When he speaks to Bucky during their training with the shield, and when he speaks to the crowd in the last episode. What a disaster.
And yet, when he spoke to Karli face to face it seemed so natural.
Really strange.
Do you object to what the script had him say, or how the actor delivered the lines?
Why do you want to discuss politics on a fictional show? None of it is real.
shareI don't want to discuss fictional politics. Or real politics, on this board full of psychotics.
I just wanted an answer to the question I asked.
"I just wanted an answer to the question I asked."
About politics. On a politically-themed show.
More about acting.
shareLies.
"Do you object to what the script had him say"
Otter has a valid question, ie is the op concern about the writing or the acting.
That can be discussed without concern for the politics of it.
Though, the politics of it, is another valid complaint, imo.
I think in both cases, the acting and the writing was probably sub par, BUT, in a one on one dialog, ESPECIALLY as the bad guy was played by a small, young woman made it seem less cringe.
BUT, both were scenes were bad. THe more public ones were just worse.
No, you cannot discuss Sam "Stop calling them terrorists" Wilson's speech he gives to POLITICIANS without mentioning politics. Otter just doesn't want to discuss a topic with someone he/she disagrees with.
Oh, the politics of it is absolutely a valid complain. Sam and Bucky spend the majority of the show complaining 'wE MUsT sToP waLkeR!" while not only (borderline) ignoring Morgantheau, but outright APOLOGIZING for her in Sam's case. The morality/message of this show DON'T WORK. They work with one terrorist (Zemo), make a martyr out of another, but Walker is the biggest threat in their world. There's no logic to that. It lacks all common sense.
I agree with you on the politics of it, and that is a huge problem. IMO, bigger than any acting issue.
But you could imagine someone who liked the politics of it, ie supporting the anti-nationalist terrorist while thinking that the writer or the actor did a shit job of doing the scene.
Nothing about it makes sense. It's not about disagreeing with the show's politics, it's that the show's politics is simply WRONG. Morgantheau was a terrorist, by the definition of the word. "bUT JOhN WalKer!" *derp derp*
Otter or anyone else is allowed to like the politics of this show, but you cannot logically come to a show about politics and refuse to discuss it. It's absurd. Otter simply doesn't want to talk to people he/she disagrees with.
You make a compelling case. Politics really were central to the show. I mean, really heavy handed.
shareHis question was legitimate. I genuinely couldn't tell from your post if you were criticizing the script or the acting.
shareHis speech at the end was very good. Just not all that believable that the Senator would say, "uh, okay then, we'll do it your way."
shareHis speech was not well written. It was another solution-free tirade that makes nebulous demands, appealing to the low information crowd. Then the senator's reaction was even worse. The actor is decent but they wrote him some pretty lame material.
shareReminded of an old expression that's used in my country: "Sa facem sa fie bine" which loosely translates to something like "we shall make it better". Loosely because the sarcasm and the nuances are lost in translation ...
shareNot a very good actor. Neither of them.
share