MovieChat Forums > Charlie's Angels (2000) Discussion > Drew Barrymore must've displayed the Dun...

Drew Barrymore must've displayed the Dunning–Kruger effect

posted 4 years ago by TMC-4 (19408)
3 replies | jump to latest

Where somebody wrongly overestimates their knowledge or ability in a specific area. Like when she tried to rationalize her decision to not have the Angels use firearms:

https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2001-may-28-ca-3444-story.html

Across sound stages everywhere, guns are getting fired--not on the set, but from it. Take Drew Barrymore’s decision to keep guns out of the hands of “Charlie’s Angels.” When interviewed in November by Rolling Stone, she gave two reasons, one having to do with antigun sentiments (“People just sit behind their [expletive] weapon and they can kill somebody and it’s just so cowardly”) and the other with simple ennui (“I feel like I’ve seen that [gunplay] in so many movies”). Her decision didn’t stop the karate-chopping “Angels” from ranking among the 15 highest-grossing films in 2000--and all the no-gun publicity didn’t seem to have hurt either.

https://www.quora.com/Are-people-who-use-guns-cowards-as-Drew-Barrymore-stated-during-the-making-of-the-first-Charlies-Angels-movie-from-2000

http://www.wagc.com/a-movie-to-protest-the-upcoming-charlies-angels-2/

https://www.quora.com/Is-it-truly-irresponsible-towards-kids-to-feature-the-protagonists-such-as-Charlies-Angels-for-example-in-a-movie-using-guns

https://www.quora.com/How-much-more-efficient-would-hand-to-hand-combat-be-when-compared-to-using-firearms/answer/Jon-Mixon-1

[–] TimMC (9143) 4 years ago

So many Hollyweirdians just shoot guns on screen and bash them and those who use/keep them off screen.

Not a hypocrite ... today. LOL

It's hard to pat a Hollyweirdian on the back because tomorrow he/zhe/she/glee will stab you in the face.

[–] TMC-4 (19408) 3 years ago

https://www.quora.com/Are-people-who-use-guns-cowards-as-Drew-Barrymore-stated-during-the-making-of-the-first-Charlies-Angels-movie-from-2000/answer/Daniel-Kaplan

First, I don’t know that Ms. Barrymore was talking about all gun owners. I would like to give her the benefit of the doubt and hope that she is simply talking about the cowards who commit mass murders or really any murder.

Still, there are some people who think that all gun owners are villains. I’ve had spirited discussions with people who believe that guns are a man’s way of compensating for an inferior penis size (they don’t have much of a reply when I bring up the fact that many women also own guns). They also like to make the gun thing into a lack of machismo.

If not wanting to face someone with just my firsts when he is a better fighter or is armed with a gun or knife, then I’m an absolute inveterate coward. I don’t want to die to prove that I’m not some kind of ninja or superhero. No thanks.

Still, I’d like to think that’s just common sense. Soldiers and law enforcement officers carry firearms. Would that statement also apply to them? I usually think of people who sign up to put their lives on the line as almost stupidly brave. Certainly braver than I am.

Are we also going to claim that those who choose to simply trust the police or their ability to run and hide are somehow braver than those who are willing to face a killer?

I’m afraid that, if the quote is correctly attributed and is also intended to be directed at all gun owners, I have to disagree. This is yet another example of situational irony being highly attractive to those with a pronounced case of Dunning–Kruger syndrome, just like “Israelis are the real Nazis” or “Vaccines cause problems far worse than the diseases they cure.” Both are about as believable as, “I just read it for the articles.”

[–] L1 (1316) 4 years ago

They could just be putting it out there like they do with predictive programming.