Yeah, it felt more like reliving it, which is an entirely different kettle of fish. Admittedly Coel self acted in hers but that whole piece felt transformative and healing at the end. Gadd’s is still left in trauma.
No, I was saying that's where my information came from, from the podcast, not in the sense of it was inferred. But can see how I wrote it would lead you to think that.
But I answered that - I didn’t think that. I didn’t quite know what you thought but you’ve now clarified it yourself, so surely that’s now resolved?
Well you could see controlled reliving in safe circumstances as therapeutic in itself. That’s a large part of TB-CBT (though usually it’s just retelling or imaginal reliving). If that was his intention though, doing it so publicly seems brave, foolhardy and/or really badly thought through.
By not a great actor people mean he isn't good looking don't they?
It’s not about whether he is good-looking or not, it’s the fact that he’s clearly about 10 years older than the character he’s supposed to be playing.
In fairness, that kind of casting isn't new. Howard Stern playing himself in his autobiographical film or the cast of the fictional Da 5 Bloods playing their younger selves but as they are now.
read Gromit's post, that's what I was responding to.
Gavin and Stacy's writer / actors aren't exactly models.
The point of the sidetrack is whether or not Gadd has “processed” the events that happened to him. I’m suggesting that (a) having “processed” events involves objectifying their narrative, so that it can be now observed from the outside; and (b) the fact that Gadd cast himself as the protagonist in a thinly-disguised version of the events doesn’t really fit the idea that he has achieved this distance, given that (c) he in no way could be said to be the ideal actor for the role, in an objective sense.It’s an odd little sidetrack, this.
hmm, I suspect that would be because some people picked out a name from supposed clues within the programme, but that doesn't make those clues accurate, or even clues (necessarily). Sounds like a circular argument.If the 'Darrien' rumour I heard is true, there are certainly some clues in the script which makes me now think Gadd/Netflix knew the people would be identified - or were otherwise quite naïve.
If said rumour is true, would also taint a fav show + put a dark pretty dark spin on one of the episodes
And she's said that she felt exploited by doing it, well no shit, apparently she was expecting a bit more of a sympathetic interview.
Or a bit more money....
Absolutely (I did type something along those lines too but lost it when rewriting my post). It's also important to remember that there was already what seemed a solid candidate which has been denied - it's a dangerous game so maybe I think I'll delete my post.
