Adam Lambert: Stop being a drama queen
Rolling Stone
Dear Glambert,
Stop being an idiot. If it were discrimination, you wouldn't have the job in the first place. Being comfortable in your own skin is completely separate from attempting to be in someone else's skin aka ACTING.
As you also conveniently noted, the entire production cast was filled with homosexual people (like this is some sort of revelation in theater) and guess what, when they went on stage they had to act like the people they were portraying as well. That acting involves taking on and adapting traits that aren't normally part of what you do might be shocking to you but it isn't shocking to....well... actors.
Last I checked Joseph, Moses brother, wasn't a gay man and in fact had a wife. Sorry if you had to act like a man that liked women when portraying a man who likes woman. Again, this is why it is called, acting.
Love your talent, get over yourself in the other areas, and next time you claim discrimination, make sure it is for something legitimate rather than... I had to act like the guy I was hired to portray as an actor.
Sincerely,
Nick
Quote:
On experiencing discrimination:
A few years ago, I did a musical with Val Kilmer, The Ten Commandments at the Kodak Theatre in Los Angeles. I was finally personally awakened, wearing nail-polish, feeling attractive and comfortable in my own skin for the first time. We'd go out sometimes with Val, and it was the first time I'd ever been around a celebrity ? it felt really fabulous. One night, we hung out at his house and Sean Lennon came over to jam with us. I was like, John Lennon's son? This is the coolest thing I've done in my life. But I had a lot of problems with the people putting on the show. One day, the director pulled me aside and said, "Can you turn it down? The producers are a little uncomfortable. It's a little too ... gay." I was like, "Um, are we doing a musical here? I'm sorry, there are fags all over the place, dude." It was very upsetting.
On experiencing discrimination:
A few years ago, I did a musical with Val Kilmer, The Ten Commandments at the Kodak Theatre in Los Angeles. I was finally personally awakened, wearing nail-polish, feeling attractive and comfortable in my own skin for the first time. We'd go out sometimes with Val, and it was the first time I'd ever been around a celebrity ? it felt really fabulous. One night, we hung out at his house and Sean Lennon came over to jam with us. I was like, John Lennon's son? This is the coolest thing I've done in my life. But I had a lot of problems with the people putting on the show. One day, the director pulled me aside and said, "Can you turn it down? The producers are a little uncomfortable. It's a little too ... gay." I was like, "Um, are we doing a musical here? I'm sorry, there are fags all over the place, dude." It was very upsetting.
Dear Glambert,
Stop being an idiot. If it were discrimination, you wouldn't have the job in the first place. Being comfortable in your own skin is completely separate from attempting to be in someone else's skin aka ACTING.
As you also conveniently noted, the entire production cast was filled with homosexual people (like this is some sort of revelation in theater) and guess what, when they went on stage they had to act like the people they were portraying as well. That acting involves taking on and adapting traits that aren't normally part of what you do might be shocking to you but it isn't shocking to....well... actors.
Last I checked Joseph, Moses brother, wasn't a gay man and in fact had a wife. Sorry if you had to act like a man that liked women when portraying a man who likes woman. Again, this is why it is called, acting.
Love your talent, get over yourself in the other areas, and next time you claim discrimination, make sure it is for something legitimate rather than... I had to act like the guy I was hired to portray as an actor.
Sincerely,
Nick
Comments
Rolling Stone
Dear Glambert,
Stop being an idiot. If it were discrimination, you wouldn't have the job in the first place. Being comfortable in your own skin is completely separate from attempting to be in someone else's skin aka ACTING.
As you also conveniently noted, the entire production cast was filled with homosexual people (like this is some sort of revelation in theater) and guess what, when they went on stage they had to act like the people they were portraying as well. That acting involves taking on and adapting traits that aren't normally part of what you do might be shocking to you but it isn't shocking to....well... actors.
Last I checked Joseph, Moses brother, wasn't a gay man and in fact had a wife. Sorry if you had to act like a man that liked women when portraying a man who likes woman. Again, this is why it is called, acting.
Love your talent, get over yourself in the other areas, and next time you claim discrimination, make sure it is for something legitimate rather than... I had to act like the guy I was hired to portray as an actor.
Sincerely,
Nick
I agree with you on the acting thing, but other than that, it seems you know nothing about Adam Lambert, and are pretty much attacking him for being gay. Not once in any interview, including this one, has he seemed to be presenting himself an a way that would be called "drama queenish".
I agree with you on the acting thing, but other than that, it seems you know nothing about Adam Lambert, and are pretty much attacking him for being gay. Not once in any interview, including this one, has he seemed to be presenting himself an a way that would be called "drama queenish".
Don't be an idiot. It is you who know nothing and must resort to name calling.
I actually saw the Ten Commandments at the Kodiak theater. I regularly do theater productions and in fact I am in one now. I do not personally know Adam Lambert but you don't either and have come to your conclusions much like everyone else has by watching American Idol and associate fluff interviewed related to it.
BTW, this article is indeed different from every other article in that it is the first time he has addressed his sexuality head on and answered questions related to it instead of sidestepping it. So of course it is also the first time he has been asked and answered questions related to possibly being discriminated against for being gay.
