Richard Armitage Gets an Unflattering Mention

/ April 8, 2015

What’s up, blogworld? Where are the usual suspects when it comes to the documentation of current Armitage-related news? Chocolate-induced coma? Ok, well, someone has to do it, I guess, and much different from my usual blog convention I am happy to bring you some topical news.

Because I just came across a rather interesting article in German newspaper Die Welt. Under the heading of “Does Middle-earth Need Affirmative Action for Men?” the article summarizes the Hobbitcon convention in Bonn last weekend. An interesting article, in fact, because it notices that the vast majority of participants at the convention were (young) women – hence the title. The report on the convention is benign-ish – although there is some criticism between the lines on the whole paid photo-op practice at cons, and I can’t help but feel that the writer doesn’t get what it is that fascinates men and women about Middle-earth to fork out money for a convention and to spend time and money on preparing for it.

 

And Armitage gets a mention – albeit an ironic if not unflattering one. Writes Die Welt in context of who does and who doesn’t attend such cons:

Nicht jeder Filmschauspieler hat Freude an Fan-Conventions. Der Engländer Richard Armitage (Thorin Oakenshield) verweigert sein Erscheinen, er strebt nach Höherem als Zwergenruhm.

Translates: “Not every actor enjoys fan conventions. The English actor Richard Armitage (Thorin Oakenshield) refuses to appear. He has greater ambitions than dwarf glory.”

thorin

Thorin aka Richard, ready to slay his critics?

 

Ouch. That sounds a bit snarky. Is someone (i.e. writer Uwe Schmitt) disappointed that the main stars (besides Armitage there are Freeman, McKellen, Bloom and Serkis who regularly miss such conventions) are missing? I am ready to switch on APM and leave a comment explaining that Mr A may have moved on, not arrogantly, but rather practically, to new roles. After all principal photography on TH finished two and a half years ago. And that he is indeed busy with new projects, despite being a self-confessed Tolkien geek. But well, it is futile to jump to his defense. And if I am honest, I will say that I am a tiny weeny bit disappointed, too, that Armitage shies away from these fan-friendly occasions. But even without Armitage, Hobbitcon 2015 looks as if it has been a resounding success for those who were there. Why spoil their happy recollections?

As for the superiority (in numbers) of women at the con – well done, girls. I am glad to see that you are enjoying such events, that you creatively take part and that you express your enjoyment, admiration, happiness and enthusiasm so freely, generously and eloquently. There is enough snark in the world as it is. We need more of you!

Related posts

93 thoughts on “Richard Armitage Gets an Unflattering Mention”

  1. It seems to me that RIchard uses cons as publicity vehicles and do to them just to do them is exhausting. (This comes from a regular goer at Dragoncon – where the party starts Thursday at lunch and goes to Monday after lunch! and it goes 24 hours from beginning to end!)

    Richard HAS moved on – how many things has he done since wrapping TH? In addition to publicity for DoS and BotFA, there has been Urban, Sleepwalker, Into the Storm, publicity for Into the Storm between showings of The Crucible – which was 8 shows per week for what, 12 weeks? The cameo for the new Alice in Wonderland movie, an Audiobook, a few commercials and Hannibal. When Hannibal wraps in 3 weeks, he’ll be heading to Ireland for Pilgrimage.

    Not a whole lotta time in there for greasing palms and smiling with fans in there, is there?

    So snarky reporter can take his snark and snark it up his snarkster.

    Liked by 5 people

    Reply

  2. What Zee said! Why has the writer singled out RA? I would love it if he attended the occasional con, it’s a great opportunity to see him and listen to him, but he does the movie promotional work that’s required of him – he’s a wonderful asset in that respect – and I don’t believe we should expect any more of him than that.

    Like

    Reply

    • Let’s face it – actors don’t become actors for being employed as marketing toys for the films they produce. They have increasingly become marketing vehicles, but that is a by-product of our media- and marketing-driven age and hardly a motivation for becoming a successful actor. [APM] In that sense I have always admired RA for his commitment to the projects he’s worked on. He definitely is a wonderful asset, as you say, when it comes to press junkets, film premieres and TV marketing. Cons seem to be a different kettle of fish. I’ve never attended one, but to me it looks as if it is a more immersive, strongly fan-driven form of marketing, and I can see why that is a PR occasion that is not to every actors’ taste. That doesn’t necessarily imply that RA’s pulling up his nose at such events. Maybe he doesn’t mind the close encounter, maybe he does – but even that is no disqualifying judgment on the worthiness of such events. [/APM]

