Monday, July 31, 2006

OK, SO SOME BLOKE NAMED STEPHEN GYLLENHAAL...

...replied to our questions! I'm not going to comment on them too much now because I want you to get to read them first. I'm so relieved this came to fruition. Did ya keep the faith?

-------------------------
My editor accuses me of being a terrible deadliner--to this I have to say guilty as charged. I've also been known to carry important documents around far too long, since about May 22, I think.
So, now, finally I want to say thank to everyone who contributed tothis Q&A. Some of you I've already met at the reading/signing at Housing Works, and some I know contribute to the online forums and fanblogs. I'm grateful for the interest and support you've given my family and me. I have to admit, as I watch all this interest unfold around me, though, particularly around my kids, I'm often driven to ask, what about each of you? Everyone of us deserves attention. Lots of attention. Each of us deserves our own Q&A. This is one of mine, I guess, though the concept that I really have any answers feels illusory.

Alaina (NY): You are best known for directing feature films. What was the motivation behind publishing a collection of poetry?
Stephen Gyllenhaal: I'd had some poems published in some good literary journals for about three years and I was already surprised and pleased that anyone would want any of my stuff in the first place. Then when a couple of editors in New York read some work I had submitted to a literary journal they worked for and asked if I had more poems to make into a book, I was flattered by their attention and I thought, Let's see where this goes. I'd also say that I never started writing with the intention of getting published. In fact, it was the furthest thing from my mind. I was a bit embarassed about writing poetry, to be honest. It was one ofthe few places in my life where I wasn't trying to show off. For along time it was just an extension of journaling, keeping a diary, almost. But over the years (after friends and family suggested it) I began to circle the idea warily of sending some of my poems out. Then one day I just took a deep breath about three years ago and began sending them out to journals and periodicals.

Anneka (Wales UK): How long have you been accumulating your collection? Is there more to come?
SG: I've been writing poetry, on and off, for about thirty years, but really didn't take it seriously until about ten years ago. Then I actually started finishing poems and putting them in drawers, or when I felt good about them, giving them to friends as birthday or anniversary presents, like Emily Dickinson did. Then I would start to write poems specifically for certain people. Portraits. And sometimes I'd just write to let off some steam, I'm sure you can all relate to that. And yes, there's more to come.

Maxine (London UK): Considering the title of your collection and having read some passages, is it deliberately aimed as a knock at Hollywood life?
SG: I guess I'm inclined to be wary of almost everything in my life. And also curious. Hollywood is and has been a stimulating place to work. But it's also a place my editor calls a city of illusions. Those are the kind of illusions that can destroy your spirit and your will to do the best work you can. And Claptrap has a couple of meanings for me, I guess. It means of collection of junk, or stuff. And I guess I like that as a description of the poems here. It always seems dangerous to take yourself too seriously. And also, I guess the trap of wanting someone to clap for you. A pretty dangerous place to find yourself (I've been there)...you then lose track of who you are, what you are. You're using other people to help you define yourself. I guess that's what worries me about so much of Hollywood (so much of the culture of the US--the rest of the world too, actually)...the idea that when someone recognizes you, claps for you, you're OK. But you're only OK if that's taking place inside of you. With yourself. Not outside.

Sherry (USA): Are the poems in your collection mostly spoken by aversion of yourself or are they sometimes written through different personae?
SG: So far it's pretty much just my voice. But this process of writing is intriguing. I'm sure it's true for a lot of you out there too. It's a journey. I think I've often been too wrapped up in myself--looking out at other people is more and more interesting to me. Right now there are a couple of poems that look at other people. Maybe in the future, I'll take that a step further and use some other people's voices. We'll see.

Susie (Manchester, UK) and Amy (NY): I read in an article regarding your education that the Romantics were influential to you. What was it about them in particular and who are your other influences, literary or otherwise?
SG: The Romantics were anti-Rationalists. They believed that by really listening to your emotions you could find the common threads that bind all human beings together. My background having been formed in what you might call an over-rational environment, I guess you might say this was my kind of rebellion.

Adriana (Romania): What would you define as the American literary canon?
SG: The kind of literature that binds us together as citizens of the same country. This was certainly easier to define in the 19th century,when there where only a few places Americans emigrated from and which had more in common with each other than they do today. But all the writers they taught us in high school, certainly, they are part of the canon. Dickinson, who I mentioned earlier, and Whitman, and Poe, and of course Mark Twain, Emerson, Thoreau, novelists like Wharton and James, Fitzgerald, Saul Bellow, playwrights like Eugene O'Neill and Tennessee Williams... I think there is a literary canon forming today, but I think you're going to find it in other, new places, like in song lyrics and even screenplays. But as I've stumbled into poetry over the years I find there's something inexplicable about it, something inexplicable in all of us that it circles. And finally, I'd be wary of words like canon (the Romantics would've worried about that word). Also, I have a poem called Canon (which, come to think of it, is a bit of someone else's voice, sort of). In that case Canon, is joking around with "cannon." Jokes are good.

Anonymous: Do you feel poetry is becoming a lost art form? Why do you choose this particular form of expression?
SG: Poetry is anything but lost! As I said above, you're going to find it in new places like popular song lyrics. In rap. Rap is amazing.I'm often dazzled by rap. The origins of my poems are the same origins of my work in films--I'm pulled into a scene in my head (often foggy)and do my best to to somehow capture it. Sometimes it works. Sometimes it doesn't. I'm sure a lot of you can relate to that. The one thing I guess I've been growing aware of recently is that I've learned (as I've been kicked around by life) that some things are better thrown away and some things are really worth working on. Sometimes a poem (ora screenplay/or a movie) takes years to get right.

