MovieChat Forums > Urban Cowboy (1980) Discussion > Ruined Scott Glenn for me

Ruined Scott Glenn for me

posted 17 years ago by midwifekathynew
38 replies | jump to latest

I've seen many on this board call Scott Glenn "hot" in this movie. His character in this film was so dispicable(sp?) it made him physically unattractive to me. Does horrible behavior change a person's outward appearance to anyone else?

I was actually so repulsed by his character in this movie, there is still an "Oh, whoa, don't trust that guy" feeling when I see him in any other movie. Guess he did a little bit too good of a job as an actor, huh?

Of course, this whole thing may have to do with the fact that I, myself, was born and raised in Texas, and have seen my share of real people who were monsters like his character.

http://nocirc.org/
http://nospank.net/
Fight the "everyday atrocities"!

[–] Tracey73 15 years ago

They could not have casted a better actor than Scott Glenn (for his character). IMO a good actor is one that fits his role so perfectly that you'll either strongly dislike his character or love his character (depending on whether he was a good guy or bad guy). I serioulsy wanted to reach through the screen & poke his eyes out. He did a great job at playing such an unlikeable character.

Committed at 22 just to get over you
My belly aches blue, Lorazepam flu

[–] tomloft2000 14 years ago

agree,i think he was the best thing in the movie.

[–] WarpedRecord 14 years ago

Scott was absolutely the best thing in this movie. Really, I think his character was the only really good thing about this film, which was pretty bland otherwise. Scott Glenn is so very good and being bad -- hitting a woman and robbing Gilley's.

[–] GilleysMuseum 14 years ago

Hi Midwife,

IMHO I think you are putting an impossible burden on Scott Glenn. As an actor, his job is to faithfully portray the character as written. The script would have made no sense if his character wasn't despicable, so he played it as it should have been. Had he not, people would have criticized the script, or his acting, or both, and the movie would have been severely diminished.

Each role an actor plays should be judged withing the context of the project, not colored by his previous roles. Please don't type-cast him. He did a GREAT job in the movie and made the movie much more interesting.

I loved the movie, and Scott Glenn contributed greatly to that reaction.

Bubba

GilleysMuseum.com

Memorabilia from Gilley's Pasadena, TX
and Gilley's at the Frontier Casino, Las Vegas

[–] jmr61 13 years ago

by midwifekathynew

I've seen many on this board call Scott Glenn "hot" in this movie. His character in this film was so dispicable(sp?) it made him physically unattractive to me. Does horrible behavior change a person's outward appearance to anyone else?

I was actually so repulsed by his character in this movie, there is still an "Oh, whoa, don't trust that guy" feeling when I see him in any other movie. Guess he did a little bit too good of a job as an actor, huh?

Of course, this whole thing may have to do with the fact that I, myself, was born and raised in Texas, and have seen my share of real people who were monsters like his character.

You're a complete idiot, right?

[–] koffeenkreame41-1 13 years ago

That's true. And I agree, he was really convincing in this movie. Look at him in here and then watch him in The Silence of the Lambs or Hunt for Red October. Great actor. As for the Paxton comment from one of the above poster, I agree with you but Hudson was surrounded by aliens with acid for blood, I'd be scared too. LOL!

"I am the ultimate badass, you do not wanna `*beep*` wit' me!" Hudson in Aliens.

[–] corinnacarpenter 13 years ago

Have you seen 'The Shawshank Redemption'? Bob Gunton played one of the worst individuals in the world and I still have a huge crush on him. He was incredible as the warden,who was a hypocrite and cold-blooded.

His character wasn't attractive but he is. He has beautiful eyes and a sexy smile. It's too bad he plays the bad-guy on a regular basis.

At any rate,Scott Glenn is oddly attractive but not in this movie. He was too scummy and rotten.

[–] noirgirl 13 years ago

Scott Glenn is the only reason I watch this horror of a movie. Well, except for Uncle Bob, whom I like.

[–] scottstrades 12 years ago

Though Glenn's character is truly an a-hole, his acting was superb in this. In my somewhat limited knowledge of all his cinematic roles, this is by far the best that I've seen him in. You truly think Glenn is despicable. That is great acting.

[–] MaverickDaTopGun 12 years ago

Glenn is great in this and yep that's why we all hate him so much in this movie. Love when JT kicks his arse.

[–] rochelle-rochelle 12 years ago

Though I would NEVER be with a guy like him, I loved his character in this movie and yes think he was quite hot and sexy. He was cool and smooth, but then also creepy, abusive, a career criminal with who has hardly paid his debt to society and a total loser. Who did he think he was? He acted like he was God's gift to women. His proud smirk to Sissy when that waitress was in that closet of a bathroom was gross and creepy.

I'd like everybody's attention. Christmas is cancelled.

[–] jefgg 12 years ago

It was a movie, not a documentary.

[–] ELashes 12 years ago

Scott Glenn was sexy in 1980, even playing a bad boy.

[–] Noir-It-All 12 years ago

This reminds me of what I've read about Richard Widmark. In his first movie in 1947, he played a thug who pushes an opponent's wheelchair bound mother down a staircase while laughing like a maniac For years, total strangers spoke to him about it. John Wayne said something to him about it in their first movie together, "So, this is the laughing son-of-a-bitch!" Years later, at a hotel opening in Houston, a man came out of nowhere and punched him!

"Two more swords and I'll be Queen of the Monkey People." Roseanne

[–] kindheart000-2 9 years ago

I found him to be totally sexy and JT just gross. He's a terrible bad boy on so many levels. Yet he is so hot in this movie.