It’s called acting for a reason ffs !!
-
-
-
Actors can play diverse roles but the reason why this is such a current debate is because it's about giving LGBT+ actors the chance to represent themselves. Heterosexual actors are the majority especially in Hollywood, so why not give LGBT actors more of a platform?
-
So, LGBT actors aren’t going to play straight characters anymore either?
-
Acting is pretending to be something you’re not ....
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Yes. It’s called Acting. The clue is in the name!
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Imagine my disbelief when I heard Chris Hemsworth wasn't actually the god of thunder.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
Actors, act.... it’s make believe, not the real world.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
They'll say next that gays can't play straight people - that will put a lot of actors out of work! By definition acting means playing a part as opposed to being yourself.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Apparently the zombies in the Walking Dead aren’t actually dead. I read that they were paid actors wearing make up. Frankly I am appalled and embarrassed by the lack of inclusion by Fox. I can only assume that it has been some terrible mistake.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
Those idiots that believe otherwise.....what have they to say of Shakespeare's times! Acting(pretending) a character....is the issue! And that's what is appreciated by the audience & rewarded by jurists! Why didn't these nuts complain when rich guys act out a beggar or pauper?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Actors should be able to play any role regardless even men have played women and vice versa.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
You will have to be French to play Napoleon next.
-
Corsican, he wasn't even French.
-
Corsica is now and was then part of France, so yeah he was French born on the island of Corsica, he was of Italian descent.
-
Nope: Corsica was independant when Fr. invaded it. His father fought with the Corsican national army. And Italy did not exist then.
-
Had to look this up but Corsica was ceded to Louis XV in 1768, Napoleon was born in 1769. Italy wasn't the same as now, it was partly part of the Holy Roman Empire as well as independent kingdoms, but the name Italy existed in relation to the peninsula. Napoleon was King of Italy
-
I repeat: Corsica was independent from Genoa since 1755. Genoa had no right to temporarily cede its rights of suzerainty* over a land it didn't own anymore. Louis XV was all too happy to conquer the island after his "problems" in Canada. *not the land itself.
-
Was Corsica ceded to the French in 1768? Yes or No? It's official whether it was right or not, it was part if France from that date, it was French, Napoleon was French, he served France, he was Emperor of France. End of story.
-
You wrong on many accounts, but feel free to think you won that one if your well-being depends on it.
- 13 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.