🌎 Discussion: Civil Rights, Affirmative Action, Critical Race Theory, Systemic Inequality, and Racism - Part 4

[MaceB]

Not really. She hasn't been in a movie in 5 years. She's pretty clearly exiled from major productions.

No, you said that the only reason they would get rid of him is because he's not a big movie star. I'm saying, they can more easily exile him because he's not a big movie star, but this gives them the opportunity to do so. Very important nuance there.

I mean.. yeah... he's gonna land some bit parts on some short films or some commercials for a few years. But it'll eventually die out completely, cause they aren't going to take a chance of giving him a starring role ever again. Bu Bye career.

 

[RockSP]

Not really. She hasn't been in a movie in 5 years. She's pretty clearly exiled from major productions.

She has a recurring role on some tv show. I never said movies specifically. Smollett isn't a movie star in the first place.

No, you said that the only reason they would get rid of him is because he's not a big movie star. I'm saying, they can more easily exile him because he's not a big movie star, but this gives them the opportunity to do so. Very important nuance there.

…



…

 

[MaceB]

She has a recurring role on some tv show. I never said movies specifically. Smollett isn't a movie star in the first place.



…



…

..Cute...

Lindsey Lohan's only role in the past 3 years has been on a British made TV show (not hollywood). I'm sure she's not making movies anymore by choice... yeah... it's not like Hollywood is refusing to work with her anymore.

Again, there's a big difference between "Hollywood will fire him because he's not a movie star" and "Hollywood will fire him because of this recent event, and it'll be easier to do, since he's not a movie star."

Follow champ?

 

[RockSP]

Again, there's a big difference between "Hollywood will fire him because he's not a movie star" and "Hollywood will fire him because of this recent event, and it'll be easier to do, since he's not a movie star."

Follow champ?

It goes without saying...or it should...that this incident is the reason for him being "fired" in the first place.

You want to harp on and on about Lohan go right ahead. You're the one who brought her up in the first place. It's not like there aren't plenty of others in Hollywood who have done crazy nonsense but have kept on working. Sometimes after a lying low period.

Okay, champ?

 

[MaceB]

It goes without saying...or it should...that this incident is the reason for him being "fired" in the first place.

You want to harp on and on about Lohan go right ahead. You're the one who brought her up in the first place. It's not like there aren't plenty of others in Hollywood who have done crazy nonsense but have kept on working. Sometimes after a lying low period.

Okay, champ?

That doesn't matter though. I don't need to prove that every single person who has ever done anything bad gets ousted by Hollywood. I never claimed that there was some universal ban on behalf of Hollywood - you're arguing with a straw man... I guess. But this will kill his career in Hollywood. This is enough. I bring up Lindsay Lohan as an example of how it's happened in the past... which you tried your best to chuckle away instead of taking seriously. The truth of the matter is that Hollywood is more than fine with not working with people who get a bad reputation. I can bring up more examples if you like. The idea that this won't do lasting damage to his career seems pretty silly to me, especially to say it so unequivocally.

 

[RockSP]

That doesn't matter though. I don't need to prove that every single person who has ever done anything bad gets ousted by Hollywood. I never claimed that there was some universal ban on behalf of Hollywood - you're arguing with a straw man... I guess. But this will kill his career in Hollywood. This is enough. I bring up Lindsay Lohan as an example of how it's happened in the past... which you tried your best to chuckle away instead of taking seriously. The truth of the matter is that Hollywood is more than fine with not working with people who get a bad reputation. I can bring up more examples if you like. The idea that this won't do lasting damage to his career seems pretty silly to me, especially to say it so unequivocally.

No one has said it won't do lasting damage to his career. You started responding to me when I responded to Schlosser's post about Smollett not being allowed to work ever again in Hollywood. There are people who have done much worse things but have continued to work in Hollywood, because they have connections and/or make lots of money for that industry. Smollett is not one of those people so that would be the reason he'd never work again, not just because he did some crazy bull. That was the opinion I was expressing and that is the opinion I still hold.

