|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Sat Apr 01, 2006 4:55 pm
I would be quite honored, really.
Thank you. Actually made my little day. X3
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Apr 01, 2006 5:43 pm
Utakan ~Musical~Angelic~Angel~ Actually, i think erik would be the most fun to play...... but thats just my opinion. I mean, wouldn't you have fun by causing chaos wherever you went? xd That's not the point of Erik. The man had so much wrong with him psychologically. Just playing him to, scuse my language, ******** with the management would be very Out of Character. No offense, but you have just proven my point as to why no one can play him right. Very true.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Apr 02, 2006 1:04 pm
Utakan I would be quite honored, really. Thank you. Actually made my little day. X3
*hisses in jelousy* But I wanna stalk Uta!! scream
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Apr 02, 2006 2:15 pm
Can't you guys share me? XD
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Apr 02, 2006 4:28 pm
Dear Gaians,
*Seeths* I simply cannot... unless.. *points to RDS* You stay as far away from GCD as possible. That is my territory. *hides Uta in coattails*
I shall write to you soon for my allowance of 20,000 Gaia Gold
Your obedient friend and Angel, the Phantom of the GCD.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Apr 02, 2006 5:34 pm
*peeks out* :3 I feel so loved.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 03, 2006 6:45 pm
Erik would be a tough character to play... It's hard to play someone who has that much of a mental complex. 3nodding
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 03, 2006 6:54 pm
Jeez, what's with the stalkers, Utakan? Wnt me to keep them away?
Hiii-yah! *Brandishes the ninja-knife-thingies at the UtaStalkers*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 03, 2006 7:02 pm
XD Nah, I'm good. Uta needs the attention sometimes.
I must be some loveable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 03, 2006 7:55 pm
I think Erik would be hard to do because he has so many emotions, so many hidden stories that it's sometimes hard to sort out which emotion to show...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 03, 2006 8:07 pm
Phantoms_lover I think Erik would be hard to do because he has so many emotions, so many hidden stories that it's sometimes hard to sort out which emotion to show... That's, obviously, my point. There is too much about him shrouded in mystery that no one could ever play him correctly. They could get close, but not entirely correct.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 03, 2006 8:52 pm
Utakan Phantoms_lover I think Erik would be hard to do because he has so many emotions, so many hidden stories that it's sometimes hard to sort out which emotion to show... That's, obviously, my point. There is too much about him shrouded in mystery that no one could ever play him correctly. They could get close, but not entirely correct. Michael Crawford certainly did a good job, but you're right, no one can actually play the part the way it is meant to be played.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 03, 2006 9:07 pm
Phantoms_lover Utakan Phantoms_lover I think Erik would be hard to do because he has so many emotions, so many hidden stories that it's sometimes hard to sort out which emotion to show... That's, obviously, my point. There is too much about him shrouded in mystery that no one could ever play him correctly. They could get close, but not entirely correct. Michael Crawford certainly did a good job, but you're right, no one can actually play the part the way it is meant to be played. Michael Crawford did good for the Musical Phantom. What I'm talking about is Erik originally as he was written. There are too few details concerning the character that no adaptation or version is ever correct.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 03, 2006 9:38 pm
Since my name was mentioned, I figured I had to add my two cents.
Utakan, my apologies if I'm starting to be a pain for you. 3nodding
I agree with you to an extent, but disagree as well.
My first point I'd like to make is that Erik is not completely without a past. I know you're aware of this, but the way you phrase it makes it sound like we know nothing about Erik. Not true. Leroux hides or explains plenty of nuggets about Erik's past in the book. We know for instance that his name is not really Erik, that is just one he picked up somewhere down the line. We know a bit of his family history, being the son of a master-mason, something that had to have shaped him in his later life, even if his parents were horrified of him. Leroux says that Erik "seemed not to know the difference between good and evil" during his time in Mazenderan, inplying that he never really learned them in his tortured childhood. I think it can be argued that Erik enjoyed himself in Mazenderan as a if not friend but companion to the Shah, as he had "provided him with many a hearty laughs" meaning that Erik had a good relationship with another human being for once, but was later betrayed by them. We know Erik murders, but we also know he has compassion as well as passions. He claims the death of Philippe as a "very sad accident" and he shows his compassion and remorse in the end. I could quote or reference things like this all night, but I'll save us all the reading.
What I'm getting at is that we may not know everything about Erik, but we have a fairly good outline of the life that led up to his time in the opera, even as far as his emotional state in some cases. Certainly we can not know what goes on in Erik's head to 100%, but I would argue that that is true of everyone you can Roleplay, aside from your self. Look at Raoul for instance, we know a bit more of his backstory, but we don't know say, how the death of his parents effected him emotionally or how being raised as the lesser to his brother weighed on his mind. My point is simply that any character not created by the person doing the Rping, can not be played perfectly if using the reasons you claim why Erik can not. We may not be able to know exactly the way Erik thinks or the way he feels, but we can ascertain what some of those feeling are and through our own experiences and imaginations get a decent idea of them. Just as we can any other character.
Is Erik hard to do? Yes. Can we know his madness? No. But we can imagine what that pain can be like. That is what makes him such a compelling character. I think of myself as a writer, and from my point of view, a character with less history or which we know less about is easier for us to write about. If we know everything there is to know about a character, what point is there to Rping or writing more about them. That makes them boring.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 03, 2006 9:53 pm
Ah yes. I was hoping someone would contradict me on things. That always makes the conversation interesting. heart
You're right, and I will agree. I suppose I need to read the book for the millionth time. We all miss things here and there and I'm glad someone else is there to shove me along and give more.
You bring up a point with Raoul, I'll say that. We can't know everything about all the characters otherwise it wouldn't have made for a very interesting mystery novella, now would it?
But I want to bring something to light. You say the characters with less history or informative background are more fun to play. Oh yes, I'll agree out of experience, but this is also the flaw that leads to poor assumptions and the nonsense we deal with every day.
Everyone has their own view of each character. It's how the phandom runs, I suppose. But Erik is one of the more poorly portrayed characters (with Raoul tying of course) and it leads to much confusion over what and who he really is.
By all means I'm not saying no one play them. That would be hypocritical of me. I think my point is it takes skill to play him as correctly as possible without delving so far into some Romanticism and romantic ideals. Hopefully you know the difference, being a writer.
It's a pleasure talking to you, really. No annoyance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
