Johnny Depp, cool guy or just up himself?

Okay, this thread is starting to go all over the place. Michael 10 I'm not sure what you're on about. Do you not like Johnny Depp personally? Professionally? Do you dislike America or its politicians or citizens? Do you hate movies from the 40s and 50s?

I think Christine summed things up pretty fairly in her 5:20 AM post. You created a thread posing an either/or question, and invited multiple opinions. Then, when people started offering opinions that differed from yours, you kind of blew up and extended to the broader, touchier, and completely unrelated topic of politics. I'm all for a lively discussion and political debate can have a place here, but this just came out of nowhere. So you think Johnny Depp's up his own ass; most people responding here don't, but no one's angry at you for your opinion of him. There's no reason to take something like personal feelings on an actor and use it as a metaphor for why our country and its citizens aren't as good as yours.

I think people here have been giving fair, respectful responses, so I just don't know where you're coming from, is all.

__________________
"I want a film I watch to express either the joy of making cinema or the anguish of making cinema" -Francois Truffaut

...........apart from Tom Hanks.

Wait, what? Johny Depp isn't a performer? And you think he's a thespian who wants to act a little mysterious? I don't think that's a reasonable judgement to make to be honest. Think about it. If he comes across that way, it's only because he hates being in the public eye in the first place. Fair enough, if you don't like the guy, that's your opinion. But I think your the one who needs to give HIM a break!

@Movieslap - I don't hate the guy, as I've never met him. While being nervous with Letterman "might" be a reasonable explanation why he doesn't watch his co-stars other performances to get a read on who he is working with......WHAT? He doesn't watch his counterparts Movies, because he is up himself....simple!

@cries & whispers - I'll answer your Qustions! Johnny Depp displays a certain air of arrogance when it come to those he works with, and the industry itself. America like Australia, have to pull their head out of their ass, before we both become irrelevant. China & India's population combined come 1/3 of the worlds population, so we better clean up our act. I have nothing against the citizens of the U.S. I actually know and have worked with quite a few. Movies from yesteryear are revered by many here, when I just think people want to be nostalgic.

@Yoda, yes it is Mandatory that we vote, but you only get fined if you register than fail to vote when a election comes around. If you never register at wherever you're residing, than you don't get fined.

Still, we don't have celebrities and known officials doing a massive campaign in order to convince people to vote. I do understand why certain minorities in the States couldn't be bothered to vote in elections before Obama, as they weren't really represented...now were they?

Firstly, I admire your balls (that sounded weird). It's pretty much you against this whole forum, and you're sticking to your guns. Secondly, I agree with some of what you're saying actually. I'm going to focus on the points you made about movies and only briefly address your political assertions. Communist China is one of the most criticized governments in the world in terms of human rights, freedom of information, and class equality. On top of that, their non-existent environmental regulations make it one of the most polluted states in the world. So I think it's them more than us who needs to literally 'clean up their act.'

As for India, well, they're actually pretty much awesome. They've maintained a relatively (to the rest of the developed world, that is) peaceful democracy for decades and sustain a healthy relationship with most countries. But they've had a de facto policy of non-alignment for a long time, so I don't see them starting a war with any country, let alone America.

Okay, my next post will be the important one--about movies!

@cries & whispers, you don't believe India will start a war with any Country? Id suggest you read your history books and watch the news! India & Pakistan have nukes pointed at one another. As for China, we have to compete with them. Most products are made there, and more Billionaires are coming out of China than anywhere else, they'll soon own the companies and Manufacture there also. Than what do we have? Consumer orientated contries with no means to pay for these products.....debt, more debt....than some more. America debt is astronomical already.

Okay, one more political post. It doesn't take a black person to represent common black opinion in America. Bill Clinton more or less represented minorities, he was one of the most beloved political figures in the African American community throughout the nineties. Also, in a time when almost the entire South opposed it, President Johnson passed the Civil Rights Act. And this wasn't just a political move, he worked hard to pass it through Congress and firmly believed in its importance. And even going with your argument that a minority would best represent the minority population, Obama is hardly the first minority to run for our nation's highest office, there have been other black people, women, black women... Minorities have been represented, it just takes a lot to overcome systematic racism that has been engraved in our country pretty much since its inception.

