Cinema Fredité
I see the Los Angeles Times has spent decades living in and reporting on the film community without learning anything about acting. In their Celebrity News section, Tina Daunt wonders whether voters will confuse Fred Thompson the politician with the roles performed by Fred Thompson the actor. She speaks with a USC professor who apparently doesn't understand the difference, either (via Hot Air):
But in the age of YouTube, this performance could raise an intriguing political question: How does a performer eyeing a presidential run deal with a video history that can be downloaded, taken out of context, chopped into embarrassing pieces and then distributed endlessly though cyberspace? Some conservative political blogs are already considering the problem."Not only do politicians have to worry about getting comfortable with a crowd and saying something that might be caught on tape," said USC professor Leo Braudy, a pop culture expert, who has written extensively about film. "Now actors who have political aspirations will have to go through every single line of every part they played to make sure there's nothing they need to explain or apologize for."
Huh? Did Fred Thompson write his own lines? Did he write all the screenplays? Does anyone in this town understand what acting means? Actors read lines, usually written by someone else, in order to portray someone other than themselves.
Can the LA Times have missed this cultural phenomenon taking place right in their own back yard?
So, for what does Daunt and Braudy think Fred might have to apologize? Maybe he needs to apologize for being a jerk to Clint Eastwood in In The Line of Fire. It could be that people will question his executive ability after watching him get pushed around by an anal retentive Larry Miller in Necessary Roughness. He gave up awfully fast against home-grown terrorists and traitors in Die Hard II: Die Harder. And he's playing Ulysses S Grant in the upcoming Bury My Heart At Wounded Knee; maybe he needs to apologize to Native Americans.
Or maybe Daunt decided to go digging for something really silly:
So can "Law & Order" actor and former Sen. Fred Thompson (R-Tenn.) become the first presidential candidate with this credit? Thompson played a white supremacist, spewing anti-Semitic comments and fondling an autographed copy of "Mein Kampf" on a television drama 19 years ago.His colleagues say that he was just an actor putting everything he had into playing the role of a charismatic racist, named Knox Pooley, in three episodes of CBS' hit show "Wiseguy" in 1988. "Do you call Tom Cruise a killer because he played one in a movie?" asked show creator and writer Stephen J. Cannell.
No, but I believe he's a pretty pathetic vampire after Interview with the Vampire. Does that count?
Cannell makes the point pretty explicit, although it seems that Daunt missed it:
"He was an actor hired to play a part," Cannell said. "These are not his personal views. He doesn't believe any of that, nor do I. If this is all they can find to say about him, then they've hit a new low."
Yes, they have -- "they" being the Los Angeles Times.
And Fred? If you're reading this, you owe us all an apology for Aces: Iron Eagle III. I'm just sayin'.
BONUS QUESTION FOR THE LA TIMES: When Warren Beatty flirted with running for governor, did you ever write articles worrying that voters might think him to be a murdering thief (Bonnie & Clyde), a Jewish mobster (Bugsy), or a Communist sympathizer (Reds)? Didn't think so.



Comments (19)
Posted by hallgt
| May 4, 2007 5:36 PM
Predictably that is how the people in the MSM work. I question why they give a REAL bigot in Robert (KKK) Byrd (D-WV) a free ride and go after someone like Thompson for ACTING the role of a bigot. Just shake your head and move on Fred.
Posted by Caltechgirl
| May 4, 2007 5:39 PM
Funny how this dovetails nicely with Fred's editorial today, taking the MSM to task for ignoring the REAL bad guys in the world...
Posted by Only_One_Cannoli
| May 4, 2007 5:46 PM
How does one become a "pop culture expert?"
Weird article. In CA our Governator said naughty words on camera and terrorized Linda Hamiliton (i saw it) and voters forgave him for that. Clinton smoked but didn't inhale, W Bush was a reformed party animal. Maybe the LA TImes' pop culture expert is a tad out of touch?
Posted by digitalintrigue
| May 4, 2007 5:48 PM
Wasn't it Dick Tracy that flirted with running for governor?
Posted by Lew
| May 4, 2007 5:50 PM
The underlying notion here is "Do the vast sea of unwashed masses really understand the subtle and highly nuanced distinction between acting and being? Can they really get it?" We should probably interview more "experts" and see if there isn't something that we can do about this terrible situation.
For Pete's sake, ALL POLITICIANS ARE ACTORS!!! Remember the old saw about "Politics is showbiz for ugly people." Well, its true! Get over it!
We really aren't that stupid, but its so revealing of these two liberals' attitudes that its actually instructive for anyone who wants to understand the mindset of the other side.
Posted by Fred
| May 4, 2007 5:53 PM
Well, it's not like Tina Daunt is a journalist; She just plays one on the LA Times.
Posted by arb
| May 4, 2007 6:35 PM
"The Los Angeles Times saw average daily circulation fall 4.2% to 815,723..."
