Actors Bashing Joss

[The Ferg]

Little Vincy was NOT happy. I think he's just angry because he didn't have a bigger part.

 

[Edmund Blackadder]

understand its context...

Theres a comment I can agree with however in a different context.
All we have are sound bites, not the context of the question and full answer.

For all we know this was how the 'understood' conversation went.

"When I first came on set, I was given the brief and saw the 'birth' episode so I began to see how this amazing character could be born. I spoke to a few of the cast, Alexis was particularly helpful, and he told me how his character had grown immensely. The first few episodes were great but eventually it got very 'samey'. I spoke to Joss, even told him a few ideas I had that might change things up abit, but he shot them down. In retrospect I guess my initial thoughts on the show were wrong, I just don't think I ever understood the show."

IF you then give that to a Connor hater, you can edit it to high heaven and just have a field day with how the actor was to blame and not your beloved Joss.
[br][/br]
Edit:
[br][/br]

"The Scanner: What's been the biggest difference between making Angel and Mad Men?
Kartheiser: There was a real sense on Angel that people were just doing a job. The grips, the DP, even the directors would kind of just show up, do their job and go home. On Mad Men, people really love the show and it means something to them. Every DP we've had has worked their ass off, we see directors we won't be working with for two weeks walking around the set setting up shots and all of the actors come in prepared. People really care about this project. Not to say we didn't care about Angel, but there was a sense we could do no wrong. We had our audience and regardless of what we did, we were going to keep that audience. On Mad Men we also have Matthew Weiner on set all the time whereas Joss [Whedon] was hardly ever on Angel. I think Joss was doing Firefly at that point and was in love with his next project. I had a friend who filmed a few episodes in the first season of Angel and said everyone was invested and there was crazy energy, so maybe I just came into it late. I let them know right off the bat that some of the choices they were making [about Conner] were wrong. I showed up to play that character and I had a lot of ideas. And they didn't like any of those ideas. That's okay, I'm in the business of having my ideas rejected. But after about 7 or 8 episodes of coming in with ideas and realizing it just didn't matter, I became really complacent and jaded and angry at the project. I felt like it wasn't a collaboration, that the people I was working with didn't care to take risks. Some actors were able to find risks in there. If you look at Amy Acker, she just did an incredible job; she came onto that show with a developed character and stayed with it. She took a big risk and succeeded and I admired that."

Look at what I found - this is one of the questions that has some of the lifted quotes.

Actually changes how some of them sound - that is interesting

 

[Buffyverse Fan]

Theres a comment I can agree with however in a different context.
All we have are sound bites, not the context of the question and full answer.

For all we know this was how the 'understood' conversation went.

"When I first came on set, I was given the brief and saw the 'birth' episode so I began to see how this amazing character could be born. I spoke to a few of the cast, Alexis was particularly helpful, and he told me how his character had grown immensely. The first few episodes were great but eventually it got very 'samey'. I spoke to Joss, even told him a few ideas I had that might change things up abit, but he shot them down. In retrospect I guess my initial thoughts on the show were wrong, I just don't think I ever understood the show."

IF you then give that to a Connor hater, you can edit it to high heaven and just have a field day with how the actor was to blame and not your beloved Joss.

Actually the only parts removed were the parts talking about Mad Men, the article is about Mad Men, and all of the comments were like, "Angel was like this _____ [a couple of sentences describing his experience on Angel], but Mad Men is like this [a couple of paragraphs describing Mad Men]." 99-100% of what he said about his time on Angel is there, the Mad Men stuff was removed because it was a two page article in the September 2007 issue of GIANT Magazine that only mentioned Angel in passing in a few sentences.

 

[Edmund Blackadder]

Actually the only parts removed were the parts talking about Mad Men, the article is about Mad Men, and all of the comments were like, "Angel was like this _____ [a couple of sentences describing his experience on Angel], but Mad Men is like this [a couple of paragraphs describing Mad Men]." 99-100% of what he said about his time on Angel is there, the Mad Men stuff was removed because it was a two page article in the September 2007 issue of GIANT Magazine that only mentioned Angel in passing in a few sentences.

Well in future, I recommend you put links in because I have just put one of the answers in full and by removing the Mad Men comments, you take out the context.

The quote I have just added makes him sound less bratty - he actually sounds like a reasonable guy who understands a)why his ideas were rejected b) why Joss wasn't around c) that its not always been like this.

Again, the quotes out of context sound like someone just having a go at their time when VK just sounds like he was initially but after the character was poorly used, which alot of Fandom agree with, he became angered, upset at it.

 

[Lindsey McDonald]

I don't think it changes how it sounds at all. It just makes him sound like he's complaining for the sake of it. I mean really, can you expect a show that, for some people, had been going for a good 10 seasons to have the same energy as a brand new one? He even acknowledges this. The latter half of the quote still paints him in the same light.

