Wesley Snipes: total scumbag.

[Dan]

Check out this article. It's bad enough that he's this much of an egomaniac, but on top of that, he's gonna try to sue THEM?! This guy's a real class act.

At least his 15 minutes is up, I guess.

 

[Yurt]

Too bad. Sounds like that jean claude guy.

 

[archangel]

Check out this article. It's bad enough that he's this much of an egomaniac, but on top of that, he's gonna try to sue THEM?! This guy's a real class act.

At least his 15 minutes is up, I guess.

Read your posted link article...I would say this applies to almost all actors...I could give a s... about their personal activities out of view of the camera...I like his acting and the Blade movies.....geez...if he is guilty then so are the rest...who cares!

 

[Dan]

Read your posted link article...I would say this applies to almost all actors...I could give a s... about their personal activities out of view of the camera...I like his acting and the Blade movies.....geez...if he is guilty then so are the rest...who cares!

Seriously? You think all actors get stoned all day long, to the point that they can't even be in front of the camera? All actors refuse to be on set for shots that they're not in? All actors are mostly stuntmen with the actor's face digitally placed on because the actor wouldn't come to the set? Do all actors sue the companies that make their movies when they don't do well?

No doubt actors are an overly pampered bunch, but to say this applies to almost all actors is insane.

 

[archangel]

Seriously? You think all actors get stoned all day long, to the point that they can't even be in front of the camera? All actors refuse to be on set for shots that they're not in? All actors are mostly stuntmen with the actor's face digitally placed on because the actor wouldn't come to the set? Do all actors sue the companies that make their movies when they don't do well?

No doubt actors are an overly pampered bunch, but to say this applies to almost all actors is insane.

You may have a point in todays world...Grew up in Burbank California...My G/pa was the Head of transportation at the "Old" Warner Brothers studios...
Met alot of stars in the day...what has changed today vs then...maybe the amount of money they are spoiled on...or their lack of support for our country...dunno....if ya have the answer please let me know!

 

[wolverine]

Do all actors sue the companies that make their movies when they don't do well?

Studios have the actors. The company that made Problem Child 2 sued the little kid and his mom claiming that his demands throughout the shooting of the film resulted in a poor finished product.

Had the film made any money they would have signed him up for #3.

 

[Dan]

You may have a point in todays world...Grew up in Burbank California...My G/pa was the Head of transportation at the "Old" Warner Brothers studios...
Met alot of stars in the day...what has changed today vs then...maybe the amount of money they are spoiled on...or their lack of support for our country...dunno....if ya have the answer please let me know!

That's fair enough, I certainly think actors are waaaaaaay too pampered and overpaid for what they do and I'm sure 99% of them probably are pretty crappy toward the people around them. But, I think Snipes' case is a little worse than the average actor's. But, I wasn't aware that you had family in the film business, so I guess you'd have better sources as far as this type of behavior than me.

And, that last sentence was not meant to be sarcastic at all, rereading it, I could see that it could come across that way.

Studios have the actors. The company that made Problem Child 2 sued the little kid and his mom claiming that his demands throughout the shooting of the film resulted in a poor finished product.

Well, in his defense, I don't think NOT starring in Problem Child 3 would be too detrimental to one's career.

I don't know, a studio suing an actor isn't as bad as an actor suing a studio to me. I guess because studios are the ones putting up the money, I sort of expect them to want things to go their way. On the other hand, an actor being paid to be in a film shouldn't be suing his studio because of the quality of the resulting film. Films are, in theory, an artform, and I think it's kind of hard to judge the quality of art in court.

Anyway, I'm not trying to stick up for anyone, no doubt choosing who is less corrupt between movie actors and movie studios is certainly a lesser of two evils situation. Just saying, I have no respect for someone who's going to do a bunch of drugs, half-ass their job, then try to pass the buck on those around them.