Next, what's wrong with a group of celebrities who are passionate about America's democratic process making videos and such to promote voting? It's not like people weren't going to vote, then they saw the Black Eyed Peas doing a concert for voter registration drives, and changed their mind. These celebrities and artists are increasing awareness of the importance of the political process. The more the political discussion enters the mainstream discussion, the more people will realize that political decisions effect their lives very directly. Then, they'll get more interested and want to be more in tune with what's going on.

Uhhmm, America has nukes pointed at pretty much every country on the map, but we're not planning on blowing up the entire world. They are precautionary. I personally think we should get rid of them, but we're at a point now where that's not a reasonable option, since other countries have nukes pointed right back at us. But we're not going to use them. Specifically with India, their military has held a no first-use policy since they first developed a nuclear weapons program. The sad truth is, to be taken seriously in the First World, your military presence needs to be able to compete with other countries in the First World.

As for India's relations with Pakistan, I'll agree that they aren't on friendly terms to say the least. They've had multiple wars and debates over land for decades. Luckily, none of our land borders India, so I think we're in the clear there. And India has made strong efforts to maintain peace with other nations. It is a major part of the Commonwealth of Nations and an active participant in peacekeeping efforts in the United Nations. Put simply, we don't have to worry about entering a war with India at all.

Also, I don't really appreciate your condescending remarks. My dad's a history professor, my brother just earned his degree in history from the University of Chicago, my younger brother is a political science major at Northwestern University, and I am a journalism major with a focus on international relations. I'm pretty much required to read the news on a daily basis, and our dinner table discussions sound like the MacNeil/Lehrer Newshour. So yeah, I have read my history books and watched the news, extensively.

To be fair, I'd find it uncomfortable to watch performances of people, even friends that I may have to work with. I'm sure if you're a professional actor you can tell what someone will be like to work with, when you begin working with them and then you can judge your own actions to ensure a well oiled performance. To watch counterparts before you start working with them may make one weary and nervous about how they do their job. It seems more fitting, to me at least, to wait until you're rehearsing or on set working off eachother with the script and the director there for guidence. I would certainly not say that this would make Depp nor anyone else up themselves. This seems like a small thing to pick at.

__________________
"Life has become immeasurably better since I have been forced to stop taking it seriously."

Okay, now the movie post!!

I think it's dangerous to try to make the argument that movies today are better than movies from the golden age of cinema. To be fair, I think our perception of that era is a little distorted, since most of the movies we watch from then are classics that have withstood the test of time. I can hardly even name a bad director other than Ed Wood from the 40s or 50s, because there movies aren't coming on AMC or TCM. Similarly, in fifty years, TCM will not be airing crappy movies from today. Theaters will not re-release Dude, Where's My Car? for special shows, ABC won't play Christmas with the Kranks every holiday season, and universities will not have classes with a shot-by-shot analysis of Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants. In fifty years, they'll be re-releasing The Lord of the Rings Trilogy and Avatar, film classes will study Synecdoche, New York, and Scorsese's work from the last decade will be airing on TV.

People on these forums who revere older films are not being 'nostalgic.' I wasn't even born until the late eighties, so these movies have no special place in my heart from childhood. We love these movies because they are GREAT. It is no coincidence that the vast majority of movies considered to be the greatest of all time by critics, filmmakers, and film historians happen to come primarily from yesteryear. I think if we took the twenty best movies of the last twenty years, and compared them with the twenty best movies of the forties and fifties, the overwhelming majority of people would choose mostly movies from the 40's and 50's as being better.

