- Aug 18 2007, 04:13 AM
I think Drake's comments can be interpreted in different ways, and that's the real problem. Whether or not "minor leaguers" is something he'd casually say, it is dismissive of either the characters or the actors who play them, depending on how you interpret it. And I can imagine this might cause tension. Not proven, but possible.
I'm also rereading it in light of Rachel Melvin's remark that someone on her first day wasn't so nice but Pinson took her under her wing.
I think...the reason the "minor leaguer" response comes off to me as a nasty swipe at costars, and the reason the interview irks me so much, is the conflict between how serious he sounds and what I've seen him do since I've watched the show. I mean, of all people to hold themselves up as a kind of savior bringing urgency and discipline- the man is famous for raising an eyebrow and squinting. Although I'll grant that none of the younger stars have major league skills with their eyebrows, or any other signature moves, it's not as though he's demonstrated a deep acting talent, imho.
The other thing that bugs me, and that I can imagine would bug others who are directly involved, is the comment about intensity. That's directly dismissive of the efforts people made over the months that The Eyebrow was in a coma, giving the reader the impression that they were all just kind of screwing around. And, again, there's this weirdness about The Eyebrow talking like he's going to whip them into shape.
I go back to that Rachel Melvin interview with that comment, too, because I think she's very serious about what she does, and while she can't carry the show I don't get the impression that she's just screwing around on set. Same with the other younger actors. They may not all be good, and very few of them connect with the audience that well, but they seem to make a solid effort. As I'm sure the other people behind-the-scenes do, with the possible exception of the writers who are crapping this stuff out.
Also, it's interesting this idea that there he perceived a different attitude and alleged lack of intensity when he wasn't around, but when it was seeming like he was coming back it got all "intense" again. Suggests to me that maybe people were more relaxed about things- though not necessarily less intense- when he wasn't there.
And the arrogance that flows through the article- coming from someone else I wouldn't necessarily mind. But if that's how he comes off in print, I can only imagine how it is with him in person. He doesn't come across as the type who would lead to a relaxed atmosphere on set, imho.
I could rant about this guy for hours, but my point is that while the article doesn't prove backstage tension, I totally see where it could lead to some disagreement and tension.
Also, I don't so much care if he's right in a factual sense with his comments (he's about half-right, I'd say). I just come from the school of thought that says if you're going to start talking in interviews all "honest" and stuff you'd best have the skills to back it up. This man does not. Though I wonder how well he'd do with a real, final death scene...they should give him one so he can be all urgent and professional and major league with it (frickin...without Eileen Davidson & Reilly's 90's I think he would've faded away a long time ago).
THANK YOU PX780! I AGREE 100% WITH EVERY DAMN THING YOU JUST SAID.
Post of the day right here!