      Liked by 3 people

      Reply

        • You must be an over-enthusiastic, 17-year-old fangirl, Kathy, by the look of things. *snarks in the vein of that article* Ha – good on ya. I can think of worse pasttimes than watching a great thriller and some beautiful bodies…

          Liked by 1 person

          Reply

        • yeah, that Strike Back was great action! Loved watching with Kathy Jones, but now I would like to watch it some more. When can I come back for 48 hours? You’ve created a monster Kathy 😀

          RE: topic at hand, did reporter attempt to inqurie why Mr A (Freedman, McKellen were not there, right?) couldn’t be there? Schedules might night allowed for the time? As a frequent comic con worker, it is hard-ass work, Kathy Jones got a taste of that last year. I know lots of people who attend these crazy events for fun and never go back. Celebs can (not the ones that usually attend to get their comic stuff and just wander around like the rest of us unwashed to buy what they want from the various booths) have it easy if they want to not fight crowds too; they can be met escorted with or without security, driven on golf cart type vehicles from place to place. Phone or text me endlessly for drinks and food while I’m trying to work. Yeah, it can be a lot of stress for them. At this point in my life, if it wasn’t work related, I wouldn’t do it anymore because the price of fun (like a few hours with people I enjoy) is more and more costly. Especially when some celebs crap all over you or dogpile on you at the podium in front of a large audience trying to get thier movie clip shown. I didn’t want to work in this industry to work with celebs… Wait, sorry, I got off on a tanget having nothing to do with what your post was about. Erm…maybe Mr A was just busy, that is my guess 😀

          Liked by 1 person

          Reply

          • Thanks for giving us a bit more insight into the organisation of these events, Mimi. I might actually put your comments into a separate post so that it doesn’t get lost here in the comment section. They prove that what we see as the audience of such events is really not what the event is like for the celebs. In any case, whether they choose to attend and be pampered or decline invitation – I don’t think it is a comment on how much they like their fans. It’s about personal preference, and just because someone doesn’t like cons, doesn’t mean they dislike their fans for attending…

            Like

            Reply

            • you of corse can do anything with my mind-tired comments, especially if you think it might be helpful to understanding what might be going on in the celeb world of our favorite one 😀

              Like

              Reply

              • I thought it was really insightful for those of us who have never looked behind the scenes of a major event involving celebs, or even attended a con ourselves. Thanks for sharing your thoughts.

                Liked by 1 person

                Reply

    • Yeah, I suppose that’s the underlying feel to this. Let’s have a look at the freaks. It just really rubs me up the wrong way that he emphasizes that this is a female phenomenon…

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

      • as it should Guylty because it is far from a female phenomenon, however, the fact that women/girls are more and more into this arena of pop culture does make it note worthy and I believe in a positive way because why should it only be dudes that like these sorts of conventions?

        Like

        Reply

        • Oh, I am completely with you in the sense that it should be applauded when women feel confident to take over an arena formerly reserved for men. The article, however, was not really neutral in its appraisal of the phenomenon. If it had merely mentioned the fact that a majority of women were there, that would have been informative. But it was evident that the writer thought them nuts – even though they are not behaving in any other manner than predominently male football fans.

          Liked by 1 person

          Reply

          • I was not impressed with the article, nor the person who wrote it. It told me more about the person writing than the subject matter I was interested in reading about. If a writer is going to do that, then it should at least be entertaining. I give their article three raspberries and my indifference. Seriously though, it is a perfect example of getting what you pay for. Maybe I’ve been spoiled by good writers who report without an uninformed agenda? 😀 I am pretty tired, have not been home since Tuesday morning, so I apologize if this does not makes reasonable sense.

            Like

            Reply

            • I agree – the article was deliberately opinionated. If I wanted to be mean, I’d say the writer is simply an old man who has no clue. But well, that would be taking it down to his level.
              I hope you have finally gone home and gotten some rest now!!!! I have no idea how you do it, Mimi. You are burning the candle at both ends!

              Liked by 1 person

              Reply

              • Yes, I know that I am less efficient and work slower when I am tired, but when my better half is working almost around the clock himself, I take those opportunities to fix things that I haven’t had time to do. Fixed a few shelves. I always think it will take less time than it does, but when I pull the books off and see the dust and pulled apart shrink wrap or plastic covers, I cannot put them all back without cleaning and either reshrink-wrapping or whatever. It must be a sickness to not be able to leave things alone when I see they are a mess. Right?