I've actually had this argument a lot, and I'm almost always on the side favoring current movies. I think that the art of filmmaking has become more refined in the last few decades. But this is to be expected in a medium that's so young where the more a director works, the more skilled he gets at his craft. It's the same with a good sculptor. The inherent creativity he has is not something that will usually deepen with age, but a sculptor will likely improve at the art of sculpting with the more projects he completes. GoodFellas is a more polished movie than Taxi Driver. I don't think anyone would argue that. The earlier Scorsese film was grainy and rougher on purpose and is without a doubt one of the best directed movies of all time. But the perfect marriage of sound effects, visual effects, camera movements, and lighting in his later film are just cleaner. Does that make it better? Absolutely not. The themes, emotions, and authenticity of its characters make Taxi Driver a better film.

Similarly, Citizen Kane is better than The Departed; Bicycle Thieves is better than No Country for Old Men, and The Rules of the Game is better than There Will Be Blood. These are all subjective of course, but then so is the argument that movies are better today than they were decades ago. What is not objective is reasoning behind opinions.

Is he cool? Is he up himself? Dont know, dont know him. You can watch or read all you want about a person but you will never get enough information from the media to know that person. You have to know someone to know them, you know. The things you see and read about him may lead you to believe that he is a little unusual. But, as far as actors go, thats not unusual. As someone commented, its not easy to convincingly portray different personalities/characters for a living. As for what I thought about the interview, which seems to be where Mike was going with this, I thought Letterman was great and Depp seemed more humble than conceited.

The difference is the old studio system which was in place until about 1950 assured a certain level of competency even from lesser films that is no longer true from Hollywood films. Some of these big budget productions like Speed Racer are horrifically bad. The reason none of us can name a really awful big budget film pre 1950s is they don't exist. Mediocre disappointments, yes, but not unwatchable awful, which is often the case today.

I'm kinda interested in why he put thespian in quotes.

@cries and whispers, you really should have listened to your Father more my friend..LOL! America is the only country to have used nuclear weapons as a means to threaten a country....It won the War, and I'm glad they did, but to suggest America will never use them is a little naive don't you think?

Maybe "nostalgic" was the incorrect word, though I love how all these budding "thespians" hehe (for the tramp) seem to get all wet when Bogart, Bergman, Hitchcock etc. are mentioned. It's a matter of taste, true. I have older relo's who can't stand these so called 'Masterpieces' from the 40's & 50's, it seems the only people who hold these classics in high regard are "thespians"..LOL!

"The cheaper the crook, the gaudier the patter, eh? People lose teeth talking like that. If you want to hang around, you'll be polite."

__________________
It's what you learn after you know it all that counts. - John Wooden
My IMDb page

What part did you take offence to my exalted friend? All factual except for the part about America could use Nuclear Weapons, Now? For they are the only country to do so, against another nation.

Say what you really mean, instead of beating around the bush, like a typical intellectual. I've had my fair share of serving our nations....have you?

Personally, I don't understand why so many people are inf-actuated with him. He's just another actor....not saying he's a bad actor or isn't attractive, I just don't get it...

__________________
But I, being poor, have only my dreams; I have spread my dreams under your feet, Tread softly because you tread on my dreams. W.B. Yeats

If you're talking to me, I was quoting that old fart Bogart as Sam Spade in The Maltese Falcon. That's about as intellectual as I can get, but if you want to take it differently, I'll give you this, "When you're slapped Corleone, you'll take it and like it."

Are you responding to mark f's statement? I think that was a quote from The Maltese Falcon, LOL.

But yeah, we'll have to agree to disagree on the nuclear weapons thing, because we're arguing something neither of us can know. Yeah, we unfortunately used nuclear weapons before, but those were extremely different times from now. Of course, anyone can draw parallels, but the fact is nothing about our current situation and the incidents that led to the bomb being dropped share anything in common. So saying, we used it before as evidence that we'll probably use it again is not really valid. On the other hand, me simply saying we won't use them doesn't really have any support other than the personal, and I think logical, belief that doing so would be just about the stupidest thing any country could do to another, and no country wants to take that leap--certainly not America first.