Who does he think he's fooling? I know the annual celebrity birthday announcements for July 3 would have one think he w
-
Belleluvsroses — 19 years ago(August 19, 2006 09:16 PM)
So he knocked five years off of his age, or was told by his agent to do so. BIG f'ing DEAL!!THAT'S been done in the acting world since time began. He was supposed to be playing a young man around 21, 22. If teens had thought of him as twenty - eight, they'd have thought him a bit too old for the part. Only Henry Winkler was able to get away with playing the part of a young man that he was in real life about ten years older than. And, while Micheal wasn't a bad actor, let's face it, he was no Henry Winkler. YO!!
Belle -
TrentinaNE — 19 years ago(August 19, 2006 10:13 PM)
The thing is, I knew when The Mod Squad was on that he was in his late 20s and that Clarence was even older, because their ages were reported in teen magazines at the time. It was no big deal then, but sometime afterwards, Michael apparently started shaving years off his age. It just strikes me as odd when the real information is out there.
Whatever. -
mmilliken47 — 18 years ago(September 11, 2007 06:14 PM)
I just found an old TV Guid article from 1969 that had him at 25. It was July of 69, so if the interview was done after his birthday, it means the birthdate is 1944, if done before, it was 1943.
No biggie, he's still the best! -
cooperhmc — 17 years ago(May 03, 2008 04:53 PM)
If you go to the interviews section (the interview with Michael Cole) on the " Unofficial Mod Squad" site, it mentions there that Michael was 25 when he got the "MOD Squad" gig. That would make his birthdate July 1943 and I have seen it cited as this elsewhere (Wikipedia I think). So, he shaved two years of his age - it wasn't unusual to do that at the time as there was a tendency to cast people who were a bit more 'mature' in younger roles. Does it make me think any less of him? No - not at all - what on earth does it matter?! Doesn't detract from my enjoyment of the show at all.
-
heathentart — 17 years ago(August 03, 2008 02:23 PM)
I think you need a hobby, or, at the very least, a life. What a nothing to get excited about. Age only matters in cases of rape or incest. Other than that, it's a useless label that gives no weight to anyone's life or accomplishments.
Michael Cole was a delightful piece of eye-candy in his 20s, and is a quite handsome man now, regardless of age. I enjoy all his performances, and just wish he got more work. -
alf
16d0
ie4ever2 — 18 years ago(December 16, 2007 09:45 PM)1945 Sounds about right to me. Ever think the article from the Sun-Sentinel or tv guide got it wrong?(Like they have on dozens of things).
If you have ever seen Michael on "Gunsmoke" he looks very very young(21 and not 26 by your records). Try and find actual proof he's not the age he claims. And btw, so what!!! -
mmilliken47 — 18 years ago(December 19, 2007 08:19 PM)
There's a fan site that's probably more reliable than IMdB, which also has lots of mistakes, that gives his birthday as 1942. If his first role was in 1961, 1942 makes more sense. But I agree so what? Who cares? If his birthdate isn't 1945, I don't think he was trying to be deceitful. Someone just probably made a mistake somewhere. He has a special place in my heart no matter how old he is. I watched "Mr. Brooks" just so I could enjoy his four lines. He still looks good to me. Guess I'm old, too.
-
kell4649 — 18 years ago(December 21, 2007 08:31 PM)
I also remember Cole and Clarence Williams III being listed as 25 by TV guide in the series first season.Somewhere else I saw Cole's age as being 28. And Clarence Williams would have to have been 29 or 30 when the show started. I would swear that Peggy Lipton, now listed as born in 1946, was listed as born in 1947 when the series first hit the air in 1968.
111c
Sure a lot of hollywood stars shave a few years off their age but this group has been all over the lot for decades now. It might be by design rather than by accident. I have read that they were very clicquish (Sp?)during their Mod Squad days and gave "outsiders" a hard time.
At any rate it is interesting now because the show is finally being released on dvd and I look forward to seeing the early episodes again in their entirety. -
mmilliken47 — 18 years ago(December 27, 2007 04:43 PM)
Definitely check out the DVD. I got it for Christmas. The reproduction is really good quality and the featurettes are nice, too. I had a bootleg DVD of the entire series that was pretty poor quality and some of the episodes had been trimmed for commercials, etc., so this release is a real treat. The second half of season one comes out in March.
Whatever their ages really were, the all look heartbreakingly young. Especially in the pilot episode. It made me want to cry, all the time that has gone by.