Jump to content
IGNORED

LaBeouf: Out of control and tweeting furiously


Schlitze

Recommended Posts

LeBeouf has gone out of control in recent months. He's lashing out at anyone who dares to question his art. Even those who's art he's copying and not giving due credit. But it's his butthurtedness on twitter thats making the headlines. He reminds me of a cross between Joaquin Pheonix and Amanda Bynes. Butthurt from Alec Baldwin calling him a ''cocksucka'' his defensiveness has gone into overdrive recently with some weird tweets aimed at Jim Carrey who pwned him at the Golden Glodes http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/gossip/shia-labeouf-slams-jim-carrey-golden-globes-diss-article-1.1578284

Shia's reation was fail, even after all the edits.

Y'all back Shia's artistic integrity claims? Or do your buttcheeks go into involuntary spasms as if Michael Bay has taken to the stage?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 114
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Guest disparaissant

haha i have been sorta following this for like a month now and it makes me laugh uncontrollably. he plagiarizes, then plagiarizes his apology for plagiarizing. then plagiarizes his apology for plagiarizing his apology for plagiarizing. it's absurd. i wouldn't be surprised if it's some kind of ""performance art"" thing but even if it is, it's shitty and not well-done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I feel like John does not have positive feelings towards Shia.

Also, do y'all think he wrote this?

http://www.metamodernism.org/

 

I guess if we are feeling embarrassed for him then I will contribute.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gJiOsIByJjs

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M_aKH-EMCu0

 

It doesn't matter though. This is the start. Then the rehab. Then the comeback. He will probably be a lot better when he is older and still looks young. Maybe he will go on an acid journey or something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like how Patton Oswalt is just like, "We're ragging on someone? Fuck it. I'm in."

 

  1. Dear Shia LaBeouf (@thecampaignbook): If you're gonna be that dumb, delusional AND boring when you speak, just go ahead and plagiarize.

  2. Action figures, videogames, superhero movies, iPods: All are continuations of a love that wanted more. 2/2

  3. Everything we have today that's cool comes from someone wanting more of something they loved in the past. 1/2

  4. Not easy to pull off crazy AND moronic, but you did it, Shia LaBeouf. Sheer assholery ahead: http://bcool.bz/19LiIOH .

 

Also, holy fuck.

 

http://www.bleedingcool.com/2014/01/02/authorship-is-censorship-bleeding-cool-in-conversation-with-shia-labeouf/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I must say this thread has made me starting to grow fond of the Shia. He's just a regular dork like the rest of us, only more sexy because of the fame and fortune. But that doesn't keep him from being a knucklehead. Like the rest of us. He doesn't care.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I must say this thread has made me starting to grow fond of the Shia. He's just a regular dork like the rest of us, only more sexy because of the fame and fortune. But that doesn't keep him from being a knucklehead. Like the rest of us. He doesn't care.

 

I don't know about all that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe he will go on an acid journey or something.

 

Michael Cera is doing the whole self-referential explorer of consciousness vibe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm actually even more confused by this guys state of mind after watching those first 3 youtube clips. Seems very self aware and over-confident (perhaps speeding or coked up) and almost pre-empting his lack of self control. Now is a good time for him to pull out the modem like he said he was going to do.

Maybe he will go on an acid journey or something

 

According to Shia LeBeouf, Shia Lebeouf actually took acid to make his ecstasy scene in Charlie Countryman more realistic :facepalm:

And when the director was asked about it in an interview he was like ''What?"

 

Oh, and this just in from his co-star today http://www.mstarz.com/articles/24864/20140115/shia-labeouf-strips-naked-drops-acid-hallucinates-demolishes-the-necessary-death-of-charlie-countryman-movie-set-dont-do-drugs-harry-potter-star-rupert-grint.htm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm only just catching up on this, I'd heard little bits about it. I like Daniel Clowes' comics so I thought I'd be anti-whatever-it-was Shia LaBeouf was doing, but I think it's pretty interesting. I reckon he's playing next level media games and could definitely be seen to relate into that manifesto posted earlier, here's a recent interview with him:

 

 

 

Almost two years ago, writer/director/actor/comics creator Shia LaBeouf contacted Bleeding Cool about the mini-comics he was creating and selling at Meltdown Comics in LA.

After the skywriting stunt yesterday, and the continual "repurposed" apologies to Dan Clowes from other people, over the plagiarism of Clowes' work in LaBeouf's most recent short film, I came across the address again.

I sent an e-mail. Minutes later I had a reply. And so last night, I was up until half past three, deep in conversation with the man about art, apology and plagiarism. Here's how it went down. And a quick Google search indicates that they appear to be in Shia's own words as well.

Richard Johnston: Tweeting with the voice of others. Is this art?

Shia LaBeouf: What does an artist do - they just point and say look at this.

RJ: No, that's what a critic does. I am certainly interested though.

SL: I agree with Julian Schnabel , Jeff koons, Duchamp ect...... You agree with?