Daniella (New Jersey): Writers seem to have a certain location or time of day when ideas come easiest to them and work is most enjoyable. Doyou have any writing routines?
SG: Writing in the morning. Often very early. Coming out of dreams. I have come to believe that dreams are profoundly important. Profoundly. That Freud was starting to figure out some important things. The Greeks, etc, knew about dreams before, but Freud began to pull dreams into the modern world. The modern world could do with a lot more dreams. So for me the morning is best. Surroundings don't seem to influence me much. I've written and rewritten anywhere. I try to write stuff down when it comes. Like catching fish. If I don't hook them at the time they bite, they sometimes escape.

britpopbaby: I always have difficulty titling my work because it feels like I'm trying to summarise my work in a few words and also feels so final when I'm never completely satisfied. Do you have a similar problem?
and
What are your greatest obstacles when writing?
SG: To answer the first part of your first question, if you'll see each of my poems and how their titles relate to each of them, you'll notice that the title is actually part of the poem. Part of the story, the wholeness of the poem. Not a summation. I guess you could consider some of these titles ironic, kind of a twist on a meaning or perspective. Even a hidden meaning maybe. Think of Crescent Moon or The Enron in My Face. But honestly? They just sort of come to me. Why do they just come to me? Why has it gotten easier as I've gotten older (although I don't think age has anything to do with it--some of the greatest writers were very young)...but for me I think finding titles has gotten easier because I've been knocked around a lot. I don't really give a shit about a lot of things anymore. (I used to worry about so much when I was younger that it just paralyzed me a lot. I had to be perfect. That idea is long gone.) But who cares really anyway? Besides, we each have to wander through this process in our own way, (and not just writing, but living and you'd have to say you can't do one without the other; and I've also found it's the other way around for me too.) And each and everyone of us is miraculous. That's what bothers me so much about almost everything I see in this culture. For instance with my kids and even these questions (to some degree). Each of you is a miraculous creature. Everyone is. Dreaming and scheming and trying to sort out life? And then we go and kill each other for some stupid piece of dirt. Or for gold. Or for a religion (that's the weirdest of all to me). We should be celebrating ourselves (Whitman certainly was into that). And that goes for each of you--it might be intriguing that each of you tries to answer the questions you've given to me. You might find that your answers are far more insightful than what I'm coming up with. Nonetheless, let's keep going....

Lee: What advice would you give to aspiring writers?
SG: I think I just gave it.

Prophecy Girl (Tennessee): I interpreted your poem "Land of the Free" as an expression of your disillusionment with the American cultural and political landscape. Is this an accurate understanding?
SG: I guess. I also liked the words. I find half the time poetry leads me. I don't really know where the poems are going half the time. I just have an ache, I guess. Or sort of growing pain, something is being demanded to grow. I try to stay out its way. One way to stay out of the way is not try to inerpret what ends up on the page I've confronted. I did the best I could with what's there. I don't mind if others try to figure out what it means, though.

Ally (iheartjake), Karen, and Ursula (Sri Lanka): Which special interest groups do you support? Will you get involved in the 2008 presidential election campaign?
SG: It's funny. I never would have thought this, but poetry seems to be pushing me towards politics. To be honest, I've never really been all that involved (some of what you may have read about me at least repolitics is hyped). My wife has been the political one in the family and I've kind of bumped along with her. But that seems to be changing. I wrote a piece for The Huffington Post because I was so enraged by the Bush Adminstration floating the idea that they might use nuclear weapons against Iran. It's insane. Many political leaders now (and through history) have been absolutely insane. I am not remotely comfortable with what's going on in this country right now. And then there's "An Inconvenient Truth"--I recommend you all go see it. Or get the DVD when it comes out. The planet you live on is the hands of crazy people. The poetry that exists inside each of us (the rhymes and rhythms in our bodies) tells us how crazy these people are as easily as we breathe. So, yes, I suspect I'll be involved in the presidential elections and in other political fights that will be coming down the pike as well. We'll see how much.

Gayle S. Stever, Ph.D. (Arizona State University) and James (LosAngeles): We have noted the invasion of the paparazzi into yourprivate family life in an escalating fashion of late. To what extent does living somewhat in the public eye affect you?
SG: It affects us. It's sad. People will discover much more interesting things when they turn their cameras (and thoughts) on the people in their own lives, the people they know. The people they personally love. The people they personally hate. The people in-between. The rest of this is just an excuse for avoiding that far more interesting world. The world of their own lives.

Anonymous: We've heard you play the viola and enjoy listening to Eminem. What else do you do to relax?
SG: What do you do?

Carina (Stockholm) and Katarina (Sweden): Since you have a very interesting Swedish heritage have you or have you ever considered travelling to Sweden to discover more about your ancestors?
SG: I've always wanted to go. I don't know why I haven't. But hopefully I will in the future. We'll see.

britpopbaby: Finally, are there any continuing themes or messages in your poetry? What do you want readers to take away from your collection?
SG: They should take away what ever they want, don't you think? When I really concentrate, a word like "theme" confuses me. Most of those important words confuse me. I can't even say I'm terribly clear when I'm writing. Slowly, though, something does seem to come into focus and that's quite miraculous. But even the confusion is miraculous, so go figure. It's just plain miraculous to be alive, isn't it?

-----------------------------
Well, what do we think? I'm thinking we should answer these questions ourselves and send them back to Stephen? I'll just say now that I can't remember exactly which questions I attributed to whom and I think some of them may have been mixed up. I tried to get a global vibe when I submitted these and I also condensed some questions together.

ALSO: Please don't post this interview or even parts of it anywhere else on the net until August 4th. That is the agreement I have with Stephen and his publisher Cantara. On Aug 4th it will be posted at www.stephengyllenhaal.com but until then please respect that it is a JW exclusive. Unfortunately I can't stamp www.jakewatch.com across it.

82 comments:

cina said...

Okey, I'm SUPER-EXCITED!! Going to read it now....

mrs_dalloway said...

OH,MAN!! I'm sooooo curious!!!

cina said...

I had to read through the answers pretty fast since I'm in a bit of a hurry at the moment, but I really enjoyed his answers. I'm going to read them again more carfully later tonight when I get home again though.

If you should read this - Thank you so much for this Stephen! We truly appreciate it!

/Carina

mrs_dalloway said...

I can't believe how intense is this man's view about life itself!It always reffers to it as a miracle, in the questions and in his poems.
Thank you so much for answering them with honesty and warmth..it is truly inspiring.(Adriana)

Kendra said...

Very interesting questions from you all -sensibly Bpb's ones- and so brainy and funny responses by Stephen that I'm not surprised he took so much time, he really needed it to convey his reasons appropriately. "Literally" it's a new victory for JW team :)

zoo said...

Papa, you make so much sense in everything you say. I'm delighted you did this for us. Thank you very very much for taking the time and trouble to answer us so honestly and thoughtfully and thoroughly.

Brit, I liked your question about titles. I remembe Martin Amis talking about how he chose the title London Fields, and he gave an interesting answer not totally dissimilar to Stephen's.

It's funny, cos my question wasn't specifically asked, but I feel he sort of did while answering your question. I can really empathise with being paralysed by caring too much and really starting to live when you start not giving a shit (or when you start being able to make the distinction between what is truly worth giving a shit about and what isn't. It's never the stuff you thought in the first place.). I felt real empathy with him as I was reading that.