                I came home early, meaning right after we closed and hubs gave me a few things to nibble (while gently chastising me for not coming home sooner) as I got another tongue bath from the hairballs. I’m lucky they don’t forget about me, I am gone so much. I would not work long hours if I did not have a job. If I did not have a job, my house would be clean, spotless. My yard would be like everyone else’s in the neighborhood. My eyebrows would be plucked. Oh they look terrible …almost grown together and up into my hairline. Good thing the hubs does not notice those flaws. 😀

                Like

                Reply

  4. How typical of press people to look down on fans and fan activities of any kind, ESPECIALLY if the fans are women! urgh, makes me so angry, what is his problem??? Nobody pays the fees at gun point, people go to Cons because they love going and have fun, nothing wrong with it. And actors who are busier are obviously harder to get and have less time available, it is just how it works. Besides Cons are largely used to publicise new material, the HobbitCons are in a way a bit of an exception at this point. I wish i could have gone but no can do with it being over Easter, but i’ve got a friend who is a big fan , she always attends and always has a lot of fun. We’ve decided to do the London Film Con in July this year just for the experience 😉 I don’t plan to cue up for photographs but i’ll definitely watch the proceedings. It is a public appearance after all, part of an acting career these days, nothing wrong with it.
    Also, funny they got aggravated about the Hobbit Con prices, he obviously hasn’t heard about the Sherlock convention LOL http://www.sherlocked.com/index.php/tickets

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

    • Yes, I don’t understand the criticism either. Especially when there are such double-standards applied to enthusiastic fan-dom. Granted, cons are something that the wider population only just has discovered. (I’ll even include myself in that group – I had never heard of it, apart from Star Trek Conventions, before I got into the Hobbit.) And yes, I also did a double-take the first time I heard about cos-play. But I do not see why I should criticize something that is inherently positive, creative, even intellectually stimulating. And I would love to go to one of these, just as an observer and a photographer. Rich, visually stunning pickings there.

      Liked by 2 people

      Reply

      • ah that is a good idea.. need to check if i will be allowed to use my camera when i go, i have to say more as a curious observer than anything else (at a steep price though, don’t see myself doing this many times, but it happens around 30 min from my home so had little excuse to bow out and since it is across many films hopefully interesting) I gave myself the excuse of professional research :-p
        And you are so right about the double standards, happy to use them for marketing but laugh at them otherwise, not nice at all..

        Like

        Reply

      • you have the right attitude and insight to the whole con concept Guylty…but double standards? Don’t get me started. FYI…trivial fact, I have not missed a San Diego Comic Con International since 1987, I don’t hold the record either, my Eisner Awards boss/admin, Jackie Estrada, has been there from the beginning, 1977. 😀

        Like

        Reply

    • I agree Hari. The general public (and perhaps more to the point, the press) seems quite dismissive of fandom, even when the fans are male. I don’t know whether that discourse is ever going to change, but I’ve come to accept that unless a person has experienced what it means to be a fan, he or she probably can’t understand the phenomenon. Before I was a fan, I was sympathetic to Trekkers and so forth, but I didn’t really understand the creative aspect of it, and the community aspect.

      Liked by 2 people

      Reply

      • I never understood fandom until i was 35 🙂 The fact that in essence it is not at all age specific for me is something positive, i think we feel our fandom/our admiration at 15 very similarly to how we feel it at 35 or 65 and beyond 🙂 And although it take more to accept when at an age where we are taught we have to control our feelings, we are also i think more conscious of the positive, life affirming and rejuvenating effect it has 🙂
        The new thing about fandom that RA fandom has taught me is creativity! It is something that is missing from fandom in classical music, or there is very little of it other than some writing. But i’ve only experience the flourish and power of creativity that comes with fandom with RA. And it is a real shame in public discussions about fandom that very positive aspect is not recognised enough.
        The stranger situation is when the object of fandom doesn’t quite understand it 🙂 It is not the case with RA, he’s been a fan and understands how it works and how it feels, most of it i think anyway 😉 But my classical music one is bewildered to this day of his ever growing number of followers and never really gets it, he submits to it, but doesn’t get it. And the interaction reflects it.
        But yeah, i think you are spot on, fandom is good for one’s soul in many ways 🙂 Let no journalist taint that 🙂

        Liked by 2 people

        Reply

        • You’ve captured it exactly. I had fan-like feelings when I was a teenager, and then never again until much later. For me it was like a creativity pill. Such a gift.
          As for Mr. H., I don’t think he understands it, but he accepts it graciously because he’s been around long enough to know that it’s part of the business.

