In Reply to: Re: Searching for Debra Winger posted by Victor Khomenko on March 24, 2005 at 13:05:52:
I think that their point was the while men have many roles to choose from, women's opportunities are much more limited. That was Plimpton's point relative to character actors - there are many more male character actors than women character actors, and more opportunities for men. Women actors are either young and tight, or old. Not much in between. When I stopped to think about, I think she is right. Who are the women characters actors? Maybe Kathy Bates. Susan Sarandon. Holly Hunter. The list is pretty small. And they generally play the same types of characters because that is all that is available.Therefore, women cannot be choosy. Terri Garr said that she has had to take small television roles in order to work. I think that Debra Winger did as you suggested - to decided to hell with it, just quit. But then she made a lot of money in her early years, and could afford to do that.
Most of the other actresses never hit the big time, like Meg Ryan, and do not have the financial resources to turn down projects. They do not have the money to simply decide they do not like the film.
There are more companies hiring engineers, plumbers and gardeners. Thus, there is more choice who to work, and to turn down work. I suspect that in the acting field, with the very limited number of jobs, and the same small group of people hiring from the same pool, you take what you can get. I've never been that type of situation, so I am hesitant to judge someone who might take work to pay the bills. I would think that the actor's abilities should not be judged based upon the quality, or lack thereof, of the project.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Re: Searching for Debra Winger - jamesgarvin 15:58:02 03/24/05 (1)
- Re: Searching for Debra Winger - Victor Khomenko 16:51:26 03/24/05 (0)