See Diary Part 9 here, or to access all entries, hit “The Diary” tab above.
Entry — a couple of years ago:
I found this video of Richard Armitage discussing Guy of Season 1. I don’t know what happened, but he either completely missed on this character, misrepresented the character or the writers changed direction. Or, well, I just don’t know what else could have happened. But at this point it’s really hard to believe Richard Armitage was this off. He just seems too in tune with how things are perceived to miss this badly. Or was he just yanking everyone’s chain when he said he wanted to make them squirm. Maybe he didn’t mean squirm from disgust.
I’m intrigued by this complete miss. Must find out what happened. Can I ever really know what happened? It’s going to drive me crazy until I find out what happened!
Whether I ever find out, I just love the video. Richard Armitage seems like a really sweet person. I hate to use the word sweet because it has connotations of someone who’s benign. I could never associate the word benign with Richard Armitage. Maybe sweethearted is a better choice. I’m becoming so biased about this actor. Maybe he’s really a schmuck.
Spoilers ahead if you haven’t seen all of Robin Hood Season 1.
See Diary Part 8 here, or to access all entries, hit “The Diary” tab above.
Entry — a couple of years ago:
I watched Robin Hood Season 1 in two days, and I’m pretty emotional right now and a little bit confused. One minute it’s about the nobility of the legend and lots of pontificating with a heavy dose of political statement, the next it’s pure camp, the next it’s an intense love triangle. The pontificating is why I hesitated to watch it. Haven’t we been beaten over the head enough with the nobility of Robin Hood? The camp was a pleasant surprise. The love triangle hooked me.
I’ll never admit that to anyone. Why I never want to admit I’m a romantic I don’t quite understand. In this age of in your face identities, people pounding their chests to show who they are no matter how goofy or silly or just bizarre, I can’t simply admit I’m a romantic. I could barely admit it to SO, but he already knew. It seems like weakness to admit an attachment for things romantic. Not sure if this is the result of a skewed view of what it means to be a feminist or being brought up as the only child to a man who really needed a son to hang out with him and repair the family car, shoot guns and never be silly and certainly never girlie. That son did come along but not before I had long since conditioned myself to refrain from anything girlie. I could never let on about having crushes or daydreaming about some heartthrob. Had to be too sensible for that nonsense. I was the girl who knew her way around radial arm saws, torque wrenches and flaring tools. I made regular adjustments to the valves of my first car, changed the oil and dealt with any flat tires by myself. All of that at the fighting weight of about 100 pounds. But hold the hand of a male or even smile openly at him to show I admired him? No, I gave new meaning to playing hard to get.
I can’t believe I cried at the finale. Surely my hormones must be out of whack. Oh, I’ve cried at movies and books a few times before, but Gisborne is horrible. Isn’t he? Oh, yeah, he is, but he doesn’t want to be? Damn! he just wants someone to think he’s valuable, and he sucked me right in. I lost it when he asked Marian if he pleased her. I’m tearing up; want to cry again right now. I know I’ve been totally manipulated, but it never felt so good to cry for a character. I’ve always been such a pushover for someone looking for redemption. I want to move heaven and earth to make sure they get it.
I can’t wait for the Season 2 DVDs to get here. I need to know what happens to Guy. So much for the legend of Robin Hood. Blast. I won’t be able to see it for a couple of months, and I refuse to watch the spoilers on YouTube even though I’m having a hard time not inadvertently seeing it. The videos seem to be everywhere. Oh, this is killing me! Why do we have to wait so long for these British shows?!!
I need to rewatch Season 1 or at least the finale.
A little while later:
I cried again. When he’s talking to Thornton I begin to get anxious for Guy, or maybe it starts when he visits Marian’s sick bed. He is so desperate and loves Marian in his own warped way, or maybe this character has warped me? I don’t know. All I know is that I’m rooting for Guy to have a great destiny and find peace, and Robin has faded from view. At least I was wiser this time around and watched so no one could hear my sob when Guy entreats Marian to approve of the church decorations and of him. Man, is this part of the camp? I wonder, and I feel dumb crying at this, but I can’t help it, and I don’t want to help it even though I do feel dumb. The crying feels too good.