          Liked by 1 person

          Reply

      • I suspect, Linnetmoss, only my theory of course, that the outsider view of any fandom will change not with acceptance, but when personal understanding and appreciation of the particular art form in question is present. Why? Comic film and television shows used to be utter crap. They got better when the people making them were fans themselves. Just one of many examples: Avengers screen writer/director, Joss Whedon reads, collects and writes comic books. The same for successful tv shows. How do I know? I see the names credited and know them (not as John Proctor knew Abigail, sorry, I couldn’t help that) from the comic book industry.

        Liked by 2 people

        Reply

        • Good point Mimi. I think Joss Whedon alone has raised the profile of the fan as someone worthy of respect. And there are people like Neil Gaiman who started in comics, then achieved success in the more staid and traditional literary world. He keeps his ties to the comics world and understands fandom. But they are men, you know? Unfortunately female fandom and fanfic seems to be represented now in the public mind by 50 Shades. It was a breakthrough, but mainly in the financial sense.

          Liked by 1 person

          Reply

          • Hi Linnetmoss, Neil is very good at his craft, but he did some extremely insightful and savvy gorilla marketing those first few years he first started out. Most do not know that Neil got his start first as a journalist in college and after he scored an interview with Alan Moore. Then he helped Alan research the documents, (evidence) from the Jack the Ripper case that the British Museum houses. (What a wonderful place that is.) Suffice it to say, Alan was key to Neil getting an opportunity to get a paid writing job in comics. If Neil did not have the talent, the synchronicity of the situation would not have helped Neil become the world famous writer he now is. How do I know? To quote Anne Bancroft from ’84 Charring Cross Road’ from memory so I hope I get it right: “I was there.” I won’t bore everyone further with the minutia unless Guylty wants me to. 😀

            Liked by 1 person

            Reply

              • Hi Guylty, hope this doesn’t come across as too wordy and I promise I am not trying to hijack your blog here. ———————————————————————————————
                The Early Neil Gaiman Days in Comics
                ———————————————————————————————
                There are a million scenarios of how people break into any job/career. Work ethic, talent and of course random, dumb luck play a large part in anyone’s success. I was introduced to Neil Gaiman, after I had already been reading Sandman. I had read his (first published comic work) Black Orchid [1] a three issue mini series, with interior art by art school friend, Dave McKean published in 1988.

                The way I remember it, Karen Berger listened to Neil’s pitch because Alan Moore [2] asked her to give him a chance to write something for them. Without that, it is unlikely he would have had the opportunity. It is always more difficult for writers to show their work as artwork is easier to judge in milliseconds. Another reason to get good at your 30 second pitch.

                Sandman originally started out as what I perceived, a horror, supernatural series and since I was also very familiar with The Endless, (Dream, Delirium, Destruction, Desire, Delusion, Destiny and Death) from high school lit class, it was a treat to see what new spin was going to happen here.

                I already had some insight to Neil Gaiman’s work from my interaction with DC Comics editorial and marketing department people. When they asked if we would host him for a book signing, we gladly agreed.

                What Neil did to make his efforts more successful? With the DC RRP group and Karen Berger’s help, they were able to identify which stores were selling the most copies of his book, Sandman. Needless to say, we were in that group. Neil made friendly and cultivated relationships. Ultimately, if the artists sell the store staff on their books, the staff sell those books to everyone else. Don’t dump on your support or you lose them forever. Neil made is first book signing appearance with us in 1990 and more after that, building a readership/foundation for his books.

                What was immediately apparent, although not to our shop in particular, were the women and girls reading Sandman showing up for his appearances. This was 1990 and across the vast comic book store world, that was unheard of. Neil was smart enough to take advantage of that fact and cultivate that audience everywhere he could. A huge part of that foundation of readers have stuck with him and shared their love of his work with their children.

                The unusual part of this account is the support Neil received from the publisher. Not necessarily for DC/Vertigo, but in general, it is rare to receive that sort of support. With all the books published, it is difficult for a publisher to devote much time to promoting one artist. Which is why it is important for the artist to do as much of that for themselves; Neil is good at charming people and is always sociable, polite, likable; so many people (me included) do not have those social skills. The fact is that his success once started, was continually built upon by taking on new and different projects using all supports available to promote and connect everyone to the new effort.

                His first novel was a joint effort with Terry Pratchett, Good Omens. I remember him (happy as a puppy) telling us about it before it was released. We were and are thrilled for him always.

                [1] Black Orchid is listed on the DC Comics web site as being four issues, but it was only three.

                [2] Alan Moore, Watchmen, V for Vendetta, Swampthing, From Hell.

                Like

                Reply

            • Ah, come on! I would love to hear more. (BTW I love 84 Charing Cross Road, both book and film.)
              I could not agree more that some of us get lucky breaks, but that isn’t what brings success. You have to be able to take it and run with it.