What a great way to beat the Monday blues.

phoebe said...

Wow. What an amazing man he is! Such an inspiration to us all. Loved his answers. So honest, personal, and interesting. What I love the most is his view on life. Wonderful.

Elle said...

Brilliant!! Wonderful answers.

Q: We have noted the invasion of the paparazzi into your private family life in an escalating fashion of late. To what extent does living somewhat in the public eye affect you?

SG: It affects us. It's sad.


Doesn't this interview, as well as all those good things we know and love about Jake, just make you want to stand up and defend them all against the nasty paps, gossipmongers and badmouthers out there? Not wanting to get into a debate here about those who choose careers that put them in the public eye, just expressing the warm sappy feeling that I get regarding all the Gyllenhaals as a result of being part of the JW community.

Jake, you have a great papa, and we love you both!

Anonymous said...

This is a wonderful interview. Great selection of questions. Thanks for doing this to you both.

britpopbaby said...

I know, elle. It's conflicting. Here is Stephen saying media intrusion effects him and his family but it is Hollywood, the place he lives, that is responsible. I've always viewed Hollywood as a place of business not creativity. Actors are sold to us much in the same way films are and we lap it all up. L'oreal tells us we should look like Scarlett Johnanson, J-Lo tells us we should smell like her. It's damned - I blame capitalism.

I have more to say on this but my cat is crying for some reason and I can't concentrate.

radioactivebarbie said...

What a wonderfully insightful O&A! It just reminds me even more why I respect and admire people such as the Gyllenhaals so much. Thank you very much to Mr. Gyllenhaal for answering these questions - he puts many things into perspective, and voices many of my concerns and beliefs in better words than I ever could.

I especially could relate to these quotes:

People will discover much more interesting things when they turn their cameras (and thoughts) on the people in their own lives, the people they know. The people they personally love. The people they personally hate. The people in-between. The rest of this is just an excuse for avoiding that far more interesting world. The world of their own lives.

How incredibly true! People in general are much too focused on things that don't really matter, and especially today, this rings true. I really wish everyone thought like this, then maybe we would live in a better world. Oh well, at least we can make a start.

And this, too:

And each and everyone of us is miraculous. That's what bothers me so much about almost everything I see in this culture. For instance with my kids and even these questions (to some degree). Each of you is a miraculous creature. Everyone is. Dreaming and scheming and trying to sort out life? And then we go and kill each other for some stupid piece of dirt. Or for gold. Or for a religion (that's the weirdest of all to me). We should be celebrating ourselves (Whitman certainly was into that). And that goes for each of you--it might be intriguing that each of you tries to answer the questions you've given to me.

Wise words! I agree with that so much - you see all these terrorist attacks, people blowing each other up, and it really makes me wonder... is that how much we value life? It's such a wonderful, miraculous thing, and should be cherished, not dismissed like it's a worthless piece of rubbish. Living, breathing, thinking people, each with their own dreams and loves and everything else, each an amazing being, yet nobody seems to care anymore.

Apologies for the little rant, but this Q&A has brought out some strong feelings in me, and I'm sure many others can relate.

Once again, thank you very much to Mr. Gyllenhaal, and I wish he and his family all the best in life. God, we need more people like them!

mrs_dalloway said...

Those are the kind of illusions that can destroy your spirit and your will to do the best work you can.It always seems dangerous to take yourself too seriously. And also, I guess the trap of wanting someone to clap for you. A pretty dangerous place to find yourself (I've been there)...you then lose track of who you are, what you are. You're using other people to help you define yourself.

Him and his family actually living there for so long makes dealing with the entire thing more easily,as they have probably got to know the scam by now.He speaks about it with a certain wisdom that can be given by a distance put between him and that bad part about Hollywood. When you are aware of the traps,it's easier to avoid and to handle them.
Something makes sense now..I have been wondering how can Jake handle all the pressure,all the media,all the paps and people screaming at his appearance..and the answer is pretty clear now. It's education in the Hollywood environment,with wise and beautiful parents..the 'survivors' in the industry.

Anna said...

Wow.

I'm amazed by the man and by the very personal answers to these questions. I admire people who say what they feel, and stand up for their opinions. This seems to be a trait with the Gyllenhaals. Truly a family worth our admiration.

And I'm so glad I got the book!

Ivy said...

Thanks Papa G! What a kind and thoughtful man. I particularly liked his response to the paparazzi question. And what a fine selection of questions they were.

gin said...

I can RELATE so intensely to so much of what he said. That intrigues and inspires me.
Thank you!!

Linna said...

WOW!! I'm impressed! Both by the questions and the answers Gyllendaddy truly sounds like an amazing man in so many ways. I'm touched by the answers.

Thanks to everyone who made this Q&A happen! :)

Anonymous said...

Stephen is a very intelligent, inspiring man! I agree with so much he says. Though I do feel that contradictive vibe someone else was talking about. He comments Hollywood and fame and people falling for that illusion, and what he says is all true, but still; it's a life he and his children chose for themselves. It's harsh but true.

The reason why people focus on celebrities and not on their own social lives has a good reason he addresses as well; there is so much wrong with our reality! I know that he wasn't judging, but I still felt like he was condamning it a bit. And that hurt a little, in a way. I AM interested in Jake Gyllenhaal, I know I don't know him and I don't need to, but there is no crime in having fantasies, living in fantasies sometimes. My reality isn't always easy like everyone else's. Actually reality has been incredibly hard on me lately. And Jake's movies have taught me a lot.

It's not OK that the paps bother them, but I just hope he understands that in a way Hollywood can give people hope and comfort. It may be false, but it does help a little sometimes.

Anonymous said...

CORRECTION:
'My reality isn't always easy like everyone else's'

has to be 'My reality isn't always easy just like everyone else's'

Sorry about my English :( not native.

britpopbaby said...

Very interesting point, anon. I believe it is in human nature to be interested in people that we think live better than us - the whole reason celebrity culture exists. You see it all over the animal kingdom - we create chains and place ourselves in at one end of the scale or the other.

Agnes said...

I'm with you all here. I loved the answers (I feel they are honest and personal) and I thank you Gyllendaddy to take the time to aswer our questions. And thanks to everyone who made this Q&A happen!

Prophecy Girl said...

I was really struck by his political answers (surprise!) and was way excited to see he mentioned An Inconvenient Truth! But, personal interests aside, I can't believe how honest and revealing he was about his methodology. I mean, really, who are we to get that level of intimacy out of him? I'm honored that I got to be a part of this.

moonbeams said...

