math of attractiveness and dating.

[GuanoLad]

@Superdude

Note to self: Do NOT ask Rachel McAdams for a handjob.

Ooh. A King Midas themed porn movie. What a great idea! makes plans

[Superhal]

@Baffle

That is because it has Rachel McAdams in it, and everything she touches turns to gold.

She couldn’t overcome the massive shit-producing powers of Rob Schneider though in “The Hot Chick.”

Or, maybe it’s inverse karma…by appearing in such a turd she got a divine blessing for her next films. Somehow she dodged another Doodoo Midas in Vince Vaughn in the Wedding Crashers.

Or maybe Schneider sucked up all her bad luck? It seems like people who do movies with him then go on to successful roles.

[Baffle]

@Superhal

She couldn’t overcome the massive shit-producing powers of Rob Schneider though in “The Hot Chick.”

For some reason, I never saw that one…

It’s an interesting experiment, of course. What happens when the immovable suck monster meets the unstoppable force of awesomeness? Now we see which force is more powerful.