Diary Part 10 here.
Screencap courtesy of my stash.
his other fans. There are so many creative people and nice people and just generally fun people in this fandom. I LOVE this! I LOVE Natalie and may be as big a fan of hers as RA’s, but I wouldn’t have known about her without knowing about him. Thank you, Richard Armitage, even though you may have no clue about Natalie.
Speaking of which, is it possible for someone to let him know about her?! Would that be appropriate? I honestly don’t know. I just write this junk here and don’t try to communicate with him at all. But if he hasn’t seen SFR, he is MISSING OUT! LOL!!
So if anyone has words of wisdom about how to let him know, send me a message or make a comment. Yeah, I know I can send a letter via his agents, but is there another, better way?
Oh, and if you have stumbled on this blog and haven’t had the pleasure of reading Nat’s blog, go there quickly! :D
ARRGH!! The end of my original post got cut off!
I can’t let this go without saying I love Heather too! It’s because of Heather’s wonderful videos that I even know who RA is, so I owe her a big THANK YOU! To see her work, go here and here!
WARNING: Spoilers in this post especially including the video!
I would have said thoughts, but I have to use words like cogitation occasionally. Then I don’t feel guilty about how I’m using that expensive education my parents paid for (oops, another sentence ending in a preposition; good thing this blog’s anonymous).
So I’m watching Strike Back, and it gets to this scene (SPOILERS AHEAD!):
and I remember what I like about most action flicks. They have Alpha males! Oh, I know what you’re thinking. Alpha is the guy who smashes beer cans on his head and has little or no respect for women. No, no. You’re wrong. Alpha is not just the guy who needs a shag and likes to handle guns and is good at handling guns, and wants to do damage to someone with the guns. He’s also the guy who kicks the door in and saves the damsel, and the damsel loves him for it and thinks about following him to the ends of the earth. When John Porter says trust me, I do.
I’m so glad RA is getting to play an Alpha again. My first introduction to him was as an Alpha male — John Thornton. The character I’m most fond of is an Alpha male — Guy of Gisborne (when he’s not kissing the Sheriff’s ass). But Alpha isn’t enough, and those characters are not successful just being Alphas. What women want and most men have not figured out is that we want Beta too. John Thornton and Guy proved they had some Beta, and it only made them more attractive. Conversely, of RA’s characters who are primarily Betas, they are even more attractive when Alpha emerges: Harry Kennedy when he wants Geraldine to pay up on her “debt,” John Standring when he runs off Andrew, Paul Andrews when he’s manifesting Alpha in the most elemental way, Lucas North when he’s taking the rich guy down in the pool. Imagine how dull these Betas would be without Alpha.
I’m not so sure we’ve really seen John Porter’s Beta. Maybe just a little peek in the beginning when he’s interacting with his 10 year old daughter, and of course when he spares the Iraqi boy. But that’s not enough for an RA character. RA likes to balance these enough to make things really interesting. We don’t have enough of Porter’s Beta yet. We need a little more, but oh, don’t slack on the Alpha while you’re at it.
I stumbled on a blog that gets the importance of the Alpha/Beta mix. The blogger gets it so well that I had a fleeting thought it’s really a woman writing the blog. His name even sounds like a woman’s when you say it really fast (ducking in case he reads any of the links to his blog). He is so dead on that it’s scary. Oh, I don’t think he’s dead on about everything, but he’s got women figured out fairly well — at least what turns most of them on. Yes, it’s just my opinion. Feel free to disagree, and I know some women do. LOL!
Here’s what he says about Alpha/Beta mix:
I generally disagree with the entire Alpha = good, Beta = bad mindset. You really need to have both Alpha Traits and Beta Traits in a marriage to really hit the sweet spot of happiness and sex. The blog is still new, but believe me I’m going to sound like a broken record on this point as the years play out.
