Broadway Legend Joined: 5/27/05
I seem to remember an actual transsexual was up for the role. I remember reading her blog somewhere. I'll see if I can find it.
I'm being lumped in to that general non-awareness, so it is directed at me.
I'm also keenly aware of what ignorance means, and I don't take it flatterinly.
I do appreciate you trying to clear things up though DG.
One's opinion of an acting performance, in my mind, is based on how that performer touched one's heart. Ms. Huffman did indeed touch my heart, but I never completely gave in to what she was trying to play, and I don't think any futher education or exposure to various experiences will change that.
Kringas are you thinking of Katherine Connella who inspired the screenplay?
Broadway Legend Joined: 5/27/05
Cult, I'm not sure. I remember the blog entry was from the night of the Golden Globes and I swear that this woman had been up for the part. Still searching. Since it's a web search, I have a fighting chance of finding it.
I was speaking of ignorance on the subject of transexuals. Not of one's opinion about acting. And, yes, your thread title and comments (and the fact that you stated you have not met a transexual that you are aware of) indicate an ignorance about transexuals.
It was not meant as an insult.
Well, it was, and is taken as such.
Well, too bad. We all have to suck up our pride when we are ignorant of something. It's part of life. And we can take the information gracefully, or we can be a d!ck about it.
Note how I've not insulted you, but now, if there was any doubt, you have insulted me.
Just noting.
Well, you've been defensive about this, which isn't a friendly discourse.
I've said nothing directly negative towards you, and would not omit you from the defensive category.
Oh you haven't have you? You only QUOTED me and then told me off. Reread this thread.
And the "I know you are but what I am?" isn't gonna cut it. I wasn't trying to insult you, but that fact didn't matter.
I quoted you and told you that what you said offended me.
If you take that as an insult....well.....so much for free speech.
Now, calling someon a d!ck, is a direct insult.
Well, that is how you came off.
Now REALLY, I don't want to fight with you--never had anything against you and really don't wanna start now. You've made yourself clear, and I have made myself clear. Let's just move on and be amiable about it.
I could argue more, but it's my vacation week.
I'm not here to make enemies.
Though, the more I read this thread.....the more I realize..I guess if I didn't fully buy her in the role....then maybe she wasn't as great as I thought.
I'll have to think about this before Oscar night.....
And my feeling is, you didn't buy her in the role based on your assumptions of transexuals. If those of us who actually know transexuals are telling you, "No, buddy, she got it right", why should you continue to judge her as if she didn't get it right? You don't even know what that "right" is!
So does my opinion matter?
It's a tricky line I think. Everyone's opinion matters. But sometimes people think something for the wrong reason. And, I think once one has the chance to learn where their opinion was off, they are wise to reevaluate.
There are people who don't buy Brokeback because they don't believe there is such a thing on this planet as a gay cowboy. Well, they are wrong, right? Not entirely the same thing, but I am trying to find an example that makes sense.
So...
If i've not read or seen "The Wizard of Oz," and don't realize that Glinda is sweetness and light and Elphaba is the Wicked Witch of the West, should I not go see "Wicked?" Will my opinion of "Wicked " be skewed and possibly wrong?
I'm not being a pain, but it sounds like this is what you're saying.
I doubt many of the Academy voters who are checking off their ballots have met a transsexual or knew June Carter. Does that mean that their opinions are invalid? If they've not read Austen's novel, can they honestly say that Kiera Knightley is not beliveable in "Pride and Prejudice?"
BUT, you started a thread where you were given the chance to learn otherwise. Is it possible many Oscar voters won't vote for Felicity because of their ignorance? Yes. Does that make it right? Would it be better if they came to learn more? Yes.
And that's all that happened here. But instead of taking the information which you agreed you didn't have, you threw a hissy fit.
And this discussion implies two things:
1. Your original question was rhetorical. You didn't care if people disagreed with you. You only wanted to hear you were right.
2. You have no desire to learn when you are provided new information. You know everything and how DARE any of us enlighten you on something we know more about?
Well good luck with all of that.
If people followed your train of thought, and needed to be educated on the topic of transexuals in order to fully appreciate the performance, Felicity would not have even been nominated, let alone have a shot at winning. Let's be thankful they don't.
That's not what I am saying, but you just keep spinning it how you like.
heh heh.
you guys fight like girls playing men who are really women.
I'm apparently learning how to spin from the best. ;-P
Spinning is more fun when you sit.
Oh! Sorry--am I allowed to offer new information?
Broadway Legend Joined: 9/3/04
For my two cents: The performance was lazy because it was based in a very shallow and self-serving interpretation of transgender issues. She threw on a funny voice and played herself.
I call Kevin Spacey lazy in almost every performance he gives for the same reason -- people OFTEN disagree. But, my palate of what is good does not include throwing on a funny voice and playing yourself. I understand that people see more than that. I don't see more than that going on.
But, that's the beauty of art -- it's subjective.
Videos