 

[archangel]

That's fair enough, I certainly think actors are waaaaaaay too pampered and overpaid for what they do and I'm sure 99% of them probably are pretty crappy toward the people around them. But, I think Snipes' case is a little worse than the average actor's. But, I wasn't aware that you had family in the film business, so I guess you'd have better sources as far as this type of behavior than me.

And, that last sentence was not meant to be sarcastic at all, rereading it, I could see that it could come across that way.



Well, in his defense, I don't think NOT starring in Problem Child 3 would be too detrimental to one's career.

I don't know, a studio suing an actor isn't as bad as an actor suing a studio to me. I guess because studios are the ones putting up the money, I sort of expect them to want things to go their way. On the other hand, an actor being paid to be in a film shouldn't be suing his studio because of the quality of the resulting film. Films are, in theory, an artform, and I think it's kind of hard to judge the quality of art in court.

Anyway, I'm not trying to stick up for anyone, no doubt choosing who is less corrupt between movie actors and movie studios is certainly a lesser of two evils situation. Just saying, I have no respect for someone who's going to do a bunch of drugs, half-ass their job, then try to pass the buck on those around them.

I just expressed my opinion based on what I saw wayback when...have not a clue as to what and why actors of today do or don't do...just a simple comparrison on my part....You are the one who would know....not me!

 

[wolverine]

I don't know, a studio suing an actor isn't as bad as an actor suing a studio to me. I guess because studios are the ones putting up the money, I sort of expect them to want things to go their way. On the other hand, an actor being paid to be in a film shouldn't be suing his studio because of the quality of the resulting film. Films are, in theory, an artform, and I think it's kind of hard to judge the quality of art in court.

This thought crossed my mind because of things I've heard way back:
Studio hires well known, talented, and accomplished actor because they sold him on what they were wanting to "achieve." Actor turns in stellar performance, but because of the director and editors they lose the "art" or "meaning" of the film and make the actor look like a dolt.
I remember Mickey Rourke and Bob Hoskins disowning the movie "A prayer for the dying" in 1987 because the director had deviated so far from the script they were presented and signed on for.

 

[Dan]

I just expressed my opinion based on what I saw wayback when...have not a clue as to what and why actors of today do or don't do...just a simple comparrison on my part....You are the one who would know....not me!

It's all good, baby!

This thought crossed my mind because of things I've heard way back:
Studio hires well known, talented, and accomplished actor because they sold him on what they were wanting to "achieve." Actor turns in stellar performance, but because of the director and editors they lose the "art" or "meaning" of the film and make the actor look like a dolt.
I remember Mickey Rourke and Bob Hoskins disowning the movie "A prayer for the dying" in 1987 because the director had deviated so far from the script they were presented and signed on for.

Yeah, it's silly when reviews blame an entire movie's failure or success on one person.

The thing that bugs me is that when a movie does really well, they rarely mention the writers. When was the last time you heard a screenwriter really being praised in a review (other than Charlie Kaufman)? It ain't fair, I tell ya, and I'm not saying that just because I'm an aspiring writer.

 

[wolverine]

Yeah, it's silly when reviews blame an entire movie's failure or success on one person.

The thing that bugs me is that when a movie does really well, they rarely mention the writers. When was the last time you heard a screenwriter really being praised in a review (other than Charlie Kaufman)? It ain't fair, I tell ya, and I'm not saying that just because I'm an aspiring writer.

Well, Damon and Affleck got high marks for the screenplay they wrote 'Good Will Hunting.' Even won an Oscar.

Or do you think that had more to do with them being 'hot' actors?

 

[Dan]

Well, Damon and Affleck got high marks for the screenplay they wrote 'Good Will Hunting.' Even won an Oscar.

Or do you think that had more to do with them being 'hot' actors?

I think the fact that their back story (they wrote the movie with the specific intent of starring in it and therefore wrote really good acting moments in it) was so writing-related, they got more publicity on their writing.

But, you're right, I just didn't think of them, honestly. Every once in a while, the writers will be acknowledged, but you more consistently see the directors or actors getting most of the credit.