| | The ability of certain people to convincingly portray characters very different from themselves is precisely why we call them "actors."
If an actor had to sympathize with the ideas and values of a character in order to portray him competently, then I guess Anthony Hopkins was unqualified to play a cannibalistic serial killer convincingly -- unless he himself had secret, cannibalistic, serial-killing, nihilistic longings.
I guess Spencer Tracy, who had a reputation for carousing and drinking, was unqualified to convincingly portray the straight-arrow Father Flanagan. Similarly, I guess Bing Crosby, reputedly a cold, cruel man in private to his children, was unqualified to convincingly portray the priest in The Bells of St. Mary's and Going My Way.
Indeed, I guess that all the actors who have ever played religious fanatics were unqualified to do so unless they shared fanatical views -- or that those who played saints (Joan of Arc, Thomas More, etc.) were unqualified, too, since their private lives were often anything but saintly.
Likewise, I guess all those actors who have ever portrayed screen action heroes (except perhaps Audie Murphy) were unqualified to do so, because they themselves may not have lived heroically. (Incidentally, despite his heroism, Murphy was a BAD actor.)
Finally, I guess Ayn Rand and Frank O'Connor should not have taken, and could not have played, roles in Cecil B. DeMille's King of Kings with any conviction, unless they believed in Christianity.
|
|
"When this movie gets made, and the publicity buzz gears up, I can't even describe how embarrassing it is for me to think of what people will find when they look for more information about Objectivism. The Vallents, and moronic, nit-witted true believers. They're humiliating to Rand and her brilliance. They're humiliating to the heroic, reasoning nature of the human race."