From: mins@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (timothy.j.mizerak)
Subject: Re: DOOL: Christie Clark [Carrie]
Keywords: what a cutie!
Organization: AT&T
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 12:56:19 GMT

In article <Dec.30.23.10.17.1992.7278@gandalf.rutgers.edu> shagan@gandalf.rutgers.edu (Susan R. Hagan) writes:
>
>She doesn't look much different to me than she did then.  Whenever she
>kisses Austin, I think "What does she think she's doing?  She's just a
>little kid". 


Gosh, if *anyone* kissed Austin I think I'd have to say "What does
she think she's doing?!?"  :)

> I'm happy to see an actor grow up in a roll.  Thats not
>my point.  I'm just saying that, *for me* - since I didn't see her as
>a teenager - only at 12 and then at 19, it is a bit of a jolt.


Okay, I understand with the "for me" part in there.  Of course, we can't
blame the show for stuff like this.  I do think they did well by getting
her back.


>>I don't find her wooden, but I suppose that compared to the wild
>>overacting that Tracy spewed forth, it might appear that way.
>
>I agree that Tracy overdid it in the beginning, but I think she mellowed
>out a lot and got much better.  Christie is very low-key, which is a big
>contrast.


Tracy did get much better, a lot like a canker sore gets better.  It's
horrible at first, then not so bad.  But it still sucks!  :)


>>But they are sooooooooooooooooooo bad.   I'm not sure that Meryll Streep
>>could make those two look better.   I know that you consider Crystal a
>>good actress, but you don't think she makes RKK look better, do you?
>>Not to mention that poor Christie is out-numbered.  :)
>
>They aren't that bad.  They aren't going to win any awards, but there have
>been muuuuuuuccccchhh worse.  Not that that is any exuse, but they just
>don't bother me, except when they pretend to be musicians.


Who has been worse?  Who?  I can't think of anyone.  I liked Hawk and
Isabella scores more than these two.  At least I could list a few redeeming
things about them.   If I went back I might say that Emilio *approached*
their horribleness, and RKK is right up there too, but that's about it.
Oh yeah, Pete Jannings was pretty bad too.  Okay, that's five.  They're
two of the worst five ever, IMO of course.


>Yes, I think Crystal is a good actress, but RKK is good also, but neither one
                                            not not not  :)


>of them are great.  I guess it takes more than simply a good actor to make
>a lesser actor look better - I guess it takes a great actor to do that. 
>Julie makes everyone look good - for example.

So true.


>>2.  Her portrayal of Carrie was completely inconsistent with the
>>previous portrayals.   When a character is recast it is just that, the
>>casting of a different actor to play the SAME character.  If they 
>>wanted someone new they would have just dreamed up a new character.
>
>Don't you think the writers have a bit to do with that too?  I
>don't think it was Tracy's fault that she was written as a shallow
>showoff.  


I really believe that it is a 50/50 thing.   The same lines can be
read but interpreted much differently depending on *how* they are
read.   I just can't believe that they were writing Carrie one way,
then they totally changed course for a new actress, then went right
back to the way it was for the old actress.   Look at the new 
Vivian, Marj whateverhernameis.   She really gives you the *feel*
of Vivian.  Ariana Chase has also given the feel of Kimberly a few
times, I believe.   


re:  Christie's speech
>Now don't fly off the handle, I'm completely indifferent to her (unlike
>you who adore her) and I'm telling you an honest observation - not a put-down.


I wouldn't say I quite adore her yet.  What I adore is the cessation of
Tracy.  :)   


>>4.  Tracy did a terrible job of showing the different facets of Carrie.
>>One second she is a bitch, the next she is vulnerable, the next she is
>>caring and responsible.  But this was never tied together nor done in
>>a believable fashion.  
>
>Again, this has a lot to do the writers also.  I think she showed a lot
>more consistency beginning with her breakup with Lawrence.  She 


I thought she was her best when she realized how bad Lawrence was
and what a fool she was being.   

>>I really don't think it was the result of any bias that we all agreed
>>that Tracy couldn't act.   I've had
>
>I never said that Tracy was a great actress, but I think she did a good
>job.  You think swas an atrocious actress, but I think that opinion
>is compounded by the fact that you were watching when Carrie was
>defined, and so when they changed her, you rejected it.  Which you
>should - its perfectly reasonable.


This isn't really accurate.  I didn't watch from Feb 89 - June 91
and missed all the Carrie teenager stuff.  The last I remember she
was a pre-teen.  But I do see your point.


>When an actress is hired to take over a role, are they expected to play
>it the same way as their predecessor?  No.  It is called Making the
>charactor your own.  


True, but I don't think they should change it so drastically except
in cases where the character still hasn't really been defined, like
with Jack.   The two Jacks before Matt were very mediocre and 
unremarkable, so a fresh new character worked fine.

Anyway, I really can't even say that I'm enjoying Christie all that
much because the storyline is just *so* stupid!  I do hope they get
her away from Austin!


>Susan R. Hagan (shagan@gandalf.rutgers.edu) 

Tim


Intriguing lyric of the week:  (send guesses via email)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
   "You're a human sacrifice to the goddess of ice
    Your hairdo is full of diamonds and rice."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

      _ _ _ _ L _    by   _ _ _   _ _ _ _ _ _ 
-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|  What is it up in the air for?                :   Timothy Mizerak        |
|  It's going to fall if it's there for long.   :   tm@mhnmc.att.com       |
|  It's over, it's over me.             R.E.M.  :                          |