One more for the road:
It’s a bit double-sad, because IIRC Willis was discovered as a roofer or something by someone, just a blue collar guy with a great face and whatnot. In reflection he’s probably had a life that he could have only dreamed of otherwise, but the predation of age can bring anyone low.
So the way that’s laid out, it reads as armor dude = Kevin Dillon, then Bruce, so who be the other flesh-face? Is that “Wire Room”? Weird name.
That guy’s name is SWAT, apparently.
They both have a weird mouth expression
Kevin Dillon looks like he’s watching a python eat a puppy.
Good to see whassisname from Entourage getting work.
When you’re a director but you get bottom billing to a reality TV star.
I have no idea what kind of expression Kevin Dillon is going for on the cover.
This is true. Real question; do we know or at least have a good idea when the @$$holes started taking advantage of Willis? I mean, the last couple years seem pretty obvious, but I wonder about shows and films before then.
editor’s note; I realize this begs the question of whether he was truly being taken advantage of or not, but having lived this long in a society fouled by corporate greed has jaded me to the point that I just assume
Dementia doesn’t typically appear overnight, so there likely isn’t some cut-off moment where it becomes immediately obvious Willis isn’t there anymore.
Ayyy, internet pedant swooping in: It’s not “begs the question.” Begging the question is a logical fallacy where you preload your question with not-proven assumptions that lay an antagonistic groundwork for any response from the inquired. Always use “raises the question.” Of course I post this in the most friendly manner, but once you get locked into a commonly misused phrase it’s hard to not point it out. Also, I might be somewhat obtuse in that it gets mixed in with a “leading question.”
Not meant to be an attack or anything. But I don’t like the ‘isn’t there anymore’ angle. Having had relatives with dementia, I think of it more like, they are ‘there’ but trapped. Again, not an attack. But it hits home.
Yeah, that was bad phrasing. Even in my very limited experience with dementia, they are still very clearly the person they always were.
Yeah, it seemed to me with my grandmother that she still had everything, but the tape was being run forward and backward out of her control. It’s brutal.
If things were really as bad as some are saying, then literally hundreds of people knew this and kept making movies with him.
Is not my assumption of malice just that? I wanted to call myself out on it to prevent firing up an unnecessary (imo) debate about it. (serious question - I always want to improve my wording)
I’m certainly not the language expert to lay down the law, but begging the question is, formally, strictly a logical fallacy. It’s just become a part of popular discourse. I would suspect because it has a soupcon (insert your own Frenchy modifiers) of fanciness, and has become popular because of that. In general use, incorrect use, it has no other meaning than “Raising the question.” And it has a lot of other, more correct uses.
Example: It’s consistent and correct to accuse someone of begging the question. It’s an attack or acknowledgement of logical fallacy. It has no weight in the simple use of, “That thing you just said raises a question beyond the scope of what you said.” That’s just raising a question.
As others have said, I think think it’s a clear-cut line. I’m also not sure how the process shook out in terms of Bruce Willis’ family, his agent, the producers on the movies he shot, and so forth. But given how far gone he is in these movies, there must have been a level of complicity down the line, and it’s shocking to me that it went far/deep enough that we have these “performances” committed to film. To my mind, it speaks poorly not just for the filmmaker, but for the people around Willis, who were managing and presumably caring for him.
But that is an interesting question, though. What’s the last time you feel like Willis was actually performing?
I don’t think you’re going to find many people using it formally these days, @Houngan! Instead, “begs the question” is just a colloquial synonym for “raises the question”. You can certainly score big on the pedantry points by correcting folks, but the original use of the phrase is mostly a rhetorical relic. I hardly even avoid using it anymore. But it does beg the question: what elements of language do we want to fight to hold? :)
The father illustrates this very well. Warning, is not an easy watch.