Thoughtful. Emotionally accessible.
Engaging. I really enjoyed it. Seemed like a conversation. He's a lovely guy.

Anonymous said...

Great post, 5.11. I'm sure Stephen meant well by his comments, but it seemed a little disingenuous to me for him to discourage others from buying into the dream when his whole family is such a part of it.

N/w/s, a lovely intelligent guy.

heddaparsons said...

I felt like I was having a conversation with Mr. Gyllenhaal. What wonderful questions and his answers were honest and heartfelt. I thought his answer to his political interests were interesting: That Naomi was the political one and he was just following along until recently.

Seaweed said...

What an incredible journey life is, and it's through our exploring and travels (in poetry, cinema, music, and the other arts)that we encounter people like Jake and now his family by some extension.

I agree with Stephen, that there is much in our own lives to be thanful for and to focus on, but still there are lessons to be learned in our observations. In watching Brokeback Mountain and going through all the emotional turmoil that that work of art represents, I became witness to the talents and humanity of one Jacob Gyllenhaal. My life has taken on a new meaning as a direct result of my observations and self analysis.

After reading the answers that Stephen provided to these questions it only confirms for me the fact that Jake has had a wonderous upbringing that has made him much of the person he is today. The thoughts and observations of the father make me want to be a better person. So I make no apologies for being in awe of these individuals as I feel I am continuing to re-evaluate my own existance while enjoying some small bit of sharing with Jake and his family.

holly said...

Perhaps because it's Monday morning and I'm having general Monday morning blahs... but after reading his Q&A I get a sense of his being disillusioned about a great many things in his life; that he's been kicked around plenty and I think that comes through in this Q&A and also in some of his poems.

It's an interesting place he finds himself in. If it weren't for his famous son we wouldn't know about PapaG's poems at all. And I'm sure that's the underlying current he must be feeling about now.

magichappening said...

I came across your website ‘Jakewatch’ a few days ago and the writing made me laugh out loud several times.
More specifically, I think the answers Stephen Gyllenhaal gave to the questions you guys sent were thought-provoking and revealing. He seemed very obliging, but very uncomfortable about being thought to have 'answers'. The line about the poetry of our bodies is lovely and I completely agree that the poetry in modern music is sometimes breathtakingly beautiful so much so that it can hurt.

I agree with answers that the connected world's obsession with the cult of celebrity is very much a way to avoid living one's own life. I have to say though that does sometime serve a purpose...if one needs respite. Human beings need illusions and Hollywood being the city of them, it is perhaps a natural place to turn to in this time of rationalism and logic. As in all things moderation is needed I suppose, although Kahlil Gibran did say ‘only when you are empty are you at standstill and balanced’. In the world today, as always, paradoxes abound.

I find the paparazzi question interesting. I wonder how many of us buy magazines that use paparazzi pictures. Not the ones where the subjects are at events etc. but the peeping Tom photos of everyday activities e.g. the photos of Stephen Gyllenhaal's son cycling, buying food, meeting friends or family. We are all held captive by these images and because we provide a market for these photos the intrusion into the lives of people like the Gyllenhaal family continues to be lucrative.

As I said, I think this website is very funny...the multitasking and sock photos are hysterical...and I am a huge fan of Jake Gyllenhaal and his work...but I can't help but feel a little squeamish while looking at photos of him in his real as opposed to reel life (sorry I hate that pun too but is was apt here). Interestingly, I felt no such squeamishness reading the published poetry which I noticed some people on this site did...I think because a decision had been taken by the author to share these private thoughts while paparazzi photos take that decision away.

I think I once read that in Papua New Guinea there are some tribes that believe that taking someone's photograph steals their soul. While this belief might seem strange to us how much less strange is it to call people we have never met by their first names and feel that we know them.

I wonder if we all stopped buying the tabloid magazines or watching the equivalent programs would it have an effect?...If only on ourselves...but perhaps eventually on the supply and demand of the invasion into the lives of people like the Gyllenhaals. Again, I am reminded of the point Stephen Gyllenhaal made about the importance of the former (ourselves) as opposed to the latter (strangers in the public eye).

I am aware of the irony of writing this on a site entitled 'Jakewatch' but I have been very impressed with the sentiments of those who are part of the community and the respect you have for The Family Gyllenhaal. And I do think people in the public eye agree, expect and even need to some extent people’s interest, fascination in themselves, their work and then their private lives George Michael spoke about it in his song Star People. Again, perhaps this paradox can be described by Kahlil Gibran where he says ‘Your joy is your sorrow unmasked‘. However, as the consumers in the cult of celebrity, each of us does have at our disposal an internal barometer of whether we feel right about doing something or not.

I recently saw someone famous interviewed (I cannot for the life of me think who it was…possibly George Clooney or someone like that, who also, as many people are aware, has issues with the paparazzi) and they talked about their …oh hang on I think it was Kiefer Sutherland if I remember correctly…and he said one of the important things he was once told by a parent figure that if we think about it we know what the right thing to do is most of the time. We don’t always do that thing, but we rarely are unaware of whether something is wrong or right.

The extreme of this is obviously the sociopath, but they are a grotesque exaggeration of a slight tendency in all humans. There is a very interesting voiceover at the beginning of a film called Kalifornia about a boy on a school trip thinking about dropping a coin off the Empire State Building, but never actually crossing that line and dropping it. I speak for myself when I say I know I often think should I be looking at this photo of someone famous in a private moment. I wonder how many of us feel the same way, but look anyway?

There is a beautiful song by Evanescence called Understanding (wash it all away) where they have a recording of someone speaking at the beginning of the song saying:
"You hold the answers deep within your own mind.
Consciously, you've forgotten it.
That's the way the human mind works.
Whenever something is too unpleasant, to shameful for us
to entertain, we reject it.
We erase it from our memories.
But the answer is always there."

Voyeurism used to carry many more negative connotations. I wonder how much we feed it and how much again human tendencies are cynically manipulated by news editors and managers. This obviously applies to news in the broader sense rather than simply the news about actors and their ilk. How many times have we seem grotesque pictures of suffering and misery that we know were intrusive? In the less solemn world of celebrity, I think some of the most invasive and spiteful photographs are those which deliberately and gleefully trap people in unattractive and unflattering photographs. In Australia they talk about the ‘tall poppy syndrome’ where people are built up to be knocked down or anyone sticking their head above the field or pack is cut down to size. Most cultures have their own way of describing this I think increasingly recognisable phenomenon.

