Doesn't she hates mixed kids?
-
Arthur_Desmond — 15 years ago(May 22, 2010 12:20 PM)
Like one of her lovers said, "I felt a beautiful warmth with Bardot but found it difficult to discuss things in any depth whatsoever."
Yes, she is a racist. But she could be a PS supporter just as well. Or a Communist supporter. Or a self-styled anarchist. The bottom line is, she is an airhead. She was known for her beauty, not for being especially intelligent. She was not even a good actress. I don't think it really matters what she might say about anything beyond the realm of filmmaking, and her opinion about social or political issues, especially if they're complex and controversial, should have the same value as the opinion of the guy who sells you newspapers every day in your local kiosk.
I frankly don't understand why journalists keep putting microphones in front of the mouths of people whose only job should be to look good and/or convincing on a movie set. Like Hitchcock said, "actors are cattle". Is that so difficult to understand? -
bardotek69 — 15 years ago(May 24, 2010 03:29 PM)
I won't agree.
Brigitte Bardot was not only known for Her beauty. Of course it's the main thing which made Her a star, but She was and still is a perfect mix of wit, humour, sex appeal and intelligence and these altogether made Her a Living Legend.
Some of Her her quotes are delicious and they're remembered by milions to this day. Just a "ravishing idiot" couldn't deliver us those great lines.
And after all, She is, was and always will an Icon and an authority for crowds, so answering your question:
Yes, it does. It does matter.
Viva Bardot! -
bardotek69 — 15 years ago(May 28, 2010 11:02 AM)
If you're calling Brigitte Bardot 'an idiot' that means you're ignorant who doesn't know what is talking about.
Brigitte Bardot is a person with golden heart and great inteligence, and try to learn and read more about Her instead of bulling Her with stupid comments which makes you look like IGNORANT.
Viva Bardot! -
-
Arthur_Desmond — 15 years ago(May 29, 2010 03:30 AM)
I don't know how old that quote is, but John Gilmore (person who said it) must've been referring to a 50s-60s era Bardot. She wasn't educated back then but she did read a lot after she retired from cinema, so I don't know how educated she might be nowadays.
- I'm not sure he was referring to her education level, but to her intellectual capability and back in the 50s-60s it must have been relatively easy to check hers. In fact, it is relatively easy to check it for 4- or 5-year-olds.
"Things of any depth whatsoever" doesn't necessarily restrict to the last book by Althusser or Marcusse. It could have been about her own daily work life, for instance especially if, as you say below, she wasn't such a bad actress after all and thus really had interesting things to talk about with respect to her work life. I've had deep conversations with people who could barely read and write, but who could pulverize any objective IQ test if they had the proper training. - You know how educated she might be, you just have to listen to her interviews. The whole interviews, that is, not excerpts.
I'm not trying to be too argumentative, but have you read any of her books? A lot of her quotes were taken out of context over the years and I get the feeling that people are disappointed because some of the things she said are politically incorrect.
I've read many interviews with her. And excerpts (yes, excerpts, I just couldn't stomach the whole thing) of books. And I understand Gilmore's quote perfectly.
As to her acting abilities, it's subjective. Since she worked with French A-list stars and directors, and even won awards for her acting, she couldn't have been all looks. I think people are just saying she had no talent because she was blonde and sexy.
Same mistake as with Marilyn. She was blonde and troubled (though not as much as Marilyn), hence she isn't so stupid.
Steven Seagal has worked with Tommy Lee Jones, Gary Busey, Brian Cox, Halle Berry, John Leguizamo, Sharon Stone, Kris Kristofferson5b4, Kurt Russell, Michael Caine, R. Lee Ermey, Henry Silva, William Sadler, Patrick O'Neal, William Forsythe, Eric Bogosian,
What awards did she get? Do awards measure real talent? is this your conclusion?
Bardot isn't a very good communicator but she can't be a major airhead. If you read some of her quotes you'll see that she has a gift for rhetoric; and she also managed her money well enough to be able to live well despite not working for almost 40 years.
Can you give me some of those quotes, please? The ones proving she has a gift for rhetoric. They seem to be kind of elusive when I look for them.
I know of porn stars and soccer players who are rich enough now to retire and live from their profits. Not very famous, not very talented. Porn stars who didn't win any AVN award and soccer players who didn't win any World Cup, if awards are so special to you. It doesn't need special talent. It only needs patience (or good guidance from someone, as was the case) and being lucky enough not to get an STD or a serious injury.
Is this a symptom of intelligence to you? Would you trade places with people like this? It isn't to me, and I wouldn't.
- I'm not sure he was referring to her education level, but to her intellectual capability and back in the 50s-60s it must have been relatively easy to check hers. In fact, it is relatively easy to check it for 4- or 5-year-olds.
-
Arthur_Desmond — 15 years ago(May 30, 2010 07:19 AM)
Hitchcock never won an Oscar. Neither did Peter O'Toole. Neither did Deborah Kerr. Some guy called Robert Benton won 3 and History has put him fairly in the limbo of the unknown. I bet you didn't even know him before this message.
Does that mean that Benton is more talented than these people?
Viva Moreau! -
bardotek69 — 15 years ago(May 30, 2010 11:05 AM)
My English isn't perfect and I'm not ashamed of it.
It only shows how narrow-minded actually are YOU, if you don't get the sentence
Which is not good for you.
A child between 4-5 years old would get it, I think
Viva Bardot! -
Arthur_Desmond — 15 years ago(May 30, 2010 06:25 PM)
Beautiful soundtrack by Delerue. Wonderfully pathetic role by Piccoli a cuckold in the physical sense, and also in the existential one. Altogether creative, as (nearly) always, direction by Godard. Even Palance did his job well.
And then there was this ditzy blonde who looked gorgeous what was her name
oh damn. Won't remember. Well the only thing she had to do is look gorgeous. That's why the film was great. Everyone did what they could, to the limit of2000 their possibilities.
Don't blame yourself. I'm sure you're still young enough to find a vocational career, in spite of all the hours of cold sweat and bitten lips in front of the computer in a dark room. I'm sure you can perform to the limit of your own possibilities as well.
Viva Moreau! -
bardotek69 — 15 years ago(May 31, 2010 01:28 AM)
It's quite pathetic that you don't remember name of the woman in whose message board you're writing now
Do you have a goldfish's memory or something?
BTW, my life is my own thing and I can do whatever I want, and it's not your business.
And I truly think you're speaking up for yourself. I'm even sure
PS: It's sad that you're watching such a boring beep like 'Le Mepris' in your spare time. I wouldn't waste my time that much.
Unfortunately, the film is one big BOREDOM. In my opinion Brigitte is the only point to see the movie.
And that's all.
Viva Bardot!
