this post was submitted on 05 Feb 2025
219 points (97.0% liked)
entertainment
112 readers
5 users here now
founded 2 years ago
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Then maybe you should have thought of that before becoming "that guy who played Zuckerberg". Eisenberg had plenty of movies he could have made instead I'm sure.
This is the dumbest comment I've read so far this week.
Thanks bro. I mean I was just trying to say he could have chosen to not portray a dude who was still alive and could potentially be an asshole in the future.
Actors choose to play people who are already assholes. They don't feel the need to say they don't agree the values of super sadistic mass murderer number 5. This guy did a dramatized documentary film and is now clarifying he doesn't like the original person's values, just acting. It should be unnecessary, but he feels he needs to clarify. A role doesn't equal they admire the character. He's clarifying for people like you who assume it does.
What? Of course the role and actor are separate. But if he doesn't want to be associated with his previous roles then he should go back in time and not portray the guy he doesn't want to be associated with. If he can't do that, then he has to live with the association and make the most of it, like he is trying to do with the rest of his comments about Zuckerberg.
The movie exposed the masses to zuck's shittyness, and he's an actor who vaguely looks like him.
Be mad at him for his Lex Luthor and that one movie Vivarium
Why would I be mad at him?
Have you seen Vivarium?
Yeah good point