Forbes 4/30/2007
Gee, wonder why...
Posted by docjim505
| May 4, 2007 6:45 PM
Par for the course for the MSM. Remember when it was breathlessly reported that Ahh-nold was born in AUSTRIA... like Adolph Hitler? Or when the dems tried to get mileage from "Bedtime for Bonzo" when the Gipper was running for office?
If you're a Republican, EVERYTHING you ever said, did, or thought about doing is fair game, including acting.
Posted by Lew Clark
| May 4, 2007 7:07 PM
Well I don't live in California, so i never had Arnold on a ballot I could mark. But I have friends in California who voted for him. They feel he has done a good job, but were really hoping he'd rip the arm off just one moonbat and beat them with it. So, under the "fool me once" criteria, I'm not looking for President Fred, who I'm backing, to do much cool movie stuff either.
Posted by Rovin
| May 4, 2007 7:18 PM
At this point I have to agree with Sheryl Crowe ----- one sheet (of the Times) is certainly enough.
Posted by ddh
| May 4, 2007 7:56 PM
I guess Nurse Betty is working at the LA Times under the pen name of Tina Daunt.
Posted by Stephen Macklin
| May 4, 2007 8:50 PM
In the next installment of their hard hitting investigation into actors turned conservative politicians they will be reporting that California's governor once appeared as a relentless robot assassin and that despite his claim to come from Austria do we really know that he is not from the future?
If this story fails to gain any traction they will follow up with a report that he once appeared in movie pregnant and could well be a transsexual.
Posted by viking01
| May 4, 2007 9:09 PM
Similar to the first poster Sen. Robert "Kleagle" Byrd, who played a Klansman in real life, immediately came to mind upon reading Tina Daunt's drivel. Tina Daunt appears nearly as shameless as Chrissy Matthews was pitching Bill Clinton in last night's debate.
If Tina Daunt or the equally asinine LA Times editors who cleared her article actually address the Robert K. Byrd issue they'll probably give Old Byrdbrain bonus crafts points for his pointy homemade costuming and woodworking credits for making those crosses he used to burn.
The LA Times has joined the NY Times as yet another leftist propaganda rag my parrot refuses to read.
Posted by Only_One_Cannoli
| May 4, 2007 10:07 PM
If Byrd had pretended to be all those things that he really was then the Times would write a story about his character (if he was a republican) but since he wasn't pretending to be an awful character there's no story to write about him. Least, I think that's how it works.
Posted by viking01
| May 5, 2007 12:47 AM
I wonder if Tina Daunt was too busily distracted by apple-off-the-tree Patrick Kennedy getting out of rehab to bother asking Mary Jo Kopechne about the pivotal reality TV "role" Chappy Teddy played in her life? Oops, too late.
Or Bobby and Marilyn? Or Condit and Chandra? Or Kennedy-Smith and the Palm Beach girl? Or Skakel and poor Martha Moxley? Or Bubba and Juanita Broaddrick? Or Barney Frank and his magical basement brothel? Or Nifong and the Duke Three drama? Or Revrum Al and (was it Freddie's?) Fashion Mart? When is the TV docudrama about Sandy "Pants" Berglar slated for broadcast?
Tina misses so much watching re-runs!
Roll over and bark Tina and maybe the DNC will throw you a snack? Now fetch!
Posted by Adjoran
| May 5, 2007 2:58 AM
Of course this is a non-issue - EXCEPT that if Thompson is the nominee, some 527 group will run the edited clips as ads the day before the election. If it were a close race, it could make the difference with people so dull they haven't decided who to vote for by November.
Now, the major networks and cable news outlets would refuse to run it, probably, BUT they would highlight the proposed ad on their newscasts for free, giving it full exposure while patting themselves on the back for NOT "running the ad."
It's a doggone shame the level to which the average intelligence in this country has sunk. Heck, a recent poll showed even the French have a lower opinion of the French than Americans do. We just aren't trying anymore. . .
Posted by BarCodeKing
| May 5, 2007 3:47 AM
Re: The bonus question: Well, given Hollywood's anti-anti-communist leanings, the last one is a definite possibility. When they make hagiographic movies about communists, it definitely shows in which direction their sympathies lie.
Posted by marcus
| May 5, 2007 9:45 AM
Before you let you indignation run away from you, think about this article is actually saying.
Like it or not, the exposure most people have of Fred Thompson is his roles on TV and in the movies. His opponents have to find some way to counteract those mythical creations.
How would you propose they go about dealing with it?
Posted by Captain Ed
| May 5, 2007 9:59 AM
Gee, I don't know ... how about looking at his record in the Senate, his public speeches, and his platform?
Repeat after me: actors play a part. Fred is not a neo-Nazi just because he played one on TV. How hard is that, really?