Hey Charles! Who gives a fuck?!!!!!

Funny enough, Jordan Peele played with an aspect of this issue in a Key and Peele sketch.

http://www.cc.com/video-clips/8oygnl/key…

So Jackson is wrong because Charles believes method acting is the one and only true form of acting and because white people do it too?

This is a new low, even for Mudede.

Jackson can act just fine, he just doesn't do it a lot.

Mudede, one thing I know is you're not an African-American. Do not attempt to speak for us American-born blacks. How dare you think you have the understanding os what it means to be black in this country. Have you heard of the term "Uncle Tom"? Well, you're the epidemy of an uncle tom. Btw, Samuel Jackson can act, and he's more successful than you'll ever be.
I also read an article of yours about that white-owned restaurant who is masquerading as if it's black owned. Most Seattle Blacks won't step foot in there simply because it's gentrification at its best. How can they do it as well or better than the folks who invented waffles and chicken combination? This is what it means to take over land and move in and appropriate spaces of where POC once lived and made a living.
Shame on you for also appropriating of what we blacks think and feel about OUR once owned and operated lands of the CD, and the south area. You as a native African you can't possibly talk fo us blacks, no more than we could talk for Africans. When you do this, you're speaking and acting like the very people who have criminally monopolize every fraction of the world.
Give us a break and speak nicely about the people who originate from the very lands you know as home. Help turn the tides around the stigma of the African American, we need you and all the media to be as positive as possible when whitesplaining blacks.

Damn Charles!!!!! #6 done handled your ass!!!!!

@6 Do you hear that, Charles? You aren't authentic because you aren't lowbrow enough, with your fancy French philosophy. Only victimized, chicken-and-waffle eating blacks who live in delapidated neighborhoods are real and can have any opinions.

I guess Charles never saw Pulp Fiction.

Good Evening Charles,
I too, am not a fan of Samuel L. Jackson. He was OK in "Pulp Fiction" but I don't believe I've seen him in any other challenging roles. That said, I too disagree with what he said.

Great actors and actresses come in all colors, nationalities and genders. You're correct. Many anglophones white, black and everything in between have had success in Hollywood. Recall that white Brits Cary Grant, Vivian Leigh, Charles Laughton and Michael Caine have all had tremendous cinema careers. There's no reason why their fellow black British citizens can't as well.

Note that American actors Forest Whitaker & Don Cheadle (one of favorites) portrayed a British soldier (in "The Crying Game") and a Rwandan hotel clerk (In "Hotel Rwanda") respectively. They were outstanding in their roles. Here's the deal. If an actor or actress is good, they can work anywhere in the English speaking world.

@10 Whitaker was also really good as Idi Amin in The Last King of Scotland, I thought.

@6) My feeling is you have no idea that black American culture is the dominant black culture in the world. Its images and sounds are consumed and reproduced by black Africans, black Europeans, and black Brazilians. Black America is the center of world blackness. I hope that gives a little more perspective.

Charles I do hope that you realized as you posted this article you would get the sort of response you are getting.

@6,

Epidemy? I think you meant epitome. Spellcheck frequently mangles my stuff, too.

I'm not going to comment on this, because I'm not Black, and I don't feel I've got any business telling Black people (whether born in America or Zimbabwe or elsewhere) what to think about Black issues. I am however interested in listening to more conversations like this one. I have a lot to learn, and I'm grateful to have this opportunity to take in the various perspectives. More articles such as this, which seem to stimulate a much needed discussion of race in America, would be welcome.

Doesn't SLJ's statements somewhat boil down to the whole "They took our jobs" sentiment blaming those of other nationalities with jobs for ones own lack of work? It seems he has a sense of entitlement in feeling that American roles should only be played by Americans, when in reality it is more likely that the Brit who auditioned was the best person for the job.

@11,
I forgot. Indeed, Whitaker was excellent in "The Last King of Scotland".

This whole fabricated controversy is another great example of Americans being below average in every category other than self-confidence.

@12, now not only are you the sole arbiter and judge of acting methods, but you are also the world expert on all black culture in the world.

In less than a day, you've gone from a lack of intellect and perspective to a lack of humility and perspective. How much longer until you realize you've made a fool of yourself?

