Hi,

to my amusement I see that this post will tie in and fit well with what Louise has brought back from the Fanderson convention.

It also deals with the acting and directing choices and abilities of the artists bringing UFO to us and how they influence the characters we get to see.

I am just now having a discussion about what is in character, what the actors put there and what we - as writers - ought to at least notice, quite regardless of any decisions we make. Thus I here have something which may be intriguing to those among you who wish to have a closer look at the creative process of these characters, in this case that of Straker.

These here are screen shots of Ed Bishop in another role (not long after UFO) displaying emotions and expressions which he - in this form - never ever once used for Ed Straker.

If you click on them, there should be a larger version coming up (just use the back button to come back here or use the rightclick right away).

lust	derision	violence
arrogance	violent lust	open sadism
scheming	deception	hatred

In case anyone wonders, no this character (Victor Stackman of Pets) isn't a nice guy, not even within a few miles of being one. He is a sadistic kidnapper of women, who he breaks via incarceration and whippings to being his lovers. In the line of that he cheats, lies, manipulates, charms and generally behaves in a rather unhinged manner. Really not nice.

What I personally find so very fascinating (and I went over all of my UFO DVDs and a couple of Bishop's other movies) is that these precise emotions we get to see here are not repeated anywhere else I watched.

Certainly not within Straker. The way Victor seduces girls is really lightyears away from how Straker comes on to (or rather backpaddles from) Jo Fraser. Victor is sassy, lies, is charming, suave and utterly sensual when faced with an object of desire. And it obviously doesn't need even the full blast of Bishop's acting to arrive there, that comes rather lightly, offhandedly.

By which it gets pretty clear that what we do not see from or in Straker is not missing because of any lack of acting capacity or knowledge in Bishop. The guy really knew what he was doing. No, he and the directors obviously decided to not put it there in the first place. Which again gels with the quote I cited regarding Bishop and how he saw Straker.

To me, as a writer, that means that I have to place trust into what these actors and the producers/directors did, and not fill in what I think should be filled in because I dislike what is there or would like what isn't there.

Food for thoughts.

One with powder blue turtlebeck and  leather jacket and wig.

"You REALLY should have warned me!"

"Well I thought this is just what the sociopathic art gallery owner who cages females should wear, Alec! Okay so I got tired of the Nehru. Not me? Sigh. I hope Harrods takes this outfit back--

Quote:


It's the medallion that gets me.

Yes wig, I'm 99 percent sure I was told or read that he used a wig. I know he owned the turtleneck. He made observations about Straker that made me regret he had not also tried writing. He said once it would have been his second choice of career. I had a lot of sources during my time as moderator-founder of EdBishopFans.I also knew things I could not reveal, often at Bishop's personal insistence. He never spoke to me but I had access to him. We lost a fine performer and human being. (hi Marc! Yeah, I'm alive, chuckle) I have a lot of his work. I even have a video of something he did which I know no other fan has. It was given to me by someone he'd done work for, as a tribute to my dedication to Ed.

Sociopaths have feeling, but it is for themselves. The mania for capturing women fit, I can see Victor upgrading to murder easily even if you can't. What was funny is that Bishop was such a devotee for women's lib and said so. They added the porn to that film afterwards, which made Bishop take it off his cv. I felt even though it was a crummy film, like a gold frame holding a bad photograph, he did express feelings about losing the gallery to a woman. Some of that was legit. Like fathers losing custody-the whole Priority business.

I saw indications of the emotions you indicated in the screen caps from Pets  in Straker. Mind you not full fledged but hints.
And yeah if anyone cares, Auspicious is Amelia.

Hi Amelia (or would you prefer I call you Auspicious?),

Quote:


No wig. For one thing such a shabby outfit as produced that movie could not have afforded the kind of wig necessary to make the hair look as naturally attached to the scalp as Bishop's did in that film Even tho that would have been more than they likely paid all actors put together, cause it would be fitting as well as Connery's in "Red October" (and we all know what that wig cost). For another, there are several sets of photos showing him going to a variety of events during that time in the US, and he has that exact  mane, just kempt back instead. Thirdly, no wig works up a lather like natural hair does when the owner sweats. Many tiny pointers anyway, which (when you look at wigs of the time, even expensive ones) tell you it's the real hair. And why not? One of his best features, really. Pity they highlighted it there, I liked Bishop's dark hair.