              Liked by 1 person

              Reply

  5. In my opinion a really bad written and unnecessary snarky article. Although it is true that RA refused to appear since the first HobbitCon. The reason for said refusal? I have no idea and I doubt that the reporter holds more insider information than me

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

    • Apart from the fact that I have given this one little snarky aside about RA more exposure than it deserves, I think the writer over-stated the whole thing, anyway. He’s given it a particular slant by writing “has refused to appear”. Sounds as if RA has been begged to attend and is taking delight in refusing. I sort of doubt that… He’s simply not into it, and fair enough. I can see how the cons – especially Hobbitcon in Germany – hold a particular attraction for the Kiwi contingent. Nice trip to far away Europe, opportunity to meet with their pals while actually being paid. Win-win. Plus, the other dwarves may by and large be slightly less in demand work-wise than RA. I think it’s slightly unfair to expect the same level of commitment from RA. But well, there you have APM in full swing 😀
      As for the underlying comments about the con participants – typically mysoginist interpretation of any (mass) activity that young women engage in. Seems as if the slamming, shaming and deriding of young women is on trend these days. I recommend this article on the general theme of why accusing teenage girls of “hysteria” is unfair: http://www.newstatesman.com/culture/2015/03/why-do-we-mock-teenage-girls-who-love-one-direction-when-top-gear-fans-are-just-same

      Liked by 2 people

      Reply

  6. Wir verstehen das nicht, und deshalb gucken wir hochnäsig auf all die dummen Fans herab, die so kindisch und albern sind, und nebenbei lästern wir noch ein bisschen über Schauspieler, die es nie geschafft haben, für ihre Arbeit bekannt zu werden und sich so ihr bisschen Ruhm grabschen, und weil das noch nicht reicht, lästern wir auch noch über jene Schauspieler, die das Glück haben, jung und schön genug zu sein, um für ihr Aussehen bekannt zu sein, auch ohne auf Cons auszutauchen, denn schließlich – das muss man doch sagen dürfen?! – bringen Schauspieler ja keine Leistungen, die irgendwie wertvoll wären.

    *gääähn*

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

    • *grins* exzellent zusammengefasst, Hedgie. (Ich fühl mich fast schon schlecht, dass ich das überhaupt weitergepostet habe…) Klar, mich nervt es ebenfalls, dass in diesen Artikeln immer auf die enthusiastischen Fans herabgelächelt wird, als wären sie Freaks. Kein Mensch krittelt an erwachsenen Männern, die bei Fußballniederlagen in Tränen ausbrechen. Aber enthusiastische Mädchen, die sich mit Kreativität und Akribie in ein Themengebiet hineinleben, sind “lächerlich”… Schon ziemlich erschreckend, wie frauenfeindlich die Welt nach wie vor noch immer ist…

      Liked by 3 people

      Reply

      • Wenn Männer zum Fußball gehen oder Formel 1 kucken ist das männlich, wenn Frauen schwärmen ist das hysterisch *schielen*
        Wobei ich manchmal das Gefühl habe, daß wir Frauen es denen, die uns wegen sowas zu Spinnern erklären, in Teilen zu leicht machen, weil wir meinen wir müßten uns rechtfertigen und nicht ‘offensiv’ genug mit dem Thema umgehen…

        Like

        Reply

        • Herba, da hast du genau den Punkt getroffen: wir Frauen meinen immer, uns für unsere Aktionen rechtfertigen zu müssen. Ist das genetisch? Jedenfalls ist das im männlichen Bausatz nicht automatisch vorgesehen. Und somit setzten wir uns immer ins Unrecht. Blöd das. Kerle tun es einfach (was auch immer für einen Blödsinn) und somit hinterfragt das auch keiner so schnell. Wir Frauen brauchen mehr gepflegte Wurschtigkeit.

          Liked by 2 people

          Reply

          • Wahrscheinlich schon. Jedenfalls kommt man(n) ganz schnell mal ins Schleudern, wenn man mal nachhakt, wo genau der Unterschied zwischen einer ekstatisch kreischenden Konzertbesucherin und einem ekstatisch schreienden Fußballfan ist 😎

            Liked by 1 person

            Reply

          • Vielleicht hast du nicht ganz Unrecht – wir fühlen uns zu schnell im Rechtfertigungsdruck. Sowas kommt aber eben auch nicht von irgendwo, sondern hat seine Wurzeln. Und diese Wurzeln keimen immer noch, wie man an diesem Artikel sieht. Klar, wäre schön, wenn wir uns einfach nur zurücklehnen und lachen könnten. Vielleicht sind wir aber als Frauen auch (selbst)kritikfähiger und gleichzeitig analytischer als Träger des XY-Chromosoms…

