Logan Lerman and Asa Butterfield are Young Republicans

[terry78]

Lerman & Butterfield to Lead James Schamus' College Republicans

The duo will take on the younger versions of Lee Atwater and Karl Rove.



Wha......?

 

[scarlet-witch]

Pass lmao

 

[Deck Rickard]

Gross. “College Racists” would be a better title.

Fun fact! Ted Bundy (Efron’s last big role) was also a Republican.

 

[TheVileOne]

Gross. “College Racists” would be a better title.

Fun fact! Ted Bundy (Efron’s last big role) was also a Republican.

Fun fact! Fred Rogers (Tom Hanks' last big role) was also a Republican.

 

[Deck Rickard]

Fun fact! Fred Rogers (Tom Hanks' last big role) was also a Republican.

Eh. According to his biographer, Rogers was registered Republican but was largely independent in how he voted. Bundy, in contrast, worked for the Republican Party and got caught spying on Democrats. To be fair though, John Wayne Gacy worked for the Democratic Party.

 

[MadVillainy]

This could be good. Don't get why be annoyed by it.
A lot of biography subject matter people are POSs. Don't see why that should matter here.

I heard the script is good. It was on the Black List.

Logan Lerman has been very bad to mediocre for years. He lacks basic charisma and screen presence when he acts

 

[terry78]

Butterfield is kinda just.....there. Never really felt anything about him either. That may be why they were chosen. Lerman I used to want for Dick Grayson though, I think he had the vibe.

 

[MadVillainy]

Butterfield is kinda just.....there. Never really felt anything about him either. That may be why they were chosen. Lerman I used to want for Dick Grayson though, I think he had the vibe.

I used to think the same thing about Butterfield. But the Netflix show Sex Education turned me around abit on him.

Lerman I used to want for Spidey and I thought he'd be a good Dick Grayson. But it really seems like he's lost his talent like the Monstars took it. All the charisma he had in Meet Bill? Gone. All his dramatic chops from Perks of Being a Wallflower? Gone

 

[Airwings]

I haven't got much interest for this. The only thing that would make me watch is seing them together, two guys who were close to become Spider-Man

If it was some adventure film, it wouldn't sound so boring. A post-apocalyptic sci fi could work too.

But Lerman doesn't want to do such projects anymore. He wants to be serious.

Now for some quotes:

Logan Lerman has been very bad to mediocre for years. He lacks basic charisma and screen presence when he acts

I used to think the same thing about Butterfield. But the Netflix show Sex Education turned me around abit on him.

Lerman I used to want for Spidey and I thought he'd be a good Dick Grayson. But it really seems like he's lost his talent like the Monstars took it. All the charisma he had in Meet Bill? Gone. All his dramatic chops from Perks of Being a Wallflower? Gone

Lerman ventured into indie films that didn't have charismatic, fun-loving characters because the plot didn't required such. When he was done with Percy, he wanted to quickly mature as an actor.
That's why he seems so bland.
But the end of Sidney Hall is perhaps the best acting we've seen from him. It's real acting, showing vulnerability and physical decline. There's no need for a lot of gestures, no need to appear to have the charisma of a leading actor to hide any lack of real acting skills.

The case with Butterfield is that he's never seemed as bad in terms of acting as he does on Sex Ed. The character doesn't agree with his personal strenghts as an actor. He shouldn't play dorky guys for fun, like this Otis is supposed to be. He's gives the worst performance out of all the cast, except for Persbrandt. All the others are better than him.
But the show itself is quite fun.

 

[MadVillainy]

I haven't got much interest for this. The only thing that would make me watch is seing them together, two guys who were close to become Spider-Man

If it was some adventure film, it wouldn't sound so boring. A post-apocalyptic sci fi could work too.

Lerman ventured into indie films that didn't have charismatic, fun-loving characters because the plot didn't required such. When he was done with Percy, he wanted to quickly mature as an actor.
That's why he seems so bland.
But the end of Sidney Hall is perhaps the best acting we've seen from him. It's real acting, showing vulnerability and physical decline. There's no need for a lot of gestures, no need to appear to have the charisma of a leading actor to hide any lack of real acting skills.

The case with Butterfield is that he's never seemed as bad in terms of acting as he does on Sex Ed. The character doesn't agree with his personal strenghts as an actor. He shouldn't play dorky guys for fun, like this Otis is supposed to be. He's gives the worst performance out of all the cast, except for Persbrandt. All the others are better than him.
But the show itself is quite fun.

The view of charisma that your talking about is narrow. Charisma doesn't just mean fun loving characters or having snappy and charming dialogue. That's not what I'm talking about at all. Charisma is having a presence that draws people to you. Some kind of magnetism.

Ryan Gosling has played a good amount of roles in movies like Blade Runner 2049, Lars and the Real Girl, Drive where he was for the most part a muted, stoic, and/or understated character. But still you're drawn to him because he has charisma and a presence.
And even people closer to Lerman's age like Timothée Chalamet, Lakeith Stanfeld, Dylan O Brien, Ashton Sanders, Lucas Hedges, Kaitlyn Dever, Saoirse Ronan, Leitia Wright, Awkwafina, Kelvin Harrison jr have a presence and charisma to them. Whether they're in a lively role or not

Lerman showed that in Meet Bill and Fury but that's only 2 roles in like 15 years. I never have seen Sidney Hall so I'll take your word for it. I heard very mixed things.

For your point on Butterfield? Sure. Agree to disagree. I don't hold that opinion and I don't see many holding that opinion either.

 

[Airwings]

The view of charisma that your talking about is narrow. Charisma doesn't just mean fun loving characters or having snappy and charming dialogue. That's not what I'm talking about at all. Charisma is having a presence that draws people to you. Some kind of magnetism.

