deerintheglen,
Yes, I am the (unofficial) Bud Cort fan site moderator.
I stand by what I feel for (and wrote) about "Ted and Venus". It was never intended to be a "pretty" story, given that it was based on a true story. It is about the sexual harrassment of a social worker by a mentally unstable man. I think Bud Cort's performance justifies the unstableness of 'Ted Whitley'. He lived in a world all his own, as you can tell from the sex-crazed poetry the character wrote. He was creepy and made me feel uncomfortable in some scenes--just as one should feel if one had to deal with a person like that character.
It is an independent film, and being on a limited budget, Bud Cort had to do the best with what he was given. He had a very hard time making this film. I try to see more about a film than how well it is shot, so I do not fault the film on any shortcomings therein. For all that it may matter, I have seen worse-shot, acted, edited and directed, films in my time.
I am sorry that you let this role turn you off from Bud Cort "in a big way". It is truly unfair an assessment of his talents, as you, and many other people I have come across, either haven't heard of him, or haven't seen much of his work outside of "Harold and Maude". He is a highly-underrated actor, and you can only know this if you were to see him in such films as, "The Traveling Executioner," "Why Shoot the Teacher," "Maria's Lovers," and even (voice-only) in "Electric Dreams," and in smaller roles in "Pollock," "The Big Empty" and "The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou". You cannot "lose" talent...it only SEEMS diminished if one is not given better roles to work with.
Bud Cort is not alone...there are hundreds of "top" or "iconic" actors who have done roles that were not the best...but as actors who have to make a living as it is all that they know (and love) to do, they make the most of what they are given.
It was nice that he dedicated it to Ruth Gordon, et. al from "Harold and Maude". I see it as his thanking them for helping him get that far in his career to have been given an opportunity to direct, as well as act.
"We can't all do good, but at least do no harm."
reply
share
deerintheglen
14 years ago
Yes I see your point. I should have another look at the movie and remind myself that this is the same man who was wonderful in H&M, Why Shoot the Teacher, MASH, etc. It just seemed to me that he was trying to be funny, type-casting himself in the process. Or maybe not: maybe his portrayal is exactly what he planned it to be.
Sonja
reply
share