RJ: Scott McCloud.

art.jpg

SL: Cool, u stick with ur squad I'm good with mine Live good player

RJ: Do you believe art needs an audience? When they point and say "look at this" do they need to be speaking to anyone other than themselves?

SL: Of course - art is not about itself, but the attention we bring to it. (UPDATE - Duchamp) Art is a lie the makes us realize the truth. (UPDATE - Pica In the 21st century there is NO personal language. Just personal selection of language. We are products of editing. (UPDATE - George Ward) Not authorship. Appropriation has been the most influential theme in art sense the 70s. If you look at Warhol's work and say " oh well he didn't paint that - its just silk screens " Your missing the point. Our notion of genius- a romantic - isolated figure - is fucking outdated An updated notion of genius would have to center around ones mastery of information (UPDATE - see footnote below) And it's dissemination It's the 21st century, thug life It wants to be fee.

RJ: Well, Warhol said art is what you can get away with. Gaugin went for "Art is either plagiarism or revolution". Do you believe that opportunity is still valid, or is it all about plagiarism now?

As for "it wants to be fee" - is that a Freudian slip? Information may want to be free. But should the author be able to demand a fee?

SL: Authorship is censorship Should God sue me if I paint a river? Should we give people the death sentence for parking violations- You'll not only have less parking violations but less DRIVERS.

RJ: Jung said the only way to achieve true selfhood is to create what no one but you could possibly create and all the other stories are just guides to get us there.

I think God's rights to rivers have entered into public domain now.

I don't believe that parking violations deserve the death sentence. However fines are meant to be paid. If you park on someone else's driveway, you should probably ask permission first. And hotwiring someone else's car and taking it for a spin, is also frowned upon.

SL: The word law is against my principles. The problem begins with the legal fact that authorship is inextricably bound up in the idea of ownership and the idea of language as Intellectual property. Language and ideas flow freely between people Despite the law. (UPDATE: Gregory Betts) It's not plagiarism in the digital age - it's repurposing. (UPDATE: Kenneth Goldsmith) Copyright law has to give up on its obsession with "the copy" (UPDATE- Lawrence Lessig) The law should not regulate "copy's" or "reproductions" on there own. It should instead regulate uses - like public distributions of copyrighted work - That connect directly to the economic incentive copyright law was intended to foster. (UPDATE: Lawrence Lessig) The author was the person who had been authorized by the state to print there work. They were the ones to be held accountable for the ideas. THE FIRST LAWS ON AUTHORSHIP WERE USED TO CENSOR & PERSECUTE THE WRITERS WHO DARED PUBLISH RADICAL IDEAS. Simple - should creation have to check with a lawyer?

RJ: Do you recognize an inherent hypocrisy in your principles, in that you are a direct beneficiary of current copyright law, in that you have financially benefited from it to a far greater extent than most authors will ever achieve? That your acting work that has netted you millions and given you the financial independence that the vast majority of people can only dream of, is inherently a result of such laws? And that speaking or working against them in this fashion when they are the very reason that your word carries such weight and impact, can rub the wrong way those who rely on such laws to earn a small living? Can you hold a principle, when you reason you can hold it so comfortably is that you have benefited from the opposite of that principle being maintained?

But I come back to the original question. Is the repurposing of other people's apologies for your own on Twitter art... or laziness? Is it an attempt to create, or is it simple dickishness? Can it be both? Is there an inherent hypocrisy in apologising for reproducing someone's work without their permission on film, by reproducing other people's work without their permission on social media? Is it all part of a wider plan, a wider statement, a wider artistic endeavour, or is an attempt to wind people up? Or is it both?

SL: Both I never asked to be paid And never profited off anyone's back acting is Plagiarism Like magicians We tell you we're gonna lie to you

RJ: You have an agent. You have lawyers. Do you not pay them to ask for you to be paid, on your behalf? Aren't you just outsourcing the request to be paid?

And can acting be plagiarism when it is being conducted with the author or owner's approval, when they are credited as author or owner, when they are paid as author or owner?

When you apologize, Shia, is that the truth?

SL: I'm very sorry I have agents to suss out material I have a lawyer to get me out of jail Nothing is original Creativity is just connecting things (UPDATE: Steve Jobs)

----

And with that, we left it. The conversation continues, if only in our own heads.

If you quote from this conversation, Bleeding Cool would appreciate a mention, though Shia doesn't mind too much, it seems. Also I'd like to credit Hannah Means-Shannon for the Jungian point.

UPDATE: We are updating any plagiarisms made by Shia in this interview within the piece, but this was offline and too big.

?our notion of genius ? a romantic isolated figure ? is outdated. An updated notion of genius would have to center around one?s mastery of information and its dissemination.? - Uncreative Writing by Kenneth Goldsmith.

Thanks to Dr. Darren Wershler. Concordia University Research Chair in Media and Contemporary Literature, for that spot. Also, thanks to OhSnapSki and Glitchy.

 

 

 

 

Here's the short film in question, it has plagiarized lines but that's not all there is to it. Make up your own mind:

 

http://youtu.be/jtgBWou5E-A

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.