            Liked by 2 people

            Reply

            • ich finde das ist alles immer noch durch die Mannerwelt konditioniert dass man alle Tatigkeiten die Frau ausser Haus macht doppelt nah anschaut und nur dann ok findet, wenn es irgendwas mit dem Haus zu tun hat und weniger mit Selbstverwirklichung. Sind ja meist nur Manner die solchen Schund schreiben und es auch noch lustig finden…

              Like

              Reply

          • ja, wir velassen den Herd und uberlassen die Nachfolgschaft fur ein paar Stunden ihrem Schicksal und der Herr des Hauses hat vielleicht nicht warmes Essen zu Hause wenn er kommt von der oh-so-wichtigen Arbeit und das alles um uns offentlich sehen zu lassen und meine Gute, sundhaft, andere Manner vielleicht anstarren. Frau darf sich ja nicht in gesellschaftlichen Kreisen sehen lassen, das ist nur fur Manner bestimmt.
            Hat jemand diese Flugkotzbeutel bereit???

            Liked by 1 person

            Reply

      • Kein Grund, dass du dich schlecht fühlst – ein bisschen APM ist erlaubt. 😉

        Cons sind Events, die immer wieder ins Lächerliche gezogen werden. Mag sein, dass es schlimmer ausfällt, wenn viele Frauen dort sind, aber das Unverständnis ist genauso da, wenn die Besucher in der Mehrzahl männlich sind. Begeisterung und Enthusiasmus hat man gefälligst für “seriöse” Dinge aufzubringen, nicht für alberne Verkleidungen u.ä.

        Wenn so ein Schreiber nicht weiß oder nicht nachvollziehen kann, wie bereichernd ein Hobby ist, ist das sein Problem, nicht meins. Ich für meinen Teil möchte jedenfalls gar nicht so denken.

        Like

        Reply

      • Ich glaube, das ist so ein ganz besonderes Gen, dass Menschen mit einem “leichten” Hang zum Zynismus und zur Abwertung bevorzugt in das Journalistenfach wechseln und dann solche Artikel verfassen. Voruteil? Hm. Wenn man bedenkt, dass einzelne Mitglieder meines Haushaltes erwägen, ihre Zukunft möglicherweise in der Schreibenden Zunft zu suchen, dann hoffe ich mal, dass das keine Grundvoraussetzung ist. Nein, es ist doch immer wieder die gleiche Leier und unter dem Strich braucht man (vielleicht) als Jounalist diese antrainierte und reflexhafte Arroganz dem vermeintlich Banalen gegenüber. Das Schlimmste ist ihnen sicher der Jubeljournalismus. Und den genauen Ton zwischen unreflektiertem Hurra und bösem Veriss zu treffen, ist nur wenigen gegeben. Ich denke schon, dass da eine gute Portion Arroganz unterwegs ist, die sich aus dem “Selbstverständnis” des kritischen Journalismus speist. Vor allem, wenn man bei sog. “renommierten” Blättern beschäftigt ist. In unserer Regionalzeitung hätte das ganz anders geklungen 🙂

        Liked by 2 people

        Reply

        • Ich vermute mal stark, dass du hier deinen leichten Hang zur Ironie auslebst :-D, denn ansonsten müsste ich für meine Zunft mal schnell in die Bresche springen… Zynismus und Ironie gibt’s unter Schreibern genauso viel und wenig wie sonstwo. Nur dass solche Zyniker dank ihres eingebauten Sprachrohrs natürlich lauter tröten können als Hobby-Polemiker. Wo ich dir allerdings zustimme ist, dass es mit der ausgewogenen Kritikfähigkeit immer eine Gratwanderung ist.

          Liked by 1 person

          Reply

          • Du vermutest natürlich komplett richtig 🙂 Alles selbstverständlich grob vereinfachend. Und, es ist das sprichwörtliche “Pfeifen im Wald”. Unter uns: ich kann den Typen fast verstehen. Also was die Tendenz angeht, sich über “profane” Dinge lustig zu machen. Bin da leider auch nicht ganz frei von. Aber sowas sagt man ja nicht laut ;-). Anscheinend jahrelang die falschen Zeitungen gelesen….. Aber seit etwa einem Jahr versuche ich, mich einer neuen Demut zu befleißigen (ist das nicht eine wunderbar arrogante, geile Wendung?). Schließlich bin ich mit meinem Fanverhalten jetzt auch im Fokus. Nett, wie sich die Wahrnehmung so plötzlich verschiebt.

