serialinterface

Let the Norm flow through you

For any laymen reading this, I think /u/Conspirologist was talking about "method acting" versus "classical acting".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Method_acting

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_acting

Method actors talk about how they sometimes experience mental/emotional issues because of how they get so deeply involved with their characters and will spend months studying and training and actually TRYING to be that character, whereas "classical actors" just wear their characters like masks and can take them off at the end of the day with no lingering effects.

Hope this helps anyone who was confused or offended at /u/Conspirologist's question.

For my part, I'm glad Matt and everyone else stuck to playing characters rather than trying to become them in their minds... Just playing the character felt authentic enough for me as a viewer.

edit: confused classical acting with character acting for a bit; character acting relates to a specific actor's ability to play a very specific kind of character effectively. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Character_acting

That is seriously the best episode of the Simpsons, by far. I know, I know, subjective opinion. But I can re-watch it every few months and never be bored.

If he was tight-lipped about being a quartermaster in Egypt of all things, he probably worked for one of the CIA-precursor groups and did things he's not proud of.

That's not quite true. Children can be contractually bound, they are just immune to certain consequences of breaking the terms. It all depends on the contract and what its for etc etc, but your statement is absolutely not universal.

The reason most companies won't enter into a contractual deal with a minor is precisely because they most likely wouldn't be able to hold the minor accountable for contract violations (usually). It doesn't mean they can't enter into a contractual deal with a mionr, it's just considered bad/risky business.