I think it was Martin Luther King who said: “We will have to repent in this generation not merely for the vitriolic words and actions of the bad people, but for the appalling silence of the good people“. He was quite obviously talking about rather more weighty issues than the paparazzi, but it still it could be argued it has relevance to the deification of people by news organisations who in turn argue that it is fuelled by us: the consumers.

Once again, I do not mean to point the finger at anyone without starting first with myself. I saw Al Gore interviewed on Jon Stewart’s wonderful show about the film An Inconvenient Truth which I noticed Stephen Gyllenhaal advocated watching as well. In the interview, which necessarily concentrated on environment and what humans are doing to it, Al Gore spoke about the gathering of a critical mass of both evidence and also of public and expert opinion so that they were reaching a ‘tipping point’ and that it had taken decades.

Again, a weighty issue, but perhaps there is a way to stem the tide of the breeding of the species ‘paparazzi’ in our post-Information Revolution new century. Through a slow accumulation of distaste and human beings listening to the voices within them rather than to those in the news and creating the news. I don’t know. I noticed several comments about paparazzi on this site previous to this Q&A and I have also had conversations with friends etc. about the fact that I think they are a lower life form. But although I have not bought the kinds of magazines that are at supermarket checkouts in a while now, I have certainly done so in the past.

I remember (very inexactly) a quotation I read several years ago by someone that said something to the effect …oh wait I turn to the magic of Google…what on earth did we do before it…here we go…it was by Ralph Waldo Emerson (once again mentioned by Stephen Gyllenhaal…what is that quote?: ’Great minds think alike and fools seldom differ’). Anyway the quote was: "Do not say things. What you are stands over you the while and thunders so that I cannot hear what you say to the contrary."

Anyway, apologies if I have offended anyone. It was certainly not my intention. I do love the spirit in which people contribute their thoughts to this site and are genuinely admiring of this actor and family, but I would be very interested to hear what you think of my rambling. It began as a comment and became a soliloquy (which by definition is speaking to oneself in a piece of theatre or the like, but this means it can never be without an audience…is this the Claptrap?)

moonbeams said...

The thing is, a lot of people see celebrities as one dimensional. The glitz, parties, etc. And a lot of celebs play into that lifestyle. It takes a lot of effort to stay grounded. And if your work is behind the camera, it takes even more effort not to be swept up in the wheeling and dealing, the egos, the need to be in control and feel important. I think I'm most impressed by the sense that all of them, Stephen, Naomi, Maggie and Jake, seem to value and protect the things that maintain contact with their own humanity. The best actors, writers, artists, etc. to me, are those whose work is informed by truthfulness and courage. Their sense of artistic integrity and their sense of being a part of a larger human community makes what they do as important as the air we breath. His comments give me the impression that he is still a work in progress and he is enjoying the journey immensely, still learning and growing. I admire that so much.
Sorry for getting all sappy,(expressing self-evident truths!) but I found his answers very moving. He really engages you in a dialogue.

Anonymous said...

I think celebrities are the new gods, in a way, only it isn't precisely religious because we've all gotten so over-rational. Like I said in my 5:11 AM post; we need fantasies, we always have. And I am not going to pretend to be superior and know better. Illusions are part of life and I embrace them, because they enhance creativity and love for the world.

blackhatnbeard said...

The comments in response to Mr. G are as wonderful as the responses he gave us. What a thoughtful and insightful man is he. I'm very impressed with the comments here.

JoyceDavenport said...

Once again I am struck by the respect and effort to keep things real that comes across in Stephen's answers. Also humility, and almost a sense of innocence- that there is, despite everything good in human beings and in life...a very strong desire to keep turning the questions back on the questioner- what do you think and feel- that's what's real- that's what's interesting to me...you can feel a mind that is hungry to taste truth and an intellect that won't accept blandness. I am amazed that such a person has survived and flourished in the illusion of Hollywood. But then again how many Hollywood couples last 20 odd months- nevermind 20 odd years. That alone takes real integrity and strength. Can't wait to get the book to read more. Ever thought about writing your memoirs Mr G?- or are you still a bit young for that?

gin said...

we need fantasies, we always have. And I am not going to pretend to be superior and know better. Illusions are part of life and I embrace them, because they enhance creativity and love for the world.

Just would like to second this after reading all the insightful comments about celebrity/paparazzi/etc.
It's not just celebrities who are overexposed by the media. It's everything. Having something like iheartjake photos to lose yourself in for a while in a strange way balances out all of the raw violence and tragedy and conflict that the media also feels the need to exploit.
I think an escape into fantasy is necessary for sanity. I'm glad people are willing to put themselves out there to be someone else's fantasy.

britpopbaby said...

Thanks for your post, magichappening. I think I agree with most of what you said. Paparazzi pictures are an issue I'm never going to be entirely settled on either way. When I started this blog is was going to be a spoof of celebrity culture - Sock Watch is especially demonstrating of that - people taking notice of the tiniest details of other people's lives when it is totally irrelevant to their own. Of course, the Jake Watch mission statement has changed somewhat but I know everyone here realises that what we do is for fun -

Ugh, my mother just interupted me in the middle of that to whine on about recruitment agencies and now I've completely forgotten what I was saying - AGAIN! Why can't people/animals leave me alone for five minutes at a time!

Anonymous said...

Extremely happy my question was answered.

What is the best way to reply.Here,or to Cantara to pass on to Stephen?

kokodee said...

Wow! I'm speechless

britpopbaby said...

Here please - I want to hear everyone's opinion. Cantara sends Stephen our discussions of his poetry so I'm sure he'll probably get to see this at some point.

Which was your question, anon?

Anonymous said...

Though I enjoyed reading it and he seems like a great person with a lot of wisdom, he also seemed very uncomfortable. Uncomfortable with the attention; I think he sounds like he feels like people read this interview like the Bible. Especially the 'free-time' question; the way he bounced that! That wasn't necessary at all; people were just showing interest!

But I understand where he's coming from, though. And nonetheless I am thankful for the time he spent on our questions.

Smurfeyshmoo said...

Wow, he's so...deep. I mean, I guess I already knew that (most poets are), but it's somehow different on these questions. It's nice to feel like he really took the time to think about the questions and answer them sincerely. Papa Gyllenhaal rocks!

Anonymous said...

This is Ally from IHeartJake.Com

bpb - check your pm's on IHJ ;) Thanks!

I just wanted to say that Mr. Gyllenhaal's response means a lot to everyone. It's very interesting to read his point of view and I admire the way he turned the Q&A on the fans. Mr. Gyllenhaal, you are a very modest man! Thank you very much again to bpb, the lovely Cantara and of course Papa G. for this.

mrs_dalloway said...