Quote:


You won't find anyone disagreeing with that.

Quote:


Sorry, no. Victor simply lacks too many of the basic requirements for a diagnosis of sociopath. He displays feelings for others, repeatedly, the given backstory has him pretty much a normal person up to several key experiences, thus he hasn't started that off as a child, he isn't cruel to his animals (as in what you would see from a sociopath), he just collects and hence jails them, the taming process as shown is comparatively considerate, not brutal and unempathetic. I could go on, but that alone already makes it clear Victor isn't anywhere near of what kind of personality gets correctly diagnosed sociopathic.

I'm actually quite partial to Victor. He's a sadist alright, though he probably would not even qualify as a sadist in need of medical treatment for the fact per se. More like counselling regarding his neurotic reactions to what happened to him and a shove towards consensual sadomasochism.

Quote:


There is no way he can have filmed some of those scenes without being absolutely clear about just what sort of sexploitation movie he was in. I saw one version of the movie so far, and received a detailed review of the scenes lacking in the one currently being sold. There's no real porn anywhere, though lots of naked butts and breasts (nipples included) and some shenanigans which do look a bit softcore. It's also not the only movie like that he was in, he obviously sometimes made poor choices as to what work to take and what not. I pull my hat though for his grit in going through with such stuff very professionally.

Quote:


Chuckling, few men react to that by caging and taming females. But I agree, the movie had an intriguing premise. Had a Nicholas Roeg been director, we even might have gotten a real whopper of a movie.

Quote:


Where would those be?

Quote:


Most have guessed as much by now. So how do you wish to be addressed?

And err yessss, that tiger came close to having a slice of Bishop... understandable enough 

>>Where would those be?<<
I'm not going to hunt for them all but you overlooked one.   Lust. The obvious example is Responsibility Seat. The eye crawl up the legs, the way he looks at her. The whole change from the "I'm no PR man" to taking her to the car, etc. Outside of UFO one example that comes to mind is The Mad Death. Again, lust.
Everyone can call me Amelia or whatever their preference is.
Bishop may not have seen the finished script. I was told by someone that would have known he didn't know how bad that thing was.
Talking about Games Girls Play?  Madame Claude? The disrobing scene in Kill Straker? (just teasing about that one)
If the definition of porn includes a rendition of the sex act, then Pets is porn.Yeah, Bishop's performance was an oil painting in a cracked frame. I have never seen him act badly. I love his book reading. Especially Snow White Rose Red. He plays all the chars in that. Oh and The Light in August.
Have you ever seen him on stage? I haven't. I would have loved it.

Hi Amelia,

Quote:


I wouldn't exactly call that lust. Lust looks different and he showed he knew the difference. After he realized she was having him on, there is not a single instance of lust or simple attraction (which I would classify what went up until that point) in sight. Actually he has a row of very nicely paranoid looks of loathing on the plate later (before the kissing scene).

Quote:


Oh, this is only about UFO, not anything else. So yes, there sure may have been other instances outside UFO, no problem.

Quote:


As you started out incognito and under pseudonym here, I am perfectly willing to go by that.

Quote:


Yep, such things happen. Today actors have grown smarter and include opt-out clauses.

Quote:


The common definition of hardcore porn is the full visibility of fe/male genitalia and PIV or PIA sexual acts in open view with the purpose of sexually arousing the watcher. Anything else might be adult or mature stuff, but not exactly porn.

Nagisa Oshima's rightfully famous and much lauded "In the Realm of the Senses" includes practically non-stop sexual acts between men and women, fully visible as well (the actors were normal actors, and not porn actors, yet they committed the act as demanded by the director), and ends in the severing of a thingy as an act of undying love. Yet you'll find no serious movie critic calling this film porn. Hence - the simple act alone is no measure of porn or no porn.

Quote:


Not on the stage, unfortunately. Only afterwards.

Quote:


Most people will murder if the motive is the right one. Stackman might have been tipped into full-blown sadistic behaviour, he quite clearly is basically a sadomasochist of the non-con variety.

But again no sociopath - he lacks too many necessary symptoms to even come within reach of being a real psychopath, not to speak of a sociopath. Unfortunately the term has been much abused, which is one reason why it is currently under critique.