The truth of the matter is that Hollywood is more than fine with not working with people who get a bad reputation.

And they are also fine working with people with a bad reputation. If those people generate $$$.

 

[MaceB]

No one has said it won't do lasting damage to his career. You started responding to me when I responded to Schlosser's post about Smollett not being allowed to work ever again in Hollywood. There are people who have done much worse things but have continued to work in Hollywood, because they have connections and/or make lots of money for that industry. Smollett is not one of those people so that would be the reason he'd never work again, not just because he did some crazy bull. That was the opinion I was expressing and that is the opinion I still hold.

It's not an either/or situation. He can be let go because of this situation AND because he won't make them money. Actually... they'll let him go, because this situation will make it much harder for him to make them money. Therefore, he'll lose the bulk, if not all of his work, as a result of this incident. Again, it feels weird and ideological to say, "they won't fire him for this.. it'll be because he's not a big star." No... they'll fire him for this... and that will be easy for them, because he's not a big star.

And they are also fine working with people with a bad reputation. If those people generate $$$.

Not when it hits the public eye, which was my original point. Sure, some people do terrible things and still have careers. But when it becomes a socially known event like this? No. He becomes box office and ratings poison, cause folks see him, and don't want to support him anymore. If this had happened under the radar, I'd agree with you. But it happened for everyone to see, and they aren't going to keep giving him a paycheck cause he comes with more negatives than positives now.

 

[Erzengel]

Isn't Smollett before all this, a "C" level actor in terms of popularity?

Him being able to bounce back if this story is indeed fabricated, will always be depending on the star status and severity of a crime.

 

[RockSP]

Again, it feels weird and ideological to say, "they won't fire him for this.. it'll be because he's not a big star."

Yeah that would be weird...if that's what I was saying.

If you're somehow interpreting what I said as "he won't be fired from his current job because he's not a big star" than that is something I haven't said.

Schlosser said he should never work again. I said if that happens it will be because he's a nobody in Hollywood, not just because he did some foul crap.

 

[MaceB]

So you aren't saying that he will be fired because he's not a big star. You're saying that he may never work again because he's not a big star?

Okay....

So let's clarify this then, since this argument is getting way too semantic...

He's not going to work again as a headliner in Hollywood, because this event will poison his reputation and make him unprofitable.

Good?

 

[RockSP]

Isn't Smollett before all this, a "C" level actor in terms of popularity?

Him being able to bounce back if this story is indeed fabricated, will always be depending on the star status and severity of a crime.

Giving him "C" level is probably too much credit. Before Empire no one knew him. He and his siblings are (or were at one point) all actors, but Jurnee Smollett is the most well known of them.​

He's not going to work again as a headliner in Hollywood, because this event will poison his reputation and make him unprofitable.

Good?

He's wasn't a headliner even before this event, lol. Taraji Henson and Terrence Howard are the headliners of the show.

 

[MaceB]

He's wasn't a headliner even before this event, lol. Taraji Henson and Terrence Howard are the headliners of the show.​

​

For goodness sakes, are you trying to be argumentative over nothing? It's pretty clear the point I'm making. His career will be seriously hurt, if not ended because of this event.

 

[samsnee]

For goodness sakes, are you trying to be argumentative over nothing? It's pretty clear the point I'm making. His career will be seriously hurt, if not ended because of this event.

His career is over if it's revealed he faked it. It's not like he was that big of a star before this whole thing.

 

[RockSP]

For goodness sakes, are you trying to be argumentative over nothing? It's pretty clear the point I'm making. His career will be seriously hurt, if not ended because of this event.

Maybe stop trying to take every statement as an argument. I doubt Erzengel thought I was being argumentative when I quoted him in the same post. It was just a statement of fact. Quite sure there is an "lol" with it, too.

 

[Erzengel]

Drugs and alcohol are not serious enough offenses for a Hollywood Star.

Violence again women is, but punching a photographer is not.

While Smollett's crime while not technically hurting someone, does tap into our current sensitive culture of race.