The point is that his answer for being discriminated against was in no form or fashion discrimination. He was easily hired for work and it was based purely on his talent. He was given direction about his acting and FROM THE DIRECTOR. It didn't even come from an inappropriate source for example. It wasn't like it was the producer asking him to be less flamboyant backstage or something of that nature. Lambert's example was not discrimination, it was acting direction and as someone who does theater I have heard it dozens of times over the years given to my fellow actors when they happen to be gay and that was from a half dozen well intentioned caring and yes even at times, gay directors as well.
Tell me what makes you an expert Tonton or are you content to just accuse others?
I said I agreed with you in regards to taking acting direction.
Don't be an idiot. It is you who know nothing and must resort to name calling.
I actually saw the Ten Commandments at the Kodiak theater. I regularly do theater productions and in fact I am in one now. I do not personally know Adam Lambert but you don't either and have come to your conclusions much like everyone else has by watching American Idol and associate fluff interviewed related to it.
BTW, this article is indeed different from every other article in that it is the first time he has addressed his sexuality head on and answered questions related to it instead of sidestepping it. So of course it is also the first time he has been asked and answered questions related to possibly being discriminated against for being gay.
The point is that his answer for being discriminated against was in no form or fashion discrimination. He was easily hired for work and it was based purely on his talent. He was given direction about his acting and FROM THE DIRECTOR. It didn't even come from an inappropriate source for example. It wasn't like it was the producer asking him to be less flamboyant backstage or something of that nature. Lambert's example was not discrimination, it was acting direction and as someone who does theater I have heard it dozens of times over the years given to my fellow actors when they happen to be gay and that was from a half dozen well intentioned caring and yes even at times, gay directors as well.
Tell me what makes you an expert Tonton or are you content to just accuse others?
So maybe it's your ignorance of the colloquial usage of the term "drama queen" that has caused this little spat?
I said I agreed with you in regards to taking acting direction.
My colloquial usage has always included both genders and preferences.
Sorry if yours doesn't and sorry if you take out your limited worldview and ignorance created by it out on others with baseless accusations.
Oh and one last note, Tonton, stop being a drama queen.
My colloquial usage has always included both genders and preferences.
Sorry if yours doesn't and sorry if you take out your limited worldview and ignorance created by it out on others with baseless accusations.
Oh and one last note, Tonton, stop being a drama queen.
Adam Lambert saying he was bothered when told that his performance was "too gay" was not being a drama queen. Your use of the term here fits better. Even better yet would be Carrie Prejean's blaming intolerance of intolerance for the face that she was fired, when the truth is she was fired because she canceled or refused multiple appearances and interviews required of her position as Miss California.
Adam Lambert saying he was bothered when told that his performance was "too gay" was not being a drama queen. Your use of the term here fits better. Even better yet would be Carrie Prejean's blaming intolerance of intolerance for the face that she was fired, when the truth is she was fired because she canceled or refused multiple appearances and interviews required of her position as Miss California.
Interesting you bring that up - have you read about her Larry King interview?
Well, Larry, all I can tell you was this basically comes down to the answer that I gave the night of the pageant. As you can see, Mr. Lewis does not agree with the stance that I took. I think he's very angry. I think he's hurt. He said in a previous statement that he's deeply saddened and hurt that -- what Carrie Prejean believes in -- a marriage is between a man and a woman. Politics and religion have no play in the Miss California family.
My question is, then why was the question asked at the pageant in the first place? If politics has no role in the pageant, why was I given this question?
...
I've had some inappropriate appearances that Keith Lewis has asked me to do. And I'm sure you're aware of them already -- one of them being Playboy; another one being a reality show which is being filmed in Costa Rica. So had I said yes to these, I mean, I would have been out of the country.
Again, Playboy, I couldn't believe. I was completely shocked that he would even pass this along to me. Another one was a gay movie premiere that he wanted me to attend incognito. He actually said he wanted me to wear a hat and go in disguise and attend this movie premiere promoting gay marriage and then come out with a statement the next day saying that Carrie Prejean attended a gay movie premiere.
...
This isn't about appearances. This isn't about a breach of contract. This is about Keith Lewis not agreeing with the stance that I took on saving traditional marriage. And from day one, he wanted me out.
Now, I don't care a whit about beauty pageants or any of the controversy generated aroung this issue, but the question she poses seems relevant to the issue she has found herself in...
Why was the question asked at the pageant in the first place? If politics has no role in the pageant, why was she given this question? Seems that the stigma of prejudice has transferred from the gays that come out to folks not sufficiently indoctrinated in spouting the PC mantra surrounding the gay marriage controversy.
I would vote against gay marriage, given it came to a vote. I'd also vote against allowing a man to have more than one wife, or a woman more than one husband. It's got nothing to do with being "against gays" and everything to do with what "marriage" means to me.
Making a big deal out of my opinion would qualify one for being a "drama queen".
Adam Lambert saying he was bothered when told that his performance was "too gay" was not being a drama queen.