Ryan Gosling has played a good amount of roles in movies like Blade Runner 2049, Lars and the Real Girl, Drive where he was for the most part a muted, stoic, and/or understated character. But still you're drawn to him because he has charisma and a presence.
And even people closer to Lerman's age like Timothée Chalamet, Lakeith Stanfeld, Dylan O Brien, Ashton Sanders, Lucas Hedges, Kaitlyn Dever, Saoirse Ronan, Leitia Wright, Awkwafina, Kelvin Harrison jr have a presence and charisma to them. Whether they're in a lively role or not

Lerman showed that in Meet Bill and Fury but that's only 2 roles in like 15 years. I never have seen Sidney Hall so I'll take your word for it. I heard very mixed things.

Perhaps Lerman isn't that good of an actor when it comes to acting natural, showing real-world emotions.
He only works for characters that are clearly fictional

 

[MadVillainy]

Perhaps Lerman isn't that good of an actor when it comes to acting natural, showing real-world emotions.
He only works for characters that are clearly fictional

No that's not it to me either. Plenty of his clearly fictional performances are still very mediocre or bad. And I honestly don't really understand the distinction. Good or bad acting is good or bad acting. I can't think of any actor who is good at clearly fictional roles and is bad at everything else.

He's just not showing he's a strong actor right now in many people's eyes

 

[Airwings]

For your point on Butterfield? Sure. Agree to disagree. I don't hold that opinion and I don't see many holding that opinion either.

So that would mean the opposite of what I said.

He never seemed as GOOD in terms of acting as he does on Sex Ed. The character DOES agree with his personal strenghts as an actor. He SHOULD play dorky guys for fun, like this Otis is supposed to be. He's gives the BEST performance out of all the cast, except for Persbrandt. NONE of the others are AS GOOD AS him (=Butterfield).

And this is the majority's opinion

 

[MadVillainy]

So that would mean the opposite of what I said.

He never seemed as GOOD in terms of acting as he does on Sex Ed. The character DOES agree with his personal strenghts as an actor. He SHOULD play dorky guys for fun, like this Otis is supposed to be. He's gives the BEST performance out of all the cast, except for Persbrandt. NONE of the others are AS GOOD AS him (=Butterfield).

And this is the majority's opinion

EDIT: I misread

 

[Airwings]

No that's not it to me either. Plenty of his clearly fictional performances are still very mediocre or bad. And I honestly don't really understand the distinction. Good or bad acting is good or bad acting. I can't think of any actor who is good at clearly fictional roles and is bad at everything else.

He's just not showing he's a strong actor right now in many people's eyes

The bolded line, can I suggest Roger Moore?

Regarding Lerman, I haven't seen the new Nazi Hunter series yet. Maybe he's decent in that?

 

[Airwings]

Yes it's the opposite of wha tyou said. Which is why I said "agree to disagree"

And no it is not the majority's opinion. That's just false

You said
" I don't hold that opinion and I don't see many holding that opinion either."
Isn't this statement pointing to a majority? If not, why even claim that?

Butterfield then. So you think he's not good in his dramatic roles, the ones that brought him to fame?
You think Butterfield is best as a comedic actor?

 

[MadVillainy]

The bolded line, can I suggest Roger Moore?

Regarding Lerman, I haven't seen the new Nazi Hunter series yet. Maybe he's decent in that?

But the thing is I don't even get what you mean. You're talking about performers who are good at being fictional character but bad at real life people?

And imo, and from others I've read, he wasn't good in Hunters either. I just think he's not that strong of an actor or at least he's fine with not showing it anymore

Again bad performances are bad performances I don't see any actor, including Roger Moore, who is bad at a fictional character and good at a real character.

You said
" I don't hold that opinion and I don't see many holding that opinion either."
Isn't this statement pointing to a majority? If not, why even claim that?

Butterfield then. So you think he's not good in his dramatic roles, the ones that brought him to fame?
You think Butterfield is best as a comedic actor?

I misread.
I think he's a fine actor either way.

 

[Airwings]

But the thing is I don't even get what you mean. You're talking about performers who are good at being fictional character but bad at real life people?

And imo, and from others I've read, he wasn't good in Hunters either. I just think he's not that strong of an actor or at least he's fine with not showing it anymore

Again bad performances are bad performances I don't see any actor, including Roger Moore, who is bad at a fictional character and good at a real character

Why would Lerman choose to not show his acting ability if he has one? Sounds weird!

For Moore, his best work is when he's placed in a different reality, portraying such characters as 007 or Sherlock Holmes, or one of his other 70s action adventures.
While these characters can have different emotions, it's never about being realistic and portraying a real human. It's always with a twinkle in the eye, as a nod to the audience. Even if some stuff can be a bit more dramatic than just entertaining.
Moore is limited and only excels in the clearly fictional. Those roles live by his charisma.
But charisma isn't equal with acting ability.

He would never have suited a completely serious film, (for an example, portraying someone who's lost everything in war), showing real human emotions. Because he lacks the skills for that.

 

[TheVileOne]

This could be good. Don't get why be annoyed by it.
A lot of biography subject matter people are POSs. Don't see why that should matter here.

I heard the script is good. It was on the Black List.

Logan Lerman has been very bad to mediocre for years. He lacks basic charisma and screen presence when he acts

I've read the script. It's OK. My problem with it is it would give me tonal whiplash. Most of the time in the script, Karl Rove is characterized as this timid, nerdy dude. Then out of nowhere, he says things like, "I'm going to crush you like a bug!" or "I'm going to rip your head off and spit down your neck!" He's not written with a lot of consistency.

Basically, it's the young, formative years of Karl Rove and realizing how he could have more power controlling or advising the presidency.