 

[MaceB]

Maybe stop trying to take every statement as an argument. I doubt Erzengel thought I was being argumentative when I quoted him in the same post. It was just a statement of fact. Quite sure there is an "lol" with it, too.

Okay... if it's not an argument, then cool. Silence is compliance.

This guy's career will be over in Hollywood, because of this event. Will he get walk on parts on a show every once in a while? Maybe... casting falls through, and they need someone on the fly... why not call him. But any hopes he had of a being successful in Hollywood is virtually gone, after this event... because of this event. It's silly to say that Hollywood doesn't care what their actors do. If you get into the public eye for seriously breaking the law or being violent, then they will stop hiring you... just like they have done for many actors before.

 

[RockSP]

Hollywood figures (actors, directors, etc.) who've broken laws or been violent also return to working in Hollywood all the time.

 

[MaceB]

I thought you weren’t arguing with me?

Well that may be, but those who commit such acts and get into public eye for doing it, don’t.as others have said, the circumstances matter. All crimes are not the same in this regard.

I’ve already provided examples.

 

[RockSP]

I thought you weren’t arguing with me?

Again, stating a fact isn't arguing.

Well that may be, but those who commit such acts and get into public eye for doing it, don’t.as others have said, the circumstances matter. All crimes are not the same in this regard.

I’ve already provided examples.

Like you said it's not an either/or situation. The example you gave doesn't encompass all of Hollywood. It's not like Hollywood only has one or two people in it making hiring decisions.

 

[MaceB]

Like you said it's not an either/or situation. The example you gave doesn't encompass all of Hollywood. It's not like Hollywood only has one or two people in it making hiring decisions.

Neither does yours, so okay... we're at an impasse. Hollywood may or may not stop hiring him based on past experiences. Certain people they've ignored crimes for; certain people they haven't.

But regardless, they WILL stop hiring him for this, because this hurts his brand enough to make him no longer profitable. This event makes him no longer a good business proposition.

You make it sound like they'll keep him, because they keep everyone. Or like... there's some God of Hollywood, who says, "well, we can't exile this guy... cause Winona Ryder is still working." Doesn't work that way though. You don't have any examples of someone doing something like this and keeping their star career. Is it possible that he'll still go on to fame in Hollywood in spite of this? Sure... I won't rule anything out. But the odds are far better that they will stop hiring him because of these allegations.

I'm not a believer that we can trust the market to fix these things, but in this case... this guy's career is going to be in tatters. Just like several others before him, who have been exiled for lesser crimes. That's a good thing of course.

 

[RockSP]

You make it sound like they'll keep him, because they keep everyone. Or like... there's some God of Hollywood, who says, "well, we can't exile this guy... cause Winona Ryder is still working." Doesn't work that way though. You don't have any examples of someone doing something like this and keeping their star career. Is it possible that he'll still go on to fame in Hollywood in spite of this? Sure... I won't rule anything out. But the odds are far better that they will stop hiring him because of these allegations.

LOL...okay at this point it's obvious you're just trolling. <---Me for not realizing it sooner.

 

[MaceB]

LOL...okay at this point it's obvious you're just trolling. <---Me for not realizing it sooner.

I'm not trolling you; I have a genuine disagreement with you.. and... in my opinion... you've been snarky and dismissive. You have this method of arguing where you pull one sentence you disagree with... mock it.. and then dismiss the whole argument. But yeah.. it's a stupid conversation we're having no doubt. You stand by your stance. I stand by mine.. and it's seriously just a matter of degree that we are discussing here. So yeah, thanks for the convo. Have a good one.

 

[Holiday]

 

[Schlosser85]

....did he send a threatening letter to himself too, or was this a misguided attempt at bringing attention to hate mail by staging a fake hate crime?

 

[Holiday]

....did he send a threatening letter to himself too, or was this a misguided attempt at bringing attention to hate mail by staging a fake hate crime?

I interpreted the tweet as him being behind that letter but you're right, it's not clear. I do know a magazine and a "wallet with stamps" were listed as taken from the two brothers home on that search warrant.