The free-time question surprised me too,anon. But not in a negative way,cause the only meaning I saw was that he was trying to underline the fact that he's no different from the others..he does in his spare time usual things just like any of us.I've noticed that every detail about him has to be followed by a question mark or an advice cunsorning us..

Anonymous said...

What a wonderful post, much love and appreciation to Stephen for taking the time. Lots of words of wisdom in there. Someone else quoted this:

"People will discover much more interesting things when they turn their cameras (and thoughts) on the people in their own lives, the people they know. The people they personally love. The people they personally hate. The people in-between. The rest of this is just an excuse for avoiding that far more interesting world. The world of their own lives."

Is he gently pointing the finger at us? I definitely have that feeling and maybe it hit a sore spot because I'm sometimes guilty of it. We should be focusing more attention and devotion on our own lives and the people in them: our friends and family; people we love and who love us back. Giving them the devotion, attention, energy, time, and love we so easily and generously lavish on our favourite celebrities. I know I'll read Jake Watch and various other Jake related blogs for a couple hours each day when I could be using my time to instead call up my best friend and have a long chat or drop my Dad an e-mail to say hi.

So in that way I feel a little guilty. I still think it's OK to have escape time, but we probably do devote too much time and energy to it.

claire said...

Wow!

First of all, I'm proud of all you fellow jake watchers for asking such excellent questions - see, we can be grown up!

Second, its great to see the amount of time pops has obviously spent on answering them.

And third - what an exclusive! Well done britpop!

britpopbaby said...

I've just spent two weeks with my nearest and dearest - I need a break from them. ;)

Kidding...kind of. I think Stephen was talking generally about celebrity culture but you don't have to read too far into it to assume it applies to us, er, 'dedicated' fans.

I've spoken on this before HERE but to reiterate; this blog stopped being about Jake Gyllenhaal a long time ago. It was never truly about Jake Gyllenhaal to begin with. Yes I'm a Jake fan and think he is one of the most talented actors of his generation and I guess he is also kind of attractive too, but my main concern is writing. I'll write about anything and I need to write everyday so this is how I cope - making random remarks and observations about some Hollywood actor. Like I've said before, this blog was almost about tea.

Anonymous said...

I agree with you anon 11:56 AM.
I feel like Stephen gently pointed the finger at us, making me feel rather guilty about all of this. I understand what he is saying but why can't we do both?

cina said...

I've had the time to read this more carefully now, and what thought-provoking and interesting answers he's given! It's evident that he's really given our questions a lot of thought and he has definitely not taken this lightly.

I also have to applaud all of you for asking such intelligent questions! Mine was really a light-weight question compared to the rest.... lol!

Prophecy Girl said...

Like I've said before, this blog was almost about tea.

Thank God it wasn't! ;) No, I agree completely, and I think that magichappening brought up a lot of interesting points. The thing is, there is a fine line between celebrating, er, celebrities, and obsessing over them. I think we strike a very nice balance on this blog.

Jake is just a very good muse for us. He's easy to write about and joke about (and look at...heh). But I think it's a testament to the artistry of the Gyllenhaal family as a whole that this particular group of people has rallied around them. We're all creative ourselves and we're drawing a lot of energy from the family and also from the others who post here.

Wow, totally not to go all weepy, psycho-analytical on you or anything but I just meant, dudes. When I was writing for this blog, I took a good hard look out of what I was getting out it, and seeing Jake in Spandex (as exciting as that was) was definitely not the best part for me. But I also know for a fact that that isn't widely apparent to people outside this group.

Basically, I'm comfortable as to where I stand in the scheme of things and basically, this was a really boring post. Did I really ask that question? I sound so smart and serious and un-Prophecy-Girl-like! :D

britpopbaby said...

What is your problem with tea?

Seriously though, I wholeheartedly agree, PG. If we were just Jake fans we'd be satisified with magazines/films/the E! Channel but I like to think we're Jake fans who are witty, creative, like a good debate and who can stand back and appreciate everything Gyllenhaal - dogs 'n' all, which is why Jake Watch is going strong.

Anonymous said...

I agree with you anon 11:56 AM.
I feel like Stephen gently pointed the finger at us, making me feel rather guilty about all of this. I understand what he is saying but why can't we do both?


I think we can! I don't think he was pointing a finger in a negative way. I do think he appreciates our support of him and Jake et al. Or else I don't think he would have answered the questions. I took it to mean that we should give ourselves and the important people in our lives equal attention/consideration, etc. JW is definitely a place of creative, funny, interesting people and I hope that doesn't change!

Anna said...

PG wrote: When I was writing for this blog, I took a good hard look out of what I was getting out it, and seeing Jake in Spandex (as exciting as that was) was definitely not the best part for me. But I also know for a fact that that isn't widely apparent to people outside this group.

I see that too, PG. I have a lot of internet illiterate friends (yes, in the year 2006) in real life, and they have two problems with my Jake Watching and Eyelashing.

1. Is he really that good looking (to warrant my sitting by the computer for hours every day)?
2. Why spend so much time by the computer in the first place?

I try to explain to them that it's not about Jake, it's about the people I have come to know, and the thoughts and laughter they share with me on these sites. They still don't get it... And for what it's worth - even though you can form shallow friendships on sites like this, you can also meet people who will stay with you for the rest of your life. I don't see why friendships made in real life should rank higher than cyber friendships.

gin said...

OK...this is my last comment on this post, I promise. I just wanted to add that the best part of this blog for me is the witty, creative people posting on it. That's why I'd rather discuss here than elsewhere. But, I do, um, "appreciate" the Gyllenhaal. You know, in addition to the wit and humor. OK, I'm out.

cina said...

I personally find this to be a very classy place. I love the people who hang here and on the forum - intelligent, witty, creative, always with a tongue-in-cheek attitude and we can laugh at ourselves and our obsession with The Gyllenhaal(s).
It's the best place imo! :-)
Plus - Britpop and PG are funny as hell!! (Damn, your Jake biography is a CLASSIC, Britpop!)

britpopbaby said...

Although Jake's bio is all factual I was especially creative with it and if I do so say so myself, it is my best work. I really wish I'd written it back in May so I could have submitted to my tutor for marking.

It's also alarming how few people actually know the true story of Jake. I'm just glad I can set the record straight.

Agnes said...

PG and Anna I agree with you.

Anonymous said...