I let them know right off the bat that some of the choices they were making [about Conner] were wrong.

So, he joins a show 4 seasons in, playing a minor character, watches one episode, and then wonders why his ideas are rejected? The comparison he makes with Amy just makes it seem like he understands his position even less - she was a core character on the show, and had been since season 2. Of course her character is going to develop more than a glorified plot device would.

 

[Edmund Blackadder]

I don't think it changes how it sounds at all. It just makes him sound like he's complaining for the sake of it. I mean really, can you expect a show that, for some people, had been going for a good 10 seasons to have the same energy as a brand new one? He even acknowledges this. The latter half of the quote still paints him in the same light.


So, he joins a show 4 seasons in, playing a minor character, watches one episode, and then wonders why his ideas are rejected? The comparison he makes with Amy just makes it seem like he understands his position even less - she was a core character on the show, and had been since season 2. Of course her character is going to develop more than a glorified plot device would.

Oh for the sake of Jebus.

He came into the project enthusiastic. He had ideas but was rejected. As someone who has worked with actors, the best actors ALWAYS come in with them.
They have to become the character and be that person comfortably.

Look at the likes of Brando, Pacino and De Niro (not say he is at their skill level) but these guys method act, they become the character even when not filming, this obviously allows them a persepective that even the writers and directors don't have.

Angel was only on 4 years at this point, this 10 season baloney is simply that, the characters may have been around but they were different shows.
Should David Fury not really care about 24 because he has been working constantly for x amount of time?

If you go onto a set where the people involved are less than enthusiastic, even a little bored and you have all this optimism then surely its gonna annoy you when you try to suggest things and you're shot down.

Also, the moment he became a character in his own right the 'plot device' lifted.
Connor was a character, he deserved the same amount of care and attention as anyone else.

 

[Lindsey McDonald]

Oh for the sake of Jebus.

He came into the project enthusiastic. He had ideas but was rejected. As someone who has worked with actors, the best actors ALWAYS come in with them.
They have to become the character and be that person comfortably.

Look at the likes of Brando, Pacino and De Niro (not say he is at their skill level) but these guys method act, they become the character even when not filming, this obviously allows them a persepective that even the writers and directors don't have.

And these guys don't play minor characters. If you're trying to tell me that VK, with that kind of attitude, tried to "become" the character - in a show he never watched - then I think you're mistaken. These guys have earned their input, he hadn't. If the writers on Angel listened to every idea that minor characters put forward, they wouldn't have time to write.

Angel was only on 4 years at this point, this 10 season baloney is simply that, the characters may have been around but they were different shows.
Should David Fury not really care about 24 because he has been working constantly for x amount of time?

The show was in it's tenth season for Joss, and there were probably another fair few people higher up that had been there from the beginning. Nobody is saying that means they shouldn't care, but it's ridiculous to think that they would be as enthused and energetic about it.

If you go onto a set where the people involved are less than enthusiastic, even a little bored and you have all this optimism then surely its gonna annoy you when you try to suggest things and you're shot down.

Fine. He's annoyed. I agree, that's perfectly understandable. However, airing these grievances in public is, as has been said before in this thread, unprofessional and tacky - especially when doing it to place your shiney new show in a better light. It wasn't really the time, nor the place.

Also, the moment he became a character in his own right the 'plot device' lifted.
Connor was a character, he deserved the same amount of care and attention as anyone else.

I disagree that a minor character should get the same amount of attention as a major one - especially where it comes to the issue of actor input. They are called minor characters for a reason. His character was not designed to exhibit huge growth or changes like Amy's was, the writers didn't want this. If VK didn't like it, he should have left, or kept his mouth shut in public. If he'd left, I'd have more respect for him. If he'd said it in a more professional, or less exploitative way, I'd have more respect for him.

Now, I have never met him. Lyri has, and she sees him differently (and in more than the lust-tinted glasses ways 😉) Perhaps things have been taken out of context; perhaps he had a bad day; perhaps he really is an idiot. I don't know. But as things like this that he puts into the public domain are all I can judge on, that's what I'm going to judge on.

 

[Edmund Blackadder]

And these guys don't play minor characters. If you're trying to tell me that VK, with that kind of attitude, tried to "become" the character - in a show he never watched - then I think you're mistaken. These guys have earned their input, he hadn't. If the writers on Angel listened to every idea that minor characters put forward, they wouldn't have time to write.

I wasn't saying he was the same as them, in fact I even said I don't believe it, what I said was that these guys were method actors, showing how they become the character and was suggesting that there is an element of that within VK, hence the annoyance.
As someone has already stated in this thread (Silum I think) acting is an 'artistic vocation'. If you give your life to something like this and you get the impression that it means nothing anymore, then you will become annoyed and bitter.