If you’re a decent Beta, the solution is to add Alpha traits, not reduce Beta Traits and add Alpha. It’s not a zero-sum game where you can be either Alpha or Beta, but not both. You can and must be both. You still hold a job down, play with the kids, listen to how your wife spent her day, do housework etc. That’s all vital comfort building goodness. She likes and needs that to feel comfortable, like you’re invested in the relationship and family. These things are not “turn ons”, but lacking them makes them “turn offs”.
I sometimes hear that Alpha females do not want Alpha males:
The alpha girl doesn’t need Mr Alpha to sweep her off her feet and buy her a condo in town; she has enough money to do that herself. She is successful, confident and she wants a caring man who can pick up some of the domestic slack.
Oh, a caring Beta is great, and I may not need an Alpha to sweep me off my feet, but I WANT ONE! and SO delivers. He flexes his Alpha enough that I know it’s not eclipsed by his wonderful Beta. I have several little SOs running around to prove that.
Speaking of SO, I think he’s going to love this show. Especially if it doesn’t make Alphas look like morons. Actually, to SO there is no such thing as Alpha/Beta. He thinks all of that is crap. To him it just means being a man who has the usual wants and needs of a man and of course the usual responsibilities. Okay, maybe there is no Alpha, but it’s fun to think about it, and certainly fun to watch it!
P.S. If Porter and Layla are not going to have some Alpha fun at some point, then I wasn’t watching the right show. Can’t wait to see how that plays out.
I knew I was right. Of course I was right. I always am — in my dreams. But I am right about something this time. Media producers need to get it. People don’t want to watch shows through nefarious means. Well, at least most people don’t. Of course there will always be some people who just want to steal. But most people just get frustrated at the difficulty of accessibility. It’s only due to this frustration that most resort to viewing shows through YouTube, P2P sites, etc.
I hope someone who can effect a change is reading this:
When asked if they would pay for a service which provided an advertising and DRM-free TV show, movies and music experience, an impressive 66.4% of respondents said they would be prepared to pay for that.
The prices they would generally be prepared to offer are $1 per TV episode, $2 for a movie and 50c per music track. ($1 AUD = $0.91 USD)
edit: The problem, my friends, is that media producers are trying to create a scarcity where there is none. This is done to keep the price point artificially inflated. It’s not going to happen. Now that average Joe Schmuck (which is how I think media producers, and I’m mostly thinking of Hollywood, think of us) has the means to manipulate the technology, it’s not going to go away. Once people got a taste of that, they’re not going to give it up easily. About the only way this could be controlled, and even then I don’t think it really can be, is if we have an international group that has the ability to exact punishment. We are moving toward that, but we’re never going to get there, and do we want to go? I know I don’t, and it’s not because I’m a law breaker but because that kind of control is not necessary. The short of it is media producers need to catch up. They are lagging far behind, and it shows and it’s going to keep showing unless they learn to deal with the competition. Okay, I’ll stop now because I feel a serious diatribe coming on about copyright and all sorts of related subjects that this blog SHOULD NOT be conducive to.
But before I drop this, I love the last paragraph of this piece.
Here’s my gratuitous pic, so this post is not entirely me bitching, and it’s the tricep this time:
WARNING: Spoilers in this post — specifically in the video.
The sane side of me reared its ugly head and came up for air.
Last week I feasted steadily on the interviews for Strike Back. Oh, it was good, and I felt really satisfied at times, but the hunger was back the next day. Finally, at the end of the week, I was sick from consuming so much. I needed time to digest.
This is helping me get back to my crazy self:
Maybe it’s just me, but I don’t remember having quite so much press hype to gorge on with Spooks 8, and I was darn near starved to death with Robin Hood 3. Plus, RA seemed to be merely doing his duty promoting those shows, but I wanted to hear more of his take on character development, his personal development, and life in general. There was only one interview during Spooks 8’s promotion that stands out (more on that later). This time around I didn’t know which one to consume first and they’re still coming fast and furiously. Throw in some titillating comments from RA about possibilities, and it’s enough to make me pass out. A Guy of Gisborne spinoff?! I think that was either a crack or a crumb. Not sure which yet, and I’m not really sure it was for us fans anyway. I tend to think it’s for potential producers. He does mention a lot that he likes to work. Is there a producer crazy enough or creative enough to bring a Gisborne spinoff to the telly?