That is the definition of drama queen. You make drama because you prefer it. Claiming discrimination when "I was like, "Um, are we doing a musical here? I'm sorry, there are fags all over the place, dude,"" shows how ridiculous the claim happens to be. If you are uncomfortable with homosexuality you don't hire an entire room full of gay people and then just happen to call one out for not acting straight IN CHARACTER.
Unless you are a drama queen looking to create some drama in which case you do.
Your use of the term here fits better. Even better yet would be Carrie Prejean's blaming intolerance of intolerance for the face that she was fired, when the truth is she was fired because she canceled or refused multiple appearances and interviews required of her position as Miss California.
Actually the Drama Queen in that instance was Perez Hilton who enjoys drawing genetalia, urine and feces all over people will calling Prejean a "bitch" and "cunt" for not agreeing with his position.
Being a drama queen is pretty much the label for his actual occupation.
um, i am not sure what lambert was complaining about -- his direct language seems to indicate that he was offended by the fact that the director used the term gay as opposed to over dramatic, but it is hard to tell.
as for miss california, does it really matter why she was fired? any number of real reasons exist, from her intolerance (there are ways of saying that you believe that marriage should be defined by religious institutions and not government/the people without coming across as an intolerant moron), to the distraction of her tenure. either way she was reducing the value of the miss usa pageant brand name, and that as far as i can tell is a perfectly legitimate reason for firing someone from what amounts to be a pr agency.
is the broader point, here, nick, that bias doesn't exist? because we have one dead security guard that pretty much refutes that notion...
wow this thread is full of sad.
um, i am not sure what lambert was complaining about -- his direct language seems to indicate that he was offended by the fact that the director used the term gay as opposed to over dramatic, but it is hard to tell.
as for miss california, does it really matter why she was fired? any number of real reasons exist, from her intolerance (there are ways of saying that you believe that marriage should be defined by religious institutions and not government/the people without coming across as an intolerant moron), to the distraction of her tenure. either way she was reducing the value of the miss usa pageant brand name, and that as far as i can tell is a perfectly legitimate reason for firing someone from what amounts to be a pr agency.
is the broader point, here, nick, that bias doesn't exist? because we have one dead security guard that pretty much refutes that notion...
Just another "I don't care if someone is gay, but i don't want it in my face" exclamation.
wow this thread is full of sad.
um, i am not sure what lambert was complaining about -- his direct language seems to indicate that he was offended by the fact that the director used the term gay as opposed to over dramatic, but it is hard to tell.
Is it harder to tell when he defends the claim calling everyone "fags" who shares his orientation? Oh, I'm sure this will fall under the "offense to reclaim a word" bit of nonsensical reasoning.
as for miss california, does it really matter why she was fired? any number of real reasons exist, from her intolerance (there are ways of saying that you believe that marriage should be defined by religious institutions and not government/the people without coming across as an intolerant moron), to the distraction of her tenure. either way she was reducing the value of the miss usa pageant brand name, and that as far as i can tell is a perfectly legitimate reason for firing someone from what amounts to be a pr agency.
is the broader point, here, nick, that bias doesn't exist? because we have one dead security guard that pretty much refutes that notion...
Oh yes... the broader point... as defined by the exception. That is some wonderfully sound reasoning there. Sort of like declaring none of us can be poor because there is one rich guy.
The reality with Ms. Prejean is that the people with the agenda didn't like to be beat at their own game and showed their own tactics to be ten times more offensive while claiming she was imperfect.
Again, this is like you claiming the right to shoot my child because I didn't keep my eye on him 24/7. The reasoning is insane. To hold the same belief as our president but claim it is okay to fire her because he is less articulate in stating it is just spin. Claiming you can reduce the value of a pageant that has had a decade of declining ratings while allowing Perez Hilton to be a judge is just as ridiculous.
The starting of this thread, on the other hand, could be considered a drama queen like behavior. It proactively seeks to create controversy about a topic. It seeks to create drama. Not that this is a bad thing. But if anything here is drama-queen-esque, it is this thread itself.
I don't think Adam's example was technically "discrimination" but it was close enough for a non-technical and non-legal interview in Rolling Stone. It was an example of Adam feeling repressed as a gay man.
If someone were told "act less black", would that be acceptable? At the very least, I think the person who was told that should be able to mention it in an interview without being accused of being a drama queen.
Adam Lambert saying he was bothered when told that his performance was "too gay" was not being a drama queen. Your use of the term here fits better. Even better yet would be Carrie Prejean's blaming intolerance of intolerance for the face that she was fired, when the truth is she was fired because she canceled or refused multiple appearances and interviews required of her position as Miss California.
What I loath about Carrie Prejean is her pre-amble of 'no offence...' which is nothing less than an attempt to declare that everything from that moment on shouldn't be up for any scrutiny. Saying, 'No offence..' is as comical as saying, 'in all due respects....' then launching into a vicious attack. The preamble neither neutralises nor does it immunise the speaker from any criticism. If she has a position then she should be willing to back it up with an argument that has a logical flow to it - not something based on feelings, whims and desires but based on objective reality, rationalism and reason.