[RebelScum]

Originally Posted by roger_50

No, 'failure to deliver' is more down to the context and perspective you look at something I'd say. Especially when it comes to anything artistic.

If we were talking about a bricklayer, then yes it would be a simple case of obligation (they'd have to lay x amount of bricks to fulfil their purpose).

The OP made in clear in the post; hype should equate to awards. So in effect your bricklayer analogy is not that far off the mark from the OP's point of view, which is why it is totally ridiculous.

But for something as abstract/open to analysis as film-acting/performing arts, etc, there's nothing wrong in taking the view a performer could have achieved more (artistically/critically) and therefore failed - for whatever reason, whether intentional or otherwise.

It is however naive to place expectations on an actor's choices/performances based on the falsehood that is Hollywood hype, more so if those expectations go on to affect the analysis of their choices/performance.

[roger_50]

Well, the OP could have perhaps worded it better. But I know exactly what he's getting at.

Not sure what you mean about Hollywood hype. It's certainly not naive to see an actor choose less meaty roles and point out those roles haven't matched performances of their early career. To me, that's just a simple statement of fact.

I think showing disappointment towards an artist for knowingly not trying to be everything they can be is a fair form of criticism that goes back centuries.

[RebelScum]

Originally Posted by roger_50

Well, the OP could have perhaps worded it better. But I know exactly what he's getting at.

Agreed. I also know exactly what he's getting at, I just happen to think what he's getting at is ridiculous.

It's certainly not naive to see an actor choose less meaty roles and point out those roles haven't matched performances of their early career. To me, that's just a simple statement of fact.

It's not naive to observe an actor choose less meaty roles and point out that you are of the opinion those roles haven't matched earlier performances; that's one thing. It's quite another to allow expectation to be influenced by hype and then quantify it in terms of failure. That indeed is naive, it's essentially a failure to manage expectations.

I think showing disappointment towards an artist for knowingly not trying to be everything they can be is a fair form of criticism that goes back centuries.

Yes, but its something most of us grow out of as we mature.

[Mark A]

Originally Posted by RebelScum

Yes, but its something most of us grow out of as we mature.

Heh heh heh.

Regards

Mark

[roger_50]

Originally Posted by RebelScum

Yes, but its something most of us grow out of as we mature.

Very droll.

But I don't really understand that comment. I'd be genuinely interested to know why you think it's a childish thing.

If anything, isn't it the complete opposite? It takes maturity to study art and performance and come to such conclusions I would have thought.

[Mark A]

Originally Posted by roger_50

It takes maturity to study art and performance and come to such conclusions I would have thought.

No, not really. All it depends on is how far up your own backside you are.

Regards

Mark

[ManchesterlsRED]

Originally Posted by Mark A

No, not really. All it depends on is how far up your own backside you are.

Regards

Mark

oops

[Mark A]

No, you misunderstand. I have regard for everyone, even the plums of this world.

Regards

Mark

[Viridiana]

Vicky Christina Barcelona is on my top ten of worst films ever made.

She's absolutely dire in it, it's the type of film that only americans would find "deep".

She's an A lister no one can really call her a failure, she just has a knack to choose terrible roles.
The Island, anyone?