On a more serious note, I love Maria’s treatment of some of the interviews. I’m still digesting.
But what I know today is RA reveals a lot about himself to the point that I feel like a voyeur and a child. Sometimes he has a childlike quality in his discussions that evokes that response from me. Oh, I don’t mean he’s immature. If anything, he articulates his observations as an old sage, but it’s couched in terms of childlike wonder and a candidness that is seldom seen in adults, and certainly not in adults who are in the media. Again, the media types only seem to spin themselves for our consumption, so any childlike quality is designed merely to endear us to them and not because they really love to discover things about life. Maybe that’s what’s happening and I just like RA so much I don’t want to believe I’m being played. See what a cynic I am. I can’t just enjoy this. I’ve got to analyze it to death. I’ve got to question my reaction and his motives. SO has said many times that I question everything that moves and if it doesn’t, I kick until it does to the point where I beat the joy out of it. Maybe he’s right.
Oh, and my apologies for so many food analogies. I started a new eating regimen to accommodate my new jacked up exercise routine. I’ve returned to eating six meals a day, and it seems I can’t stop thinking about food even when I want to.
Next up: my thoughts on Episodes 1 & 2 of Strike Back, which I really am writing for myself. If you guys get something out of it, then goody. Otherwise, it’s placed here so the family doesn’t have to listen to it. LOL!
I have often found myself asking that question when I read an interview with Richard Armitage. His answers are almost perfect. Oh, my bias is showing. But let me explain. He gives answers that I actually ponder far longer than my reading requires. He also seems to have his profession in perspective and isn’t quick to believe his own press. As if that’s not enough to convince me he’s got his head on straight, he’s willing to admit he is still learning and his perspective is subject to change — more to ponder. This kind of thoughtfulness and candor is refreshing with anyone no matter what they do for a living. But to find it in an actor?
I guess I’ve been prejudiced in thinking actors are mostly caricatures and somewhat superficial and almost never thinkers. At least that’s how it seems when they’re confronted with an interviewer. Some of them state the obvious and never anything of interest that a casual observer couldn’t conclude. Kind of like the typical interview with a footballer who’s asked post-game how his team got the victory. He often responds, “We scored more points.” I would think they were making a joke, but their demeanor doesn’t suggest they’re being facetious at all. They usually have a wide eyed look about it all. I’ve often wondered if these athletes realize we already know that. Similarly, actors seem to think that they’re letting us in on something, but the reality is that we mostly get to witness their posturing, the spinning of their personalities for public consumption and hopefully increase in ticket sales or ad revenue or whatever it is that puts cash in their hip pockets. Whatever is actually happening, I almost always come away with a hollow feeling.
But I’ve never felt that with Armitage. With him I actually have to think at times. Quite simply he gives food for thought, and it’s because his comments make it clear that he thinks and mostly like a sane person and not someone inside the show biz bubble. Even this seemingly benign interview is interesting. Mostly for its unfailing honesty about the hassle to continually keep up appearances almost 24/7. Yuck.
From Times Online
April 27, 2010
The inside track: Richard Armitage
Fresh from filming the TV drama, Chris Ryan’s Strike Back, Spooks star Richard Armitage, 38, gives us his health report
Melissa van der Klugt
I’m normally one of those people who, unless you shove a sandwich in my hand, would forget to eat. The last diet I went on was in training for Strike Back and it involved six small meals a day to keep my blood-sugar level high. It was carbs during the morning and two shakes a day. I kept this up for 18 weeks of filming in South Africa, because you’re often on your feet for 12 or 13-hour days.
For Spooks I lost a stone.My character had just come out of a Russian prison after eight years. I had to weigh everything I ate and not eat too late.
