|
|
Post by tipou on Jan 10, 2009 15:20:05 GMT
ok, so, this thread is planned to be as subjective, irreverent, and silly as can be. talk about going out on a limb...
but i am, deep inside, seriously (!!!) trying to establish a theory.
you may have learned the theory already emitted by a reporter regarding jeff brigdge's hair length, and the state of his career. seems everytime he has long hair: good movie. short hair: lousy or lowly commercial opportunity.
case to the point: the big lebowski: long hair. against all odds: short hair. the theory may certainly be contradicted with other examples, but...
the question is: what is an actor's hair in relation to his work? you know that hugh grant (though not as bad an actor as many rufians want to believe) made a fortune with his mop. and anyone having gone to a hair salon in the last 10 years knows what meg ryan's hair has done for her fame. and, also, the absence of hair might be a plus for actors' bank accounts: consider bruce willis.
you know where i am going with this, right?
is there any way to formulate a theory about rufus sewell's remarkable hair relatively to his roles, career, or personality at different times of his life?
be serious now. this is scientific. talking about science, jacob hood has short hair.
|
|
|
|
Post by tipou on Jan 12, 2009 5:02:17 GMT
but it's a true scandal!
here i am, trying to add scientific depth to our little group, and no one takes interest.
ok! there you go. i will then rant on my own.
oh! the tragedy, the loneliness of the true scientist...
so let us establish a few statements about the hairy topic:
seems that, often when rufus plays a king, he has a minimum of head pilosity - charles II, tristan & isolde.
the most romantic roles - the more curls.
when rufus wants the most to be recognized as an actor, the more his hair suffer - case to the point: amazing grace.
bad roles, bad hair days: she creature, bless the child.
but "good" baddy roles seem to command the legendary rufusian mop to be greased down into a hopeless pancake. consider "zorro", and "the illusionist".
there seems to be an unproportionate number of female co-stars who feel compelled to run adoring hands through his hair whenever kissing him onscreen (that is, when he has hair to be so stroked). comparisons might be drawn to film treatment of hugh grant's formidable "pompadour": mr. grant prefers to do the hair-striking himself (from what i heard, to the rate of a contractual minimum of two self-hairstrokes per movie).
torture committed towards sewellian "chevelure" often includes the use of the most ridiculous wigs ever conceived by the sometimes very sick minds of humans and directors (often two different species): even, from photos i saw, a blond one - i already signaled this awful crime to the concerned authorities.
a couple of "coiffures" performed upon the head of the Green-Eyed Wonder still defy any theory tempted so far by this here researcher. namely, those exhibited in "taming of the shrew" and the american show "eleventh hour". the fact that these two very different roles also involve quite specific differences in the choice of clothing (dark jackets for dr. hood, mini-skirt for petrucchio) might sometime become the subject of a distinct thesis.
those preliminary observations will be completed as i research more movies by this interesting specimen.
|
|
|
|
Post by ukelelehip on Jan 12, 2009 7:40:09 GMT
bad roles, bad hair days: she creature Oh, I love talking Roof hair! And I beg to differ on "She Creature", that's a mighty fine mop on display:  Also, I don't like his haircut on EH (at least the episodes I've seen, I need to catch up big time). It's really bothering me to the point where I can't focus on the plot and just keep thinking "Rufus, please get a haircut". Not good. |
|
|
|
Post by tipou on Jan 12, 2009 11:40:32 GMT
uke, thank you for your input on the hair topic. the ice is now broken, by the message board leader, no less. this here pro-board has now entered the science world.
nothing like a very large picture to destroy a scientific statement, right? i like how you went right to the point and torpedoed mine.
yes, indeed, fine mop up there on the guy. fine guy underneath the mop.
i guess that my general distaste of the movie - except the love scene, 'fcourse - clouded my scientific judgment. also, viewing a very slightly lit movie on you tube is not the best way to get a clear picture of dark hair, i should have considered that.
but... is that a self-hairstroking gesture a la hugh grant that i see there? please tell me it is a head-scratching one, so i do not see another of my statement utterly shattered by one movie still. i kind of remember that rufus' character had plenty of reason for head scratching moments.
|
|
|
|
Post by ukelelehip on Jan 12, 2009 17:41:23 GMT
I don't remember if he's stroking stroking or scratching, all I know is that it's teh sex and that's really all that matters, right?