            Liked by 1 person

            Reply

            • *ggg* Aber du beweist geistige Größe beim Eingeständnis vormaliger Fehlleitung. Und hey, ich gebe gerne zu, dass ich meinen Horizont ebenfalls erweitern musste – das Fangirl-Dasein hat auch mich nachhaltig beeinflusst und ich sehe die Teilnahme an Veranstaltungen, um die ich früher hochnäsig einen großen Bogen gemacht hätte, lediglich als Gelegenheit mit Gleichgesinnten Spaß zu haben, oder nach wie vor hochnäsig und gnädig meine kostbare Aufmerksamkeit einer dahergelaufenen Truppe windiger Entertainment-Profis zu schenken *ggg*. So kann man’s doch auch mal sehen – *wir* geben *denen* das Gefühl, wichtig zu sein. Als Celebrity Empowerer ist das schon ein ganz anderer Schnack als ein schaulustiger dummer Fan…

              Like

              Reply

              • Das mit dem Unterstützen windiger Schauspieler gefällt mir gut. Das klingt so ungeheuer pro-aktiv und nimmt dem ganzen Fangedöns das alles Lähmende der schieren unkritischen Verehrung. (Manchmal habe ich am Anfang keine Ahnung, wohin mich meine Sätze führen…. 😉 ) Jedenfalls kann man dabei dann die allseits geliebte Ironie wunderbar ausleben. Win-win-Situation. Schön!

                Liked by 2 people

                Reply

                • Finde ich wunderbar, dass deine Sätze sich von ganz alleine entwickeln. Zeugt von geistiger Flexibilität. Und ja, ich denke, dass alle Fan-Maßnahmen, die *nicht* am heimischen PC oder im stillen Kämmerlein stattfinden, pro-aktiv und damit essentiell kreativ sind. Wir sind toll *ggg*

                  Liked by 1 person

                  Reply

  8. What Zee said. Richard hardly neglects fans, as evidenced by his stage-door appearances throughout the Crucible run, endless meet-and-greets for Hobbit events, and other occasions. He has made numerous appearances at Hobbit doings when he was able, often having to schedule around his other work to do so. But he can’t do it all, and as Zee mentioned, cons are a tough thing to fit into as insane a schedule as Richard keeps. They take much planning, much time, and a whole lot of energy. Nerdy geek that Richard is, I would wager that he’d love to do it, if he weren’t working so much. But then the question arises; Which con do you attend, when there is at least one per month in any given city? It’s not just the major cons like San Diego Comic Con and Atlanta Dragon Con and HobbitCon/RingCon, but all the junior cons as well, and since every one of them is all-inclusive, well, he’d have to pick and choose, and it’s not always easy to go to a new director and say, “Hey, I do this thing where I show up to such and such, and you’ll have to schedule your shoot around me that week…” Richard is too professional for that. Already scheduled appearances, yes, like Hobbit premieres, press junkets, and the like are accepted breaks and pre-contracted before he takes on a new project. But fan events like cons have to be planned differently, and not generally with the studios that have hired major stars for other work, so if they don’t work into the current work flow, well, they have to be attended in spirit, only. I think his recent tweets with Jed Brophy said as much, if I read between the lines correctly.

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

    • Completely agree, boudicca. I think RA is certainly more fan-friendly than a lot of other celebs. And I suspect he wouldn’t entertain the accusation levelled at him between the lines at all. He’s been to a couple of cons, as part of the promo for his then-projects, so he’s hardly deliberately boycotting them. But there may be some truth in the suspicion that his participation in such events is not deemed worth the effort in terms of exposure and widening his reach. I am sure his agents would press for it if they thought it was of (greater) benefit. Whatever. The article wasn’t exactly hard-hitting journalism, anyway. It could’ve been more interesting if the writer had looked a bit deeper at why young women enjoy such events so much – and if he had done so without disqualifying them.

      Liked by 3 people

      Reply

  9. Well Richard has always done his best for PR and I doubt that he sees himself as too big now to keep doing Hobbit stuff. This person seemed to think or say that he doesn’t do these events and we all know that isn’t quite true. He is filming now and has other commitments so perhaps that is the real reason he didn’t go. Mind you if he is just tired of going to every single event like this, that is understandable too.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

  10. Let’s look behind the curtain…I’m not sure if this aspect of the celeb con has been discussed; conventions pay the celebs a fee to attend. The bigger the celeb, the bigger the fee or sometimes it just travel, hotel and food. (Which in itself is a hefty price as well.) Their participation is used to promote the con and sell tickets. The fees in question are varied, while other celebs attend for PR obligations when they agreed to work on a film. Some use the convention circuit to sell their head-shots and photo-ops and they make their living that way if they don’t have other work.

