ЯÉvlveR
danneB
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2012
- Messages
- 5,588
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 31
correct.Resume is an indication of experience.
right.What you are essentially indicating is that because she is younger, Debicki does not have the same amount of experience in acting.
in saying that she's an actress in her own right i didn't imply that she was a better actress then the other two.The only way she would then be an equal actress is if she was notably more gifted in acting than the experienced actresses. This may be true, but we have little reason to suspect such a thing.
when the others fixated on one attribute, as was the case with the height, they alluded that her appeal was strictly a physical one, which is bull, of course, it's the thing that's gotten some people interested in her, but if tall was all she ever was, i guarantee the few of us who actually like her wouldn't care as much.
That's why I suggest you're taking other things for granted, because you presume that the experience that grants skill isn't really relevant, and only amounts to some lines on a resume, as opposed to something with a real life relevant application, as all good experience has.
at no point did i presume any of those things. there are all sorts of characters and all sorts of actors capable or incapable of playing said characters. if the role appeared to be more then she could handle, then i'd agree to your point.
arterton's been in clash of the titans and in the prince of persia, both films in that wondy wheel house. that's 2 more then blunt has been, and i would bet very few people would think that she would be a better actor in the role of wondy then blunt even though she's had more experience in those roles.