The show was in it's tenth season for Joss, and there were probably another fair few people higher up that had been there from the beginning. Nobody is saying that means they shouldn't care, but it's ridiculous to think that they would be as enthused and energetic about it.

And we read that Joss was hardly there.
The actual fact is, if people have lost that enthusiasm and energy for the show then it really was TV by numbers and should have been brought to an end.

Fine. He's annoyed. I agree, that's perfectly understandable. However, airing these grievances in public is, as has been said before in this thread, unprofessional and tacky - especially when doing it to place your shiney new show in a better light. It wasn't really the time, nor the place.

He was interviewed asked a question.
He gave an honest answer that, in context, doesn't sound as bad as the initial post made out.
You people are really amusing.
You post threads trying to determine why people like Charisma and Joss fell out (if they did) wishing for the information, then when someone else actually gives you his reasons for something you attack him.
Truly astounding.

I disagree that a minor character should get the same amount of attention as a major one - especially where it comes to the issue of actor input. They are called minor characters for a reason. His character was not designed to exhibit huge growth or changes like Amy's was, the writers didn't want this. If VK didn't like it, he should have left, or kept his mouth shut in public. If he'd left, I'd have more respect for him. If he'd said it in a more professional, or less exploitative way, I'd have more respect for him.

Connor wasn't a monir character. He was a fully fledged member of the show. He was a titled character way before Lorne, who incidentally had more character growth before he became a main titled character.
He was playing the son of the lead, which in other shows would be a fairly important role, and in Angel it should have been even more so because it should be impossible for Angel to have a child.

Now, I have never met him. Lyri has, and she sees him differently (and in more than the lust-tinted glasses ways 😉) Perhaps things have been taken out of context; perhaps he had a bad day; perhaps he really is an idiot. I don't know. But as things like this that he puts into the public domain are all I can judge on, that's what I'm going to judge on.

I've never met him and I have a different opinion and I don't find him attractive.
I find Eve very attractive but her character bugs me.
That has nothing to do with any of it, if you're intelligent enough to make that break.

You are judging him based on a preconceived notion, the fact that he said in the full quote some quite respectful things and the tone changed yet you haven't even acknowledged that shows you're not even willing to give it a chance.

 

[Lindsey McDonald]

As I said, it's not the fact that he told the truth that's the problem. Its the way he did it, the words he used, and the exploitative nature of when he said it. I've said what I have to say, and I'm not interested in going round in circles about it. The one thing I do wish to clarify is that I never insinuated that finding a character attractive is a valid reason for defending/respecting and actor. I think the use of the phrase "in more than" makes that perfectly clear. What I was saying is, I have nothing else to judge him on but this and other quotes. Lyri does, and she feels differently. I'm not going to argue with that, because I don't know what she knows. She is one of the few people in this topic who is claiming that he is entirely different to the view I have of him, and I don't want her to feel that I am attacking her (perhaps fairer) opinion. However, we are talking about the quote concerned, and I feel that I am perfectly justified in my view with regards to that.

But as I said, I'm not interested in going back and forth over it. It's really not that interesting a topic.

 

[Edmund Blackadder]

As I said, it's not the fact that he told the truth that's the problem. Its the way he did it, the words he used, and the exploitative nature of when he said it. I've said what I have to say, and I'm not interested in going round in circles about it. The one thing I do wish to clarify is that I never insinuated that finding a character attractive is a valid reason for defending/respecting and actor. I think the use of the phrase "in more than" makes that perfectly clear. What I was saying is, I have nothing else to judge him on but this and other quotes. Lyri does, and she feels differently. I'm not going to argue with that, because I don't know what she knows. She is one of the few people in this topic who is claiming that he is entirely different to the view I have of him, and I don't want her to feel that I am attacking her (perhaps fairer) opinion. However, we are talking about the quote concerned, and I feel that I am perfectly justified in my view with regards to that.

But as I said, I'm not interested in going back and forth over it. It's really not that interesting a topic.

You're the one that keeps coming back, no one forces you.
But what exploitative comments?
Deconstruct what he actually said and KEEP it in context of that, he doesn't say anything malicious, he just gives his opinion and its effect on him.

You, and alot of others, have chosen to tke this comment personally because he attacks something you love which automatically makes you biased.

 

[Silum]

You're the one that keeps coming back, no one forces you.
But what exploitative comments?
Deconstruct what he actually said and KEEP it in context of that, he doesn't say anything malicious, he just gives his opinion and its effect on him.

You, and alot of others, have chosen to tke this comment personally because he attacks something you love which automatically makes you biased.

its a discussion about an actors intentions, i dont see anyone taking it personally. Except maybe when people are told they are wrong in their opinion.

