Quote:
Originally Posted by Pudding
You said "Knowing Meat transforms into this character makes Meat more of a talent" I'm saying that there's a tonne of actors who do that - method acting.
|
So there is no confusion: my statement made above is isolated and is taken out of context because it was to support my other statement.
This is what I'm saying: I believe it takes more of a talent (ie Meat and method actors in general) to portray a believe-able opposite of their own self on screen. I believe Meat sees this as a challenge therefore chooses roles such as these. This is not to say other actors cannot do it or Meat is the best actor in the whole wide world IMO. I believe Meat has grown as an actor over his experience and I believe that Meat is forever learning. I enjoy Meat's characterizations and I do believe certain roles were more of a challenge for him. I have seen actors play great "bad guys" and they are not quite "nice guys" in real life....I think that bad guy roles may come easier to those people who are not such nice guys in reality. Now however that gets spun in Pudding land, I can only imagine.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pudding
As a general rule of thumb, but not 100% accurate, it's usually the films with the big budgets or the big names that get the attention and the awards. Most (not all) of the films Meat has been in are B-list films not A-list cinema experiences.
|
Is a film labeled B-list film when the script comes across the desk of Sir Meat?