HIS QUOTES ON IMDB

I thought his Tom Hanks references, however generalized they are supposed to be taken, were more self-revealing than about Hanks. Add me to the "go to hell, Theroux!" haters. Having seen him in several David Lynch films, he is the worst thing about them, utterly BORING in his performance in Inland Empire for example. He has freedom of speech going for him, but apart from that I see no value in his pompous opinions. Definitely a wannabe -hopefully he won't be successful, but it would be instructive to see how he would actually handle the "overnight" superstardom that some accidental successes, I'm thinking a Kevin Costner or a Harrison Ford, have had.

And to address the central point of his Hanks' diatribes. I contend he is simply wrong. Paul Morrissey, who is as offbeat and anti-establishment a director as Lynch or anyone else I can think of, had a very revealing interview in a film journal many years ago where he was discussing star power. He was quite outspoken about how valuable an actor like Gary Cooper or Clint Eastwood is -who projects a strong personality and might be thought of as "playing himself" in every film, as opposed to character actors who are more like chameleons. Morrissey's point was that this type of actor provides an extremely solid basis around which to build a film. He even contended that Joe D'Allesandro served that function in his early hit underground films. I had never made the connection before reading this, but on reflection realized that Joe in movies like Flesh, Trash and Heat, was a solid "force of nature" type of personality -not appearing to be acting, but very effective. Not that different from an Eastwood persona, though strictly underground.

Theroux's notion that the audience learns too much about the private life of big stars like Hanks is imbecilic. To take an extreme that on the surface might surport Theroux's position, Lon Chaney in the Silent Era had one of the most devoted fan bases of all times and Chaney carefully tried to remain mysterious, not signing autographs or giving lots of interviews and the like. BUT, in my opinion it was the acting/makeup craft of Chaney to always appear different in appearance and screen persona that made him effective, not some determined avoidance of fan magazines or papparazzi. Talent is what matters; I am NOT a fan of Hanks and never have been, but I would not drag in his celebrity as the problem. Unlike Theroux, if I think Hanks (or any other star) gives an unconvincing performance -that would be my contention, full stop. Dragging in this "we know too much about him" to belive him in character is a sign that our dear Theroux is not a deep thinker like his more famous relative.

"Three quarters of what is said here can be completely discounted as the raving of imbeciles" - Donald Wolfit in Blood of the Vampire (1958)