I'd like to see you deconstruct the Middlemarch 'do!
|
|
|
|
Post by GreenEyesToo on Jan 12, 2009 18:06:09 GMT
the most romantic roles - the more curls. when rufus wants the most to be recognized as an actor, the more his hair suffer Hmmmmmm......... Dirty Weekend = Rufus as a sleazebag.....  .......curls! Victory = not exactly a good guy......  .....curls! A Knight's Tale = baddie to the extreme....oh, lookie here......  .....more curls! And I'm with Uke - I lurrrrrve his hair in She-Creature. ;D |
|
|
|
Post by robbiesheik on Jan 12, 2009 18:22:34 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by tipou on Jan 12, 2009 18:27:38 GMT
to GE2:
ah ha!! my theory is challenged.
ok. lets refine the previous affirmations.
bad guy = curly hair + five o'clock shadow.
romantics = curly hair only.
you thought you would destroy my thesis so easily?
(good god, those photos are GREAT. i LOVE when you girls accompany your objections with p-roof - got it? got it?)
|
|
|
|
Post by tipou on Jan 12, 2009 18:32:02 GMT
I don't remember if he's stroking stroking or scratching, all I know is that it's teh sex and that's really all that matters, right? I'd like to see you deconstruct the Middlemarch 'do! deconstruction is not among my scientific methods of choice. i pant, sometimes i drool, but i rarely deconstruct. also, i still have not seen middlemarch. until i have the chance to see it, i have taken out the george eliot collection from the "english studies" box, but, frankly, my heart is not into it. |
|
|
|
Post by tipou on Jan 12, 2009 18:37:48 GMT
to: robbieshiek
thank you for your support of my theory.
i must observe that your first photo brought sweat to my forehead.
not so sure about the glasses, though... let me have another look...
unscientific comment: rufus's hair in zorro = a bloody crime.
|
|
|
|
Post by ukelelehip on Jan 12, 2009 20:12:31 GMT
also, i still have not seen middlemarch. until i have the chance to see it, i have taken out the george eliot collection from the "english studies" box, but, frankly, my heart is not into it. Watch it. You'll be into it, trust me.  It's also not his real hair, it's a wig. That doesn't redeem the look though, imho. |
|
|
|
Post by GreenEyesToo on Jan 12, 2009 20:28:55 GMT
bad guy = curly hair + five o'clock shadow. romantics = curly hair only. The Woodlanders = Giles = good guy .....  .....= curls + five o'clock shadow + romantic = theory debunked  Yup!! (Laura - that first one = my favourite curls, too!) |
|
|
|
Post by ukelelehip on Jan 12, 2009 20:44:57 GMT
Thesis not just debunked but trounced! Giles is the best guy ever.
|
|
|
|
Post by GreenEyesToo on Jan 12, 2009 20:52:28 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by tipou on Jan 12, 2009 22:35:19 GMT
bad guy = curly hair + five o'clock shadow. romantics = curly hair only. The Woodlanders = Giles = good guy ..... .....= curls + five o'clock shadow + romantic = theory debunked Yup!! (Laura - that first one = my favourite curls, too!) nooo. i refuse to be defeated by one hairdo.  only one of my scientific assertion needs reworking. i need more experimentation. i have not seen this movie. i believe i ordered it, i will respond later.  (thank you for the proof, once more. god! this guy is HHOOTT). (i apologize for the lack of scientific seriousness of previous line.) |
|