 

[Edmund Blackadder]

its a discussion about an actors intentions, i dont see anyone taking it personally. Except maybe when people are told they are wrong in their opinion.

People have taken it personally, its become a defensive thing.
When ever someone attacks shows like this the fans automatically take it as a slight against them because it is part of who they are.
Instead people should realise that this guys opinion is his opinion and is a valid one, considering he actually agrees with a large portion of the fanbase.

 

[Lindsey McDonald]

People have taken it personally, its become a defensive thing.
When ever someone attacks shows like this the fans automatically take it as a slight against them because it is part of who they are.
Instead people should realise that this guys opinion is his opinion and is a valid one, considering he actually agrees with a large portion of the fanbase.

And you seem to be ignoring the fact that I, who know what I chose to do more than you ever will, did not say that I disagreed with what he said. It was how he said it.

 

[Edmund Blackadder]

Lindsey McDonald agrees: The exploitation comment refered to his bashing of Angel to make Mad Men look good. In my view, that's unprofessional.

Welcome back.
If you're gonna leave vague comments, fair enough, but leave the specific comment/s you have issue with.

Silum did and his were discussed.
[br][/br]
Edit:
[br][/br]

And you seem to be ignoring the fact that I, who know what I chose to do more than you ever will, did not say that I disagreed with what he said. It was how he said it.

Which I have already shown was out of context and that new comment adds a different emphasis to the comment, something which you have chosen to ignore because of your already predisposed annoyance at what he said.

 

[Silum]

People have taken it personally, its become a defensive thing.
When ever someone attacks shows like this the fans automatically take it as a slight against them because it is part of who they are.
Instead people should realise that this guys opinion is his opinion and is a valid one, considering he actually agrees with a large portion of the fanbase.

I think most are more interested in the way he chose to express his opinion, wether you agree with it or not, well thats the discussion. But i agree with Lindsey, its old now that were just going around in circles. Either you respect him for his honesty or lose respect for his raggin on the creative team.

 

[Joan the Vampire Slayer]

If VK didn't like the damn show, he didn't like it. Why do so many fans of shows like BUFFY and ANGEL "insist" that the actors in these shows are also major fans or like their jobs?

There are a lot of people who do not like their jobs, but do it anyway, because they need work. Which is probably what VK eventually did. It wasn't a crime for him to dislike what he was doing.





Oh for God's sake! You guys sound like a bunch of whining kids who are pissed off because some actor who worked in their favorite fandom didn't share their feelings. Who cares whether VK liked working on ANGEL or not? Your opinion of the show should matter, not his. If the fact that he did not share your feelings about the show really bothers you that much, then you need to take a good, long look at yourselves.

Whoa there. Who's "you guys"? I don't give a damn if VK likes Angel or not, and you would know this if you read my posts.

 

[Edmund Blackadder]

I think most are more interested in the way he chose to express his opinion, wether you agree with it or not, well thats the discussion. But i agree with Lindsey, its old now that were just going around in circles. Either you respect him for his honesty or lose respect for his raggin on the creative team.

Which is why I have asked Lindsey to show which ones are actually the issue and the full quote, so the context can be discussed, rather than the vaguey way he just lump them all together.

 

[Joan the Vampire Slayer]

I just want to say I really love this thread, guys. I'm not being sarcastic. It's really cool to hear everyone's opinions.

 

[Five]

Vincent Whatshisface is a child. I know I'm 18 and saying that is really arrogant from me, but, come on. He seems very immature. The way I see it, this is just some child-star being all glad to have a part, and not even understanding the concept of his job description (I was as shocked as some of you, if not more, to see him expecting people to take his ideas. Hello, this isn't "Skins", move to friggin'England if you're not satisfied !)... and then he goes and sees how AS4 seems to be the Less Liked Season of All Angel Seasons. So he thinks (yeah!) "Omg, people hate my character, boohoohoo, I'll just whine [just like Connor] for a while and then have an interview when I can say how much this is NOT my fault I acted so horridly!" Way to go, Vince. Only problem? We're not buying it. F***ing grow up.

 

[IdiotJed]

Christian Kane is a nutcase, lol, I've seen the proof! He was pissed by of the things Joss did with Lindsey, not least of which was the 'tiny Texan' comment, and the fact that they killed Lindsey in the finale, with no real motive, and by Lorne. Or in his own words 'A [blank] gay kareoke demon.'

And I knew Vinnie never watched the shows, so that wasn't news. A fan asked him and Keith at a Con what their favorite episode was. Keith replied 'Heartthrobe' while Vinnie admitted that he's never watched the show, and the only ep he's seen is the one where Connor was born.

:lmao: on that one! That is so hilarious!! I can understand his pain. 😀