|
Post by Kerrie on Jun 15, 2003 15:33:23 GMT -5
Sorry, but this just sounds like such silliness. I admire Marsters for his considerable acting ability; but to say that he'll refuse to act in a rape scene because he knows what it does to me is kind of foolish for an ACTOR to say. Does he want to play nothing but nice guys and character bits for the rest of his life? And how come he had no problem playing a vampire who drained the blood from innocent people, but an attempted rape scene so damaged his psyche that he can never do such a scene again? There is certainly nothing wrong with an actor saying that rape is a terrible unjustifiable act, or that playing a scene was difficult. I could see an actor saying he would never do a nude scene again, but saying he'll NEVER play a rape scene again strikes me as being a bit too over-sensitive. Actors are often called upon to play unpleasant or downright evil/deranged people. That's why we call them ACTORS. It doesn't validate the act of rape to play a rapist in a play, movie, or TV show; as long as one isn't romanticizing the act (which the bathroom scene with Spike and Buffy hardly did). Gail Umm, I am probably wrong, but I seem to recall that prior to the AR JM did some sort of method acting. I think, but I am only speculating, that this and the amount of time that he spent playing Spike made the whole thing quite traumatic for him. In the unknown interview that I am referring to he also said that he hadn't discussed the AR with SMG before the scene so that they both freaked whilst filming. I don't know whether in future JM will have a contract that prohibits rape scenes (lke SMG's "no shower" scenes clause), but if he doesn't he is till goiing to be in trouble (i.e. possibly cast in that situation) and writers may still get around it anyway with Attempted rape scenes. You also mentioned the difference between playing a vampire and draining innocent people dry and playing a rape scene. I think it goes back to the style of acting. There are no vampires in RL and so JM would just have to copy all the movies/TV scenes of draining people couple with his own knowledge of biting people ( ), but rape can be imagined. And, obviously for JM he never knew he had that capacity for rape until he prepared for and did the AR. No wonder he was upset! I hope this makes sense.
|
|
|
Post by LeeHollins on Jun 15, 2003 16:53:27 GMT -5
Umm, I am probably wrong, but I seem to recall that prior to the AR JM did some sort of method acting. I think, but I am only speculating, that this and the amount of time that he spent playing Spike made the whole thing quite traumatic for him. In the unknown interview that I am referring to he also said that he hadn't discussed the AR with SMG before the scene so that they both freaked whilst filming. I don't know whether in future JM will have a contract that prohibits rape scenes (lke SMG's "no shower" scenes clause), but if he doesn't he is till goiing to be in trouble (i.e. possibly cast in that situation) and writers may still get around it anyway with Attempted rape scenes. You also mentioned the difference between playing a vampire and draining innocent people dry and playing a rape scene. I think it goes back to the style of acting. There are no vampires in RL and so JM would just have to copy all the movies/TV scenes of draining people couple with his own knowledge of biting people ( ), but rape can be imagined. And, obviously for JM he never knew he had that capacity for rape until he prepared for and did the AR. No wonder he was upset! I hope this makes sense. Kerrie, I understand this perfectly. I did a lot of acting in high school and college (not that I was good or anything) and for me, acting always tapped into something inside me - I became that character. I'm betting that JM tapped into something inside him while playing that scene and it probably scared him. None of us like to think that we are capable of doing something like that. I completely understand his sentiment about not wanting to ever play a scene like that again. It's just too....real. Several actors have "no nudity" clauses in their contracts all the time - I don't see his not wanting to do an attempted rape scene again as being all that different. Yes, they are actors but they are still people. If they don't want to do something that makes them uncomfortable, why shouldn't they? This probably makes no sense but do I ever?