I am always jumping off things on set, on an adrenaline high. At the end of a take people suddenly run up to me waving cotton swabs because I am bleeding and I haven’t noticed. Strike Back was the most physical role I have taken on and I had to work hard with an ex-military instructor to build up my physical mass and strengthen my ankles and wrists so that I wouldn’t injure myself.
I follow the Alexander Technique for 15 minutes each morning. It’s a way of helping my vocal production and control, but when my stress levels are high during filming, it gives me a break. I lie on the floor with a book over my head while I focus on the exercise. On the shoot in South Africa I fell asleep pretty much every time I did it.
I don’t take risks enough in my life. As I’m always under contract, I’m restricted by what I can and can’t do with myself, so skiing is my nirvana. I have been skiing for the past few years and being in the mountains is very therapeutic. You’re up above the clouds, it feels remote. When you’re skiing just faster than is safe there is a thrilling combination of risk and freedom.
Read the rest here ( if necessary, click again to make legible).
A new interview with RA is in TV.com. He says some of the same things but it’s not identical to the Sky magazine interview nor the Premiere interview. But even if it were, I’d probably review it more than once. LOL! It’s a wonderful interview.
What I’m trying to figure out is if Heather spent only 10 minutes with RA or this is supposed to take 10 minutes to read. If it’s the former, wow! that’s a lot in 10 minutes. If it’s the latter, then they have some slower readers in their audience. LOL! Okay, I know it’s just a catchy title, but words should mean something.
10 Minutes with Strike Back’s Richard Armitage
by Heather Hughes TV.com Staff Writer 04/28/10 06:03 AM
British actor Richard Armitage has been propelled into the public consciousness in recent years thanks to major roles in BBC dramas Spooks and Robin Hood. Six years ago, though, he was better known as John Thornton in period adaption North and South. That was his first lead part in a TV show and now he’s hoping to emulate his success by starring in another book adaptation–this time fronting Chris Ryan’s multi-million bestseller Strike Back. Despite being busy on the set of Spooks’ ninth season Armitage took some time out to talk TV.com about his new show and what’s to come…
TV.com: I’ve just watched the first two episodes of Strike Back and it’s incredibly intense. What was that like to film?
Richard Armitage: Oh, brilliant. Yeah, it was fast, exciting, and exhausting. But I think we knew that it had balls, if you know what I mean.
You had specialist military training for it didn’t you? What was that like?
That was one of the best aspects of it, I think, because you can get your head into that. I trained with a military guy here in the UK and then one in South Africa, and then we had three SAS advisors that were there the whole time. I think that when you feel you’ve got the real deal giving you advice it stops feeling like you’re playing at it and it feels like you’re doing it very seriously. When you believe that an SAS guy could sit and watch it, and that it wouldn’t be too farfetched, then that does help you to get into character.
And it was written by Chris Ryan who’s a former SAS soldier, which must’ve helped with the authenticity?
Yeah, absolutely.
The show’s based on his a bestseller. Did you, or any of the rest of the cast, feel under extra pressure because of its popularity?
Well, I really like taking stuff from literature because I feel that when people read a book they have a kind of response to it. I have a visual mind, so when I read a book I get an instant picture in my head and it’s very clear. I think that bringing that into reality is much easier than creating something out of nothing. Because it was Chris Ryan’s novel and, like you say, he was the military man I felt like [my character] John was semi autobiographical. I was really going through the book looking for every detail that I possibly could. The pressure to get it right is a brilliant pressure and I think everyone thrived on that.
You’ve starred in a couple of adaptations now. Is there one that you haven’t appeared in that you’d like to? Pride and Prejudice perhaps?
I wish! No, I’d like to do Crime and Punishment. I know it’s been done fairly recently but I love that kind of Russian, dreary, poverty-stricken grief.
[edit: if you’re landing on this page looking for 2010 pics of Richard Armitage at the BAFTAs, I have some here.
See Diary Part 7 here, or to access all entries, hit “The Diary” tab above.