"You can also meet people who will stay with you for the rest of your life. I don't see why friendships made in real life should rank higher than cyber friendships."

I totally agree. I have one friend I met online that is the dearest person to me. Unfortunately she lives in another country, but it hasn't stopped us from getting on a plane and visiting each other. I think the best thing to come out of blogs and mb's is definitely the people we meet and form close friendships with. =)

cina said...

Anon 2:25 - that's wonderful!

smurfette said...

Jake is just a very good muse for us. He's easy to write about and joke about (and look at...heh). But I think it's a testament to the artistry of the Gyllenhaal family as a whole that this particular group of people has rallied around them. We're all creative ourselves and we're drawing a lot of energy from the family and also from the others who post here.

If we were just Jake fans we'd be satisified with magazines/films/the E! Channel but I like to think we're Jake fans who are witty, creative, like a good debate and who can stand back and appreciate everything Gyllenhaal - dogs 'n' all, which is why Jake Watch is going strong.

well f--ing said, PG and britpop! (excuse my lingo, i’m a little excited). the two have you have summed up exactly why i come here and why I love this blog—in other words, the reason why so many cool folks flock to this blog and stay is because we have such awesome writers that have the right perspective.

anyway, welcome back britpop, and thanks again for this awesome exclusive. pops really seems like a wonderful person. what a talented family…

Anonymous said...

the idea that when someone recognizes you, claps for you, you're OK. But you're only OK if that's taking place inside of you. With yourself. Not outside.

Jake has often talked about how he can be insecure and has a huge desire for people to like him. So I can't help but wonder if some (or all) of this applies to him.

Anonymous said...

The rest of this is just an excuse for avoiding that far more interesting world. The world of their own lives.

While I agree that we shouldn't ignore our own lives and I do feel bad about the paparazzi invasion the Gyllenhaals have had, I can't help but still enjoy it every time more pictures come out. I'm not avoiding a far more interesting world however because I do enjoy my own things but I also enjoy seeing what Jake is up to and watching him interact with friends/family. It's a guilty pleasure but a pleasure no less.

cina said...

^^ I second that, totally.

nice anonymous said...

I actually feel as if I've been scolded a little by the Gyllenpappa. (If I were a dog, my tail would be between my legs & my head would be drooping. Bad dog. Bad, bad dog.)

All I can say in my defense is that, as I've mentioned before, I'd be paralyzed with fright if I actually saw any of the Gyllenhaals on the streets of Manhattan, live & in person, and I would nod briefly & keep my distance. Like endangered animals, they deserve the use & enjoyment of public space & should be permitted to go about their lives unmolested.

I plead guilty: My job at the office can be numbingly dull, and it's a pleasure to think of something far-off, a sort of Shangra-La. So, in my imaginitive life, I do make use of Mr. Gyllenhaal's handsome son. "My" Jake is quite fictionalized, and probably has nothing to do with the actual person who's got a birth certificate with Gyllenhaal typed upon it. Except that they physically resemble each other. Probably has more to do with a character dreamed up by Annie Proulx and further refined by Diana Ossana/Larry McMurtry/Ang Lee than with the real Jake Gyllenhaal.

And I like to think that I use the image presented by any famous person within my creative mind the way Joseph Cornell would sometimes use the images of ballet dancers & B-movie actresses & Spanish infantas as part of his famous boxes & assemblages.

That said, Mr. Gyllenhaal's left me thinking that I'd better be careful, lest I get too weird or something.

Anonymous said...

"Jake has often talked about how he can be insecure and has a huge desire for people to like him. So I can't help but wonder if some (or all) of this applies to him."

I didn't take it that way at all. I think he was just talking broadly about how it's an easy trap to fall into.

Anonymous said...

I didn't take it that way at all. I think he was just talking broadly about how it's an easy trap to fall into.

And I was just pointing out that given the way Jake has talked about himself, I can see him possibly falling into that "trap" himself, at least once in awhile. I mean none of us here really know the real Jake and I do think some people tend to make him out to be much more perfect than he is. I'm not saying he's a bad guy at all but just that I don't think he's always bound to have a perfect handle on the attention and what it means to him. Just because Jake comes from a well connected family who has seen the game played, it doesn't mean he's going to always react to it all in the best way. Hell for all we know, Jake cries himself to sleep at night from the pressures that surround him. The point is we don't know and the paparazzi pics and interviews don't necessarily tell us the real story.

Anonymous said...

"I mean none of us here really know the real Jake and I do think some people tend to make him out to be much more perfect than he is. I'm not saying he's a bad guy at all but just that I don't think he's always bound to have a perfect handle on the attention and what it means to him."

Oh, I agree completely! To clarify, when I said I didn't think Stephen's statement was aimed at Jake I didn't mean it couldn't be true of Jake. Sorry for the confusion.

claire said...

our leader britpop said
this blog stopped being about Jake Gyllenhaal a long time ago. It was never truly about Jake Gyllenhaal to begin with. Yes I'm a Jake fan and think he is one of the most talented actors of his generation and I guess he is also kind of attractive too, but my main concern is writing. I'll write about anything and I need to write everyday so this is how I cope - making random remarks and observations about some Hollywood actor.

and thats the reason why so many of us come here because we love the writing style. People who don't get it could get quite offended in the way you handle some of the stories/pap pics because you have the ability to take the piss out of him and his fans and we can laugh at our obsession which brings us right back down to earth. And the jake bio is spot on in my book, not factually clearly ;-) but its just so damn funny!!

dani said...

I am so impressed with the questions that were presented to Mr. Gyllenhaal. And the fact that he took the time to give such thoughtful, in depth answers is beyond amazing.

This is further proof that investing so much interest in Jake is not a complete waste of my time. He stands head and shoulders above so many of the cookie cutter Hollywoood types and now I can see that he came from a well grounded family. Hopefully this will give him strength to stay true to himself no matter how crazy his life may get.

There has been so much to read that I can't remember who said what, but I do agree that a little fantasy is necessary in all of our lives. And I believe that all of us who post here do have the right balance. This is a fun place to go to relax and have comraderie. All of our lives are important and I'm sure we devote the proper amount of time to taking care of them. And if for relaxation we choose to idealize the life of a celebrity, there is no one better than Jake. We mean him no harm and wish him much success because his success is our entertainment. We laugh at each other and laugh at ourelves. That is what's so great about JW. Now, Jake's dad has made us feel worthy of his time also.

I just finished reading what nice anonymous said and I tend to agree that my interest and devotion to Jake really has more to do with a fictional character that he was fortunate to play and I simply transfered those feelings to the actor. The real Jake may not be worthy. But I choose to believe that he is.

