Comments on: Ambushed in Hollywood http://www.secondnegative.com/archives/2004/11/13/mugging-by-camera-point/ Sat, 22 Nov 2008 13:12:02 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2 By: Greg http://www.secondnegative.com/archives/2004/11/13/mugging-by-camera-point/#comment-323 Greg Mon, 15 Nov 2004 06:54:12 +0000 http://www.secondnegative.com/archives/2004/11/13/mugging-by-camera-point/#comment-323 Well, I don’t blame actors for fame, only for what I perceive as their resistance against the inevitable. And I actually do think that photographers have more right to follow celebrities around. It’s just that I think of it as a contract of sorts. If you sign up to be an actor, you sign on for the celebrity and the loss of privacy, etc. I wouldn’t be pleased with photographers jumping out at me, but I’d probably stop short of assaulting them. But I’m not a celebrity, and I didn’t make the deal that I feel like they’ve made. I do agree that I grow tired of hearing about them in the media. It seems to take less and less talent to be famous these days. Well, I don’t blame actors for fame, only for what I perceive as their resistance against the inevitable. And I actually do think that photographers have more right to follow celebrities around. It’s just that I think of it as a contract of sorts. If you sign up to be an actor, you sign on for the celebrity and the loss of privacy, etc.

I wouldn’t be pleased with photographers jumping out at me, but I’d probably stop short of assaulting them. But I’m not a celebrity, and I didn’t make the deal that I feel like they’ve made.

I do agree that I grow tired of hearing about them in the media. It seems to take less and less talent to be famous these days.

]]> By: stefan http://www.secondnegative.com/archives/2004/11/13/mugging-by-camera-point/#comment-322 stefan Mon, 15 Nov 2004 04:04:29 +0000 http://www.secondnegative.com/archives/2004/11/13/mugging-by-camera-point/#comment-322 I don't disagree with your post/thoughts. I think that the lack of "public privacy" is one of the trade-offs of becoming rich, powerful and famous. When their careers are going down the tubes, you don't hear them complaining about their pictures being taken which puts them in the public eye with an often affect of a career boost. OR, when one of their new projects is getting ready to come out, they use the paparrazi to their advantage, don't they? I don't buy the couples story about being mugged though - they are generally surrounded by bodyguards. So, I find that pretty lame. I'm with Clay - the less I hear about these "stars" the better I like it. Whatever happened to the era when actors and actresses were looked down upon and considered to be only one step above a common criminal? I guess that all changed probably in the late 1930s and the 40s. I don’t disagree with your post/thoughts. I think that the lack of “public privacy” is one of the trade-offs of becoming rich, powerful and famous. When their careers are going down the tubes, you don’t hear them complaining about their pictures being taken which puts them in the public eye with an often affect of a career boost. OR, when one of their new projects is getting ready to come out, they use the paparrazi to their advantage, don’t they?

I don’t buy the couples story about being mugged though - they are generally surrounded by bodyguards. So, I find that pretty lame.

I’m with Clay - the less I hear about these “stars” the better I like it. Whatever happened to the era when actors and actresses were looked down upon and considered to be only one step above a common criminal? I guess that all changed probably in the late 1930s and the 40s.

]]> By: Clay http://www.secondnegative.com/archives/2004/11/13/mugging-by-camera-point/#comment-321 Clay Sun, 14 Nov 2004 14:26:16 +0000 http://www.secondnegative.com/archives/2004/11/13/mugging-by-camera-point/#comment-321 I agree, to a certain extent. However, fame isn't the fault of the actor, it's the result of coordinated public opinion. Photographers have no more right to follow an actor around than they do to follow an ordinary citizen, like yourself. Plus, celebrities are people, with all of the same emotional failings; if you can imagine yourself doing to a photographer what they did, then there's a case to be made <strong>for</strong> privacy, and not <strong>against</strong> the celebrities. Besides, if you're anything like me, it would be quite a relief to not hear about them in the media so much. =) I agree, to a certain extent. However, fame isn’t the fault of the actor, it’s the result of coordinated public opinion. Photographers have no more right to follow an actor around than they do to follow an ordinary citizen, like yourself. Plus, celebrities are people, with all of the same emotional failings; if you can imagine yourself doing to a photographer what they did, then there’s a case to be made for privacy, and not against the celebrities.

Besides, if you’re anything like me, it would be quite a relief to not hear about them in the media so much. =)

]]>