Entry — a few years ago minus five months:
I couldn’t stay away from the Robin Hood videos on YouTube. I just had to watch some of them. Someone had up several of the shows, so I started watching. Now I own the first season. That makes over a $100 I’ve now spent on Richard Armitage. I console myself with the fact that I’m getting my money’s worth — watching them every day. I also found this site called RobinHood2006.com which has tons of screencaps. Then I opened a Photobucket account, a paid one! to store my own copies. Let’s see that makes over a 100 bucks plus about $20 more I’ve spent, and I dare not add up the money I’ve spent on the songs to the fan videos I like. I’ll soon own the second season of Robin Hood. The only reason I don’t have it now is it’s not out yet in America, and I don’t have a DVD player that will play the stuff from the UK. What in hell’s name is going on with me? I’m a cheapskate, and now I’ve spent close to 200 bucks because of some British actor I had never even heard of until several months ago?!!
Then again, this picture explains it:
And this Guy of Gisborne, bad ass as he is, is, well, is, well, I’m not sure how to describe him. All I know is that he’s even more sexy than John Thornton. No, he’s equally sexy as Thornton. Then again it depends on my mood. And then there’s Harry. Harry’s my favorite, and Richard Armitage is one savvy dude to play love interest to the Vicar. How could I not like some guy who falls for the Vicar? Then I saw a wonderful video of him at the BAFTAs, which I’ve learned is sort of like the Oscars except it includes TV shows (more useless crap for me to remember). In the video he’s being interviewed about whom he would like to kiss, and he says Nigella Lawson (I already knew her ’cause I’m a Food Network junkie!) after she’s eaten a chunk of chocolate cake.
Uh, where was I? Had to swoon for a second thinking of Richard Armitage liking a full figured woman. Who IS this guy?!
edit: For Twinkling Moon and anyone else who wants to hear RA talking about Nigella Lawson. :D His interview starts about 2:15. Rupert Penry Jones is at 1:50. If you would like your own copy of this or some other footage at the 2007 BAFTAs, then see this page at RichardArmitageNet.com
I thought it was cute, and if it is RA, there is nothing embarrassing about it in my opinion, and it’s my opinion (for the most part) that will dictate what does or does not get posted on this blog. Hopefully, no one was offended by that video. If they were, then they probably won’t want to read this blog in the future. By saying that, I’m not implying at all that I would put something up that would compromise Richard Armitage. I respect him even though I’m wrestling with objectification (more on that later; not quite ready to talk about it yet. I still want to wallow in it a bit).
But today, I’m trying out a new word that I love. It’s already becoming entrenched in my vocabulary. At least in my head and on this blog. Not sure if I’m ready to utter the word, but I do LOVE dorktastic! and it’s now part of the RA Lexicon. Thank you, Nat for introducing me to that word in Busting a Groove!
Dorktastic gets at another facet of RA that I love. His dork factor. I love it when some guy is very sexy and masculine but has a bit of dork going on. It’s a type of vulnerability, and we women need vulnerability in the men we’re attracted to. No, I don’t want to psychoanalyze that just yet. It might reveal more about my control freak than I’m comfortable with. LOL!
I find it interesting that Guy of Gisborne, who is fatally sexy, has a bit of dork peek through now and again. I love that about Guy — showing that vulnerability. Showing the kid, the little boy inside the bad ass. Is it just me who finds this attractive?
Okay, hit me with the psychoanalysis. I’m ready. LOL!
Wait! I forgot my gratuitous pics.
Dork moment coming up:
He has no clue; just can’t hold back his dork:
There he goes:
Classically perplexed like a true dork, or huh?
My heart went out to Guy in that scene. I had to mentally slap myself to remember the heinous things he’d done. Such is the power of the dork when it’s in a sexy package.
For a less cursory treatment of dork as it applies to RA, check out Servetus’s post Dorktastic Past.
Screencaps courtesy of RobinHood2006.com (update: which no longer exists) and RichardArmitageNet.Com
RAFrenzy 
