Why do we have to worship celebrities?

OT: anything goes!

Moderator: Edi

User avatar
TrailerParkJawa
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 5850
Joined: 2002-07-04 11:49pm
Location: San Jose, California

Post by TrailerParkJawa »

Tsyroc wrote:
TrailerParkJawa wrote:Ive never understood the people, especially girls, that scream like crazy when they see a celebrity.
Me neither. Maybe it's similar to why they scream at spiders and snakes even
when they've never had a bad experience with them? :D
Do you think parents talk to kids about this? There are celebrities that I think are good looking or I like their movies but Ive never obsessed over them. About the worst thing I ever did was hang a Jet Li poster in my room.

If my kids screamed and fainted when they saw a star, I might worry about them.
MEMBER of the Anti-PETA Anti-Facist LEAGUE
User avatar
Ghost Rider
Spirit of Vengeance
Posts: 27779
Joined: 2002-09-24 01:48pm
Location: DC...looking up from the gutters to the stars

Post by Ghost Rider »

Probably because it's an easy form of hero worship.

As for swooning over stars...yeah that would cause some worry, and is really not healthy given that means the person is quite literally believing everything about said person.
MM /CF/WG/BOTM/JL/Original Warsie/ACPATHNTDWATGODW FOREVER!!

Sometimes we can choose the path we follow. Sometimes our choices are made for us. And sometimes we have no choice at all

Saying and doing are chocolate and concrete
User avatar
Darksider
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 5271
Joined: 2002-12-13 02:56pm
Location: America's decaying industrial armpit.

Post by Darksider »

Montcalm wrote:
Darth Wong wrote:It's part of anti-intellectualism. Why doesn't Stephen Hawking draw the same kind of crowds as, say, Bruce Willis? Because we live in a society which actually prefers the dumb jock or entertainer over the genius.
That makes me think of the Sliders episode where the geniuses are worshiped.
yeah but wern't the geniuses also athletes in that ep???
And this is why you don't watch anything produced by Ronald D. Moore after he had his brain surgically removed and replaced with a bag of elephant semen.-Gramzamber, on why Caprica sucks
User avatar
RedImperator
Roosevelt Republican
Posts: 16465
Joined: 2002-07-11 07:59pm
Location: Delaware
Contact:

Post by RedImperator »

The Great Unbearded One wrote:
RedImperator wrote:Cinematographers, editors, sound engineers, FX guys, boom operators, cameramen, composers, and all the rest are important, but not fundamental to the movie. And while we're on the subject, every last member of the crew is paid union wages, probably better than most of the people on this board, so it's not like they're being screwed. There's no such thing as the working poor in Hollywood.
What fucking bullshit is that?!? Cinematogrpahers, editors, sound engineers, boom ops, cameramen and so on ARE essential to the movie! Right, role of cinematographer - (working with the director) decides camera angles and lighting of the picture. The editor- MONUMENTAL part of the film making process. You watch any single movie, it has been edited. Shots clipped together to keep the pace of the movie going is all the work of the editor. Sound engineers - imagine The Matrix without the sound of bullets in the bullet-time roof sequence. Imagine any sounds, explosions, doors shutting and so on, all work of the sound engineers. Boom ops get the sound of voices on set, and then, in collaberation with sound engineers, wrok in a studio to get the voice clarity almost perfect. So stop talking out your ass, please! :roll:
Ahem. Read my post before you shoot your mouth off. I'm well aware of the role of the crew in making a movie. When I said "essential", I meant just that. Take away all the technical people, and you still have the director, the actors, and the writer(s) telling a story. What do you think they did before the motion picture was invented, or do you think they had boom mike operators at the Globe Theatre? You can make a movie with one camcorder for filming (operated by the director), three powerful desk lamps (for the key, fill, and back lights), and two VCRs for editing. The quality of the finished film would blow, but you'd still have a movie. Or, you strip out all the extraneous technical aspects, and what you've still got the stage drama that humans have been performing since the dawn of time. THAT'S what essential means. Try to make a movie with all the best technical people in the world and no actors. You don't get a shitty movie, you get a two hour lighting exercise.
Image
Any city gets what it admires, will pay for, and, ultimately, deserves…We want and deserve tin-can architecture in a tinhorn culture. And we will probably be judged not by the monuments we build but by those we have destroyed.--Ada Louise Huxtable, "Farewell to Penn Station", New York Times editorial, 30 October 1963
X-Ray Blues
Asst. Asst. Lt. Cmdr. Smi
What Kind of Username is That?
Posts: 9254
Joined: 2002-07-10 08:53pm
Location: Back in PA

Post by Asst. Asst. Lt. Cmdr. Smi »

Celebrities make so much money because the industry they work in makes so much money, and there are fewer people to distribute the money to. However, when a movie makes $100 million, and the star gets 20% of that, it really isn't fair, as hundreds of other people helped make the movie possible, and cameramen and such should get more money. Same thing with sports. The greedy players demand raises, but the sports industry doesn't make enough money to meet their demands.

As for people hailing thes celebrities and them getting away scotch free with crimes, that really isn't fair.
BotM: Just another monkey|HAB
Post Reply