|
|
|
Post by RAKSHA on Jun 15, 2003 17:10:15 GMT -5
Kerrie, I understand this perfectly. I did a lot of acting in high school and college (not that I was good or anything) and for me, acting always tapped into something inside me - I became that character. I'm betting that JM tapped into something inside him while playing that scene and it probably scared him. None of us like to think that we are capable of doing something like that. I completely understand his sentiment about not wanting to ever play a scene like that again. It's just too....real. Several actors have "no nudity" clauses in their contracts all the time - I don't see his not wanting to do an attempted rape scene again as being all that different. Yes, they are actors but they are still people. If they don't want to do something that makes them uncomfortable, why shouldn't they? This probably makes no sense but do I ever?[/quote Well, I think if an actor wants to continue to have starriing or at least good roles through his old age and be paid well for them, he doesn't say publically that he will never again do such-and-such a scene. Mr. Marsters is, right now, a big fish in a very small pond, that of syndicated action/adventure/fantasy/SF TV. When ANGEL finishes, he may or may not be in that much demand. But unless you're on the Hollywood A-list, an Oscar winner or on that kind of level, I think it's very foolish to go on record anywhere saying you won't do this-or-that kind of scene. I acted from grade school through age 17; multiple plays every year, not professional but I did have some talent and could have continued in that direction had I wanted to. I'm not totally unfamiliar with character immersement. (hope that's a word)
Gail
|
|
|
Post by SpringSummers on Jun 15, 2003 17:47:12 GMT -5
[ Well, I think if an actor wants to continue to have starriing or at least good roles through his old age and be paid well for them, he doesn't say publically that he will never again do such-and-such a scene. Mr. Marsters is, right now, a big fish in a very small pond, that of syndicated action/adventure/fantasy/SF TV. When ANGEL finishes, he may or may not be in that much demand. But unless you're on the Hollywood A-list, an Oscar winner or on that kind of level, I think it's very foolish to go on record anywhere saying you won't do this-or-that kind of scene. I acted from grade school through age 17; multiple plays every year, not professional but I did have some talent and could have continued in that direction had I wanted to. I'm not totally unfamiliar with character immersement. (hope that's a word) Gail [/b][/color][/quote] Surely, it is up to the individual actor how much they are willing to sacrifice in the way of emotional upset, or anything else, to further their career. It sounds like the AR scene just upset JM too much - and he's willing to accept the consequences of his statement that he won't do another scene like it. He's been around long enough to know there are consequences; he must be OK with them. My late husband (John) was a lot like what James describes when it comes to reactions to on-screen rape scenes. I mean, John just could not abide them. He detested them; would not watch them. He did a little light, minor-role acting in HS and college - and I can easily imagine that he would have absolutely refused to do any kind of rape scene - or being put into the "you really have to" sort of situation JM was put in . . . it's so easy for me to picture the truly major mess he would have been, both before and after. Some men are just like that. I don't know enough about psychology to speculate on why; with John, it seemed to be about that protective instinct he had toward women, and maybe about fears about his own instincts and what he might be capable of himself. John was an extremely bright, artistic, sensitive person - kind and gentle with people, and very interested in them as human beings. So anyhow, it's easy for me to imagine how this is for James, and it's not a small thing, when you have that sort of emotional make-up. It's no different really, than an actor refusing to do a stunt he finds excrutiatingly, physically painful. I don't doubt his sincerity when it comes to how hard it is for him, and I don't blame him for looking out for himself.
|
|
|
Post by Nickim on Jun 16, 2003 17:27:38 GMT -5
You also mentioned the difference between playing a vampire and draining innocent people dry and playing a rape scene. I think it goes back to the style of acting. There are no vampires in RL and so JM would just have to copy all the movies/TV scenes of draining people couple with his own knowledge of biting people ( ), but rape can be imagined. And, obviously for JM he never knew he had that capacity for rape until he prepared for and did the AR. No wonder he was upset! I hope this makes sense. Yes, there are no vamps in RL, but there are murderers and JM had no problem playing someone who broke Nikki's neck with what could only be described as joy. I've only watched the AR scene once, but it didn't ring true to me. If Buffy had always said no and Spike still attacked her, if would have been different, but the whole B/S thing started with what looked like a mutual sexual assault in "Smashed."
|
|
|
Post by SpringSummers on Jun 16, 2003 19:00:57 GMT -5
Yes, there are no vamps in RL, but there are murderers and JM had no problem playing someone who broke Nikki's neck with what could only be described as joy. I've only watched the AR scene once, but it didn't ring true to me. If Buffy had always said no and Spike still attacked her, if would have been different, but the whole B/S thing started with what looked like a mutual sexual assault in "Smashed." I can only guess as to why playing a murderer didn't bother James the way playing a rapist did - and again, I can only base it on what I remember from my late husband's similar reactions. I mean, John could watch murder scenes, no problem. The biggest clue I ever got as to what bothered him so much was when he told me about reading a book for a political science class. There was a description of a historical civil disorder, which - totally unexpectedly for him - contained a rather detailed description of a rape. He told me - in this deeply ashamed way - that it had sexually excited him. I tried to reassure him that since rape has a sexual component, a sexual component to his reaction was normal, etc. But he just wasn't buying. He was upset all day, and couldn't be consoled. After that, I interpretted his angry "I can't watch that" reactions to . . . I don't know how to put this . . . turning his sexual excitement into something more acceptable to him: anger, disgust - not that these aren't natural reactions also, but it was so intense, and I took that to be due to re-directing the energy - because he just couldn't face that animal in him that reacted with sexual pleasure to the sexual, regardless of the hurt and pain being caused. He just couldn't stand it. Watching a murder scene didn't inspire this kind of reaction, and I would say it was because it never gave him any sort of pleasure. So there was nothing to feel all ripped up inside about. There was nothing that got to him on that level. I thought the AR scene rang very true - too true. They were astounding in it. It upset me quite a lot - not with the kind of anger I describe above, but just with feeling their pain, their desperation, the horror of everything that had gone on in their individual lives, and between them, that had brought them to this place. I thought Buffy's screams were plainly screams of terror, but Spike was just way too far gone for it to register. It was just so horrible.
|
|