@19, im done with you. you are a dead end.

@20, projecting much?

@4 No, Jackson is wrong because his position is fucking stupid. Charles just points out a few relevant, industry issues that make his position seem extra, extra stupid.

But that may just be me. I've never really felt that we should be committed to this stringent identity casting. My college's communications program is regionally known as a great place to study performance, which is the discipline of trying to learn important lessons about people and cultures by preforming as them.

It's anti-intellectual and stupid to complain that a talented actor shouldn't have a role because of there background. It might be frustrating for others, but we should avoid pointing to individual people and saying, "That person right there has no right to work and be successful."

P.S. you wrote this with no reference to Chiwetel Ejiofor?

P.P.S. How do you pronounce Chiwetel Ejiofor? I've been saying it, "the-black-guy-from-ser-en-i-ty-no-no-not-ron-glass-the-other-guy"

@22, I was hoping he'd defend his "method acting or bust" diatribe so I could point out the times when method actors were character actors. Parts like Sir Patrick Stewart's portrayal of Charles Xavier.

Sadly, expecting nuanced responses from Mudede is even more futile than expecting nuanced "stories" or "news" from him.

@25: It is always funny watching Mudede flail about when asked to explain the most basic points or inconsistencies with his writing, though.

Rare he gets so flustered he throws a tantrum and goes home though.

He reminds me a lot of an English 101 student. So convinced they are clever, but unable to articulate any kind of response to the most basic criticism or questioning.

Charles your negativity in life is downright pathetic. I know it's been a long cold winter but damn man you are the Strangers head Negative Nancy. You need some of that Zimbabwe sun and maybe a little exercise to get your blood boiling in the right direction. I know Seattle is the complaining Capitol of the States and you'll always have a little fan club of other cry babies that need acceptance but I do believe most informed readers of this magazine( not newspaper) view you and your writing as nothing more then a pile of boredom which doesn't sway anyone's opinion on any issue. Don't worry big dawg summer's a comin'.

@26, I hear you. His writing reminds me of my high school Creative Writing class, where some students got As just for incorporating words like angst and rubicon rather than writing a story.

All style, no substance.

I hate it when Canadians play Americans. Canadian William Shatner played American Captain Kirk and it was just awful. I also hated Roddy McDowell as an ape. Couldn't they have found a real talking ape? Sheesh.

Samuel L. Jackson isn't a "method actor" as the term is generally understood in the industry, that is, the sort of actor who so immerses themselves into the given circumstances of the character they portray that at a certain level it becomes nearly impossible for them (and often for the audience) to separate the two. In fact, he's pretty much a textbook example of the opposite of that: every role is simply a variation of his own self and personality, which is not so much subsumed into the role, but rather layered over the top of it. Rarely does one view one of Jackson's performances and think, "he embodied that part so authentically I could really believe he WAS that person!", because that's not why directors hire him. They hire him to be "Samuel L. Jackson" and to bring to any given role the familiar character foibles that audiences have come to expect; and there's nothing wrong with that, because clearly he's been very successful at doing what he does. But, it also represents a very limiting form of performance.

Which points up why British, classically-trained performers are so often sought out for more challenging roles; not because they're necessarily strict adherents of "the method" (a style that in any case has fallen somewhat out-of-favor in the past several decades), but because their more comprehensive training has given them a very strong foundation, not just in technique, but in covering a much wider range of character types than American actors, coming out of the academic diploma-mills that typify most college-level, non-conservatory drama programs, generally get. American actors tend to get locked into their "type" very early on in their careers, and even if they demonstrate some facility with a broader range of characters, well, there are plenty of other actors out there who can fill those roles as well, so pigeon-holing is always an issue. Successful actors generally tend to work within the limitations imposed on them by directors and casting people and play to their strengths; Jackson does this very well. Brits, on the other hand, have more of an advantage in this regard, because their training system encourages and promotes actors pushing outside of their comfort zones in terms of the roles they take, so the Hollywood-style compartmentalization tends not to be as much of an issue for them - at least not until they get to Hollywood.

Relevant to this conversation: Samuel L. Jackson reconsidered his comments in response to a Facebook post by Gloria Tafa.