Anonymous said...

woah - I absolutely understand what Papa means about turning the camera on your ownlife - hell I remember that lesson when I read Anne of Green Gables - how all these elaborate stories of far away places got her no where until she wrote about what and who was around her. That book always stuck with me - especially that lesson.I feel the most secure writing about the most insecure moments of my life - because no one can challenge that experience.

Papa done right!

Den Of Thieves said...

I totally agree with all of the comments about the greatest thing about this blog being the writing. It's smart and witty (as are the comments) and it keeps me from feeling too guilty about my extreme Gyllenhaal interest...because what I usually end up reading is an intellectual discussion, sure sometimes we discuss his ass, but it's in fun.
I also think it's Jake's being so selective in choosing in his movie roles that keeps me so interested. I love that he acts because it's his passion and he loves it...rather than to be famous. And he's SO talented. We're smart girls (and boys) so we appreciate this smart guy. We wouldn't just love an actor (like say Chad Michael Douchebag) because he's pretty, he has to have the talent, personality, and passion for the craft. That's why I love and appreciate Jake so much.

mrs_dalloway said...

I come here for the writing,for the people,for the activities and for Jake. This is the only place that can satisfy them all. I admire very much Jake as an actor,that's how it all began in the first place..He's the first celebrity for me that made me go and search on Google for more info.And that's because I was very impressed by his work in Donnie Darko and Brokeback.I didn't need a substituent for the real life, I just needed to know more about a talented actor. This blog is the best way to keep up with his work and to appreaciate in various ways his look. :)
It's definetly not a waste of time,there's enough time for everything,so why not include this type of activity in our lives? We can and we have made it a perfect sourse of fun, knowledge, communication, understanding, sometimes a refuge. Each of us comes to whatever he has and shares his opinion on Jake or other subjects. I think it's wonderful. And I think Jake is wonderful,too,honestly..he's a human being who's art has led to such a great impact on people. Well,some of those people react like we do: we share.

Anonymous said...

I agree Mrs Dalloway. I don't need a substituent for the real life either. I have loving friends whom I deeply appreciate and care for. I am aware of the blessings in my life and VERY aware of people's uniqueness and my own. It doesn't mean that I suddenly don't like Jake anymore!

Jake is a distraction, just taking my mind off my busy life and focussing on Jake for a minute, letting go of all my other worries, helps me. It doesn't mean I don't appreciate the people around me or I don't notice the cute guys in 'real life'.

But how Jake comes across has taught me a lot, his movies have taught me a lot. If it wasn't for Brokeback Mountain, I would have never been able to handle so maturely that my father after hiding it all his life turned out to be a crossdresser. If it wasn't for Jake, I wouldn't have been so concerned with voting - believe it or not. If it wasn't for The Day After Tomorrow, I wouldn't have been so aware of global heating. Also, I go to college, somehow the Gyllenhaals have shown me you don't have to be a boring bookworm; don't ask me how, they just have.

Maggie is a far better rolemodel for young girls than girls like Lindsay Lohan and the Olsen Twins. And I embrace that!

Before Brokeback Mountain, I thought there was no hope for Hollywood - honestly. I thought we were all doomed to drown in Freaky Friday, Mean Girls and Raise Your Voice. That was definately my personal way of looking at it, but Jake (and Heath too for that matter) have shown me that there are still simply GOOD ACTORS out there who don't need to date everyone to get attention and appreciation.

Me likes The Gyllenhaal :D

britpopbaby said...

Maggie is a far better rolemodel for young girls than girls like Lindsay Lohan and the Olsen Twins. And I embrace that!

I agree. Maggie is one of the few people I would term an 'actor' rather than a 'celebrity'.

Seaweed said...

Anna said:

I try to explain to them that it's not about Jake, it's about the people I have come to know, and the thoughts and laughter they share with me on these sites. They still don't get it... And for what it's worth - even though you can form shallow friendships on sites like this, you can also meet people who will stay with you for the rest of your life. I don't see why friendships made in real life should rank higher than cyber friendships.

So many of you bring up points that are very worthy. The comments about the development of friendship in this community as it were. The excellence of the writing and the expression of thought with a generous helping of humour. These are the things that keep me coming back to Jake Watch daily.

The recognition of something special in Jake... besides the obvious good looks and charm, like when he speaks from the heart, and I believe he does. To have these observations and thoughts confirmed in some way when his own father takes the time to reply to the questions presented to him on his writing and his life lead me to believe that we are being witness to a great exchange or a meeting of minds.

OK now.... I know I'm getting all warm and fuzzy but that's just who I am, but I value that human ability that I'm sure we all have to recognize something good when we see it and to celebrate it as we are doing here and now.

Thanks everyone.

Simon Agent 002 said...

I need a day or two to properly reply...don't close this book just yet!
And it's not the pithy clear reply I wanted...
Sorry,
It became a long rambling stream of flow which
I'm hoping will tie coherently together at the end....loose ends drive me crazy.
It needs editing and thank god for spell check, or a ADD translator would also be required...
Your humble reader,
Simon

only1annabel said...

Wow Jake Watchers you really are an intelligent bunch! I on the other hand could not think of any questions that didn't relate to young Jake!

How cool that we got a Jake Watch exclusive! Poppa G must love us too!

britpopbaby said...

I'll stick it to the sidebar in some creative manner so we can still discuss for weeks, months...years!

Anonymous said...

I just hope Mr. Gyllenhaal doesn't honestly think we don't know how blessed we are with our lives and the people around us!

We are just what movies are about; we are the people who were touched by them is all. Doesn't mean we have a disturbed focus :-s What I do in my spare time? Watch movies :-D!

But it's obvious this is a very wise man, and he's very generous for taking the time to answer our questions!

Simon Agent 002 said...

I haven't forgotten... long story short ,I want to scrap all I've written and start again. Bear with me!

Rita C. Michael said...

I like the part where he told us all to get a life. *snort* I don't want to say what I really think about the whole thing starting with how this Q & A came to be in the first place. But as Nic Cage said in Moonstruck, "Only God can point the finger, Loretta."

britpopbaby said...

I don't think that is entirely the right interpretation. And god can't point fingers either.

Anonymous said...

This is very interesting site... film editing schools

Anonymous said...

Very nice site! » »

Anonymous said...

Stephen Gyllenhaal's Official Website
http://stephengyllenhaal.net

Anonymous said...

stephengyllenhaal.net