    One year Angelina Jolie was promoting Tomb Raider and last minute, day before, asked to propel from a helicopter onto the roof of the convention center. She wanted to do it, but it was deemed too risky by con management/insurance. I don’t believe she would have been paid to do that particular entrance, but it would have been way cool if she could have. Another year, director, Robert Rodriguez set up (with permission) a Taco Truck in front of the convention center to promote his film, Machete and the actors in the film, made and served up tacos to the con attendees for free. It was a great publicity stunt and the actors had in all likelihood agreed to do publicity long before they knew they would be working in a hot taco truck in the middle of July.

    I have scheduled some celebs for comic store appearances or library lectures with the stipulation that if they have the opportunity to work in a film/tv show, they will have to cancel. But in those situations, we were not paying an appearance fee.

    I think it isn’t about any of them not wanting to do a con, but what ‘work’ is involved. If they have a film they are working on or if they do not. They know they have to get out there to publicise themselves and that is how they get more work. If they are not working on a film, attending a con can generate immense publicity. I am not talking about just being seen by 6000 people sitting in Hall H asking you questions from a floor microphone, but the press room set ups where the celeb in question sits and interview dozens of reporters one right after the other for hours. I have set up interviews like that in SLC and it is so much easier than taking the person in question from place to place for interviews. Although some insist on wanting them in studio, just depends. But the person in question is usually exhausted after a few hours because it can be intense. To those whimps, I usually tell them to toughen up and keep going. Just kidding…or am I 😀

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

  11. Pingback: Kein Gedankengeschwurbel eines Fangirls | Unkraut vergeht nicht….oder doch?

  12. Pingback: A Look Behind the Con | Guylty Pleasure

  13. re: female fans — this is directly relevant and might interest you: http://www.newstatesman.com/culture/2015/03/why-do-we-mock-teenage-girls-who-love-one-direction-when-top-gear-fans-are-just-same

    re: celebs at cons — presumably everyone has his/her own motivation. My read on Armitage is that this (lining up with fans, doing autographs, brief chit-chat, etc.) is neither something that he is absolutely opposed to (or he’d have never done that whole stage door thing all summer) nor something that he is eager and excited to do all the time. I don’t know why journalism insists on these black/white conclusions. Hannibal is also an SDCC-capable product, I assume, so it will be interesting to see if he goes this summer, but my guess is that promotion is always going to be secondary to actual work for him, that he’s not opposed to promotion, but that if he doesn’t need to do promotion, he’s not going to be doing these kind of things unless there is some other big incentive.

    Liked by 3 people

    Reply

    • That article was very interesting. I posted it, too, somewhere in a comment, can’t remember where. The analogies with Top Gear fans “whining” are rather evocative – and chilling when compared to the battering which the fangirls receive…
      As for RA and cons – probably like you said, judging on past behaviour. Fair enough – I really do think it is something that depends on the personality of the celebs. Some people enjoy being the centre of attention in that way, others don’t. The black and white interpretation in the media sells papers, I guess, as does name-dropping, hence a reference to a lead actor who “shines by his absence”. Just in terms of common sense I would agree that promotion work is not something that actors actively prefer to do. It can’t be something that has motivated them to become an actor and that they thrive on. It is a necessary evil, or part of their work, and therefore they do it. But if they have the choice, maybe some prefer not to do it. Fine with me.

      Liked by 2 people

      Reply

  14. Singling out RA as the critic did is puzzling. For me, in general, if the cost of travel to attend a movie con was a non-issue, I’m still not sure if I would go to one. I would like to hear the artist’s/author’s–such as RA’s–thoughts in person, as a first hand account.

    But my having been to a few “big name” lectures/performances, where if the artist/author deigns to have an overpriced book you can buy and they sign it for you–e.g. a giantess in the 2nd wave feminist movement who was gracious and had a kindly smile for everyone as she signed and then handed the attendees book back to them, and an esteemed historian who never looked up from signing the books placed in front of him by an event handler, each come to mind–the whole thing is very rushed and you are told not to engage the celebrity in conversation by the event handlers. So the thought of fans somewhat being treated as cattle herded through a shoot past the celebrity, is not appealing to me. Been there, done that. Ha!

    Though if RA ever comes to Chicago, I am there in a heart beat! Albeit, standing way in the back–with my periscope to see over everyone’s heads. Ha!

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

  15. Pingback: This Day in 201? … | Guylty Pleasure

Leave a reply to Guylty Cancel reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.