Badmovies.org Forum

Most of you know that Robert Blake was aquitted of killing his wife.
During his press meeting he stated that he was broke and needed a job.

I say give the man some work!
I think he would be perfect if cast in a role where he plays a totally vicious character.
Maybe a Mafia type.

Give that man a role he could really play.
I've always liked Blake as an actor and I think it would be cool to see him in a new film with other stars.
Make him the villain....definitely.

What do you think?

(http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/eo/20050224/capt.c587b705a764aca271b518f22037ba3e)

I mean just look at that mug....tell me he wouldn't be great as a bad guy in a new film!



Post Edited (03-18-05 22:28)

You do realize that  he may have killed his wife right? Okay okay I agree he does look like a villian type.

daveblackeye15 wrote:

> You do realize that  he may have killed his wife right?


You do realize that he was aquitted, right Dave? That means innocent, not guilty until proven innocent.

Although he would be good as a villain, I would think that he could use a sypathetic role to help his reputation as, irregardless that he was aquitted. he was basically convicted in the eyes of the media over the course of the trial.

Ridley Scott was quite positive in his remarks toward Blake's ability to get work. Maybe they will work together. That would be interesting.

 

I know I know, but to me "May" isn't exactly concrete, it's not yes or no it's maybe or might have, but I was smart  I would have just said "aquitted" (I didn't want to copy ASHTHECAT) You're right totatly innocent until proven guilty. It just felt a little weird making a question like this after his wife died.

Go villian! But can he act? He's got the look.

He has quite a history in cinema and television. As a child actor, he was in the OUR GANG/LITTLE RASCALS troup and he played Red Ryder's sidekick, Little Beaver, in the Red Ryder Westerns. He gained critical acclain for his role in the movie IN COLD BLOOD (I believe 1967). And, of course, he had the TV series BARETTA where he played second banana to a cockatoo named Fred (just kidding, he was the star). The BARETTA series was inspired by the real life David Toma (there actually was a short lived series called TOMA which preceeded BARETTA).

With such a long and varied career, it would be nice to see him continue.

          Knowing that this guy walked off his charges ala O.J. and the Ramseys(John & Patsy),but yet didn't quite horribly butcher his wife(like a human shish-ki-bob)like O.J.,I'd say senetence ole Baretta to work with the likes of Fred Olen Ray,Jim Wynorski,David DeCoteau,Albert Pyun,and even Donald Farmer,for I'm sure that Eric Roberts and Gary Busey are growing tired of all of the B movie slop that they're in,so why not deliver a (more) fitting sentence to this guy?


        Shameless plug for my blog:
        http://journals.aol.com/stevmedia/Genre-fied

Sure I think that Blake is a competent actor and could do quite well if given the right part.  I also think that we should give Jack Valenti a great villan role, just look at the guy:

(http://pov.typepad.com/main/jack-valenti-1-thumb.jpg)

Come to think of it, Blake did play a real a***ole in Money Train with Wesley Snipes and Woody Harrellson.

He was the guy who controlled the train and the money on it.
I haven't seen that one in a while....gonna have to rent it sometime soon.

Unlike OJ, Blake got off because the DA  didn't have any real evidence. OJ got off despite the evidence.

Robert Blake is capable of playing it very creepy.

>You do realize that he was aquitted, right Dave?
>That means innocent, not guilty until proven innocent.

Yeah, just like OJ and Alger Hiss. Except that in this case, there really is some possibility that someone else did it, not him.

Anyway, I think the ideal role for Blake would be some kind of rascal, maybe part of a whole gang of rascals.

I'm posting at my blog again, BTW
http://davemunger.blogspot.com

I also thinks someone else did it because she was a con woman who was riping off some single men in America in different states.

I also thinks O.J knew who really killed his ex and her boyfriend but is not telling.

DARKWOLF wrote:

> I also thinks O.J knew who really killed his ex and her
> boyfriend but is not telling.

Sure he knows who did it and he's just not telling...HE DID IT!

Well it's your opinion but STOP YELLING!!!!!!!!

It was stressing a point, not yelling, but you have provided a perfect example of yelling yourself.

Not you odinn7.

Blake playing a killer, nut job, or villain? "In Cold Blood", "Money Train", "Tell Them Willie Boy is Here", "Corky", or that mid 90s TV miniseries where he played another real life killer, this time a man who murdered him entire family. In his adult career, it's the roles where he's a sympathetic or likeable guy that are rarer, like "Electra Glide in Blue" or "Busting". Even in the TV series "Helltown" he was a heroic priest, and he was hard to like.

Blake was my favorite part of the David Lynch head trip film "Lost Highway" as the mysterious stranger with no eyebrows who has the creepy and odd "we've met before" conversation with Bill Pullman.

Blake also used to regularly appear on Tom Snyder's CBS talk show in the 90s. Truely fascinating TV with all his rambling, wild stories, freak outs, and abusive comments directed at enemies and himself. No doubt he was often drunk or wired on something, you felt bad for watching him, but couldn't look away either. I just hate that I'm too young to have caught his wild antics on "The Tonight Show" in the 70s.

I figure he'll find some kind of work if people can put up with him. I could see him getting the kind of straight to video roles that David Carradine has played when his career dips.

DARKWOLF,
I believe Menard was referring to what I posted.
That aside, yeah, it's my opinion and probably 95% of the rest of America too. As far as yelling is concerned, I WAS  MAKING A POINT. HELL, YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT YELLING, EVEN YOUR USER NAME IS YELLING.
Now, why don't you go and help OJ look for the "real" killers on the back 9.

If the price was reasonable, I might have some work lined up for Mr. Blake...there's more than a few people I need rubbed out





just kidding :-)

I say that in cases covered by the media, we should reverse our principles to read "guilty until proven innocent and even then presumed guilty."  After all, 95% of Americans were there and saw OJ do it with their own eyes, right?  

Just like Blake?  

Just like we all saw Richard Jewel plant that bomb at the Atlanta Olympics, too...  Remember how we all could tell he was guilty right away and were blabbing about what his sentence should be... oh, wait.

Everyone's welcome to voice their own opinion.  Mine says that if you think you know who committed a crime when you have only that 20% of the facts that the media feels compelled to report (or misreport), then you've got some serious delusions going on.

Not saying I think OJ did or didn't do it, just having the brains to admit I don't know because I wasn't there and didn't see any of the evidence.  Twelve people who did see ALL of the evidence didn't buy the prosecutor's case.  Get over it.

It doesn't help O.J.'s case, though, that another jury found him guilty in a civil liability case over the murders.

Yeah, but the standards of evidence are much more lenient in a civil case - You don't have to prove he did it, you basically just have to prove that he's a millionaire and he might have done it.  

Now why that is is something I don't understand.  Frankly, if you're acquited of a crime in criminal court, then ANY civil suit regarding that crime should automatically be thrown out.  That has nothing to do with OJ, that's a general opinion of mine.  If anyone can explain legal reasoning of why you're allowed to file a civil suit against someone for a crime they've been acquitted of, I'd really like to know.  I'd like to understand how that isn't a form of double jeopardy.

Imagine you're wrongly accused of murder and evidence is brought to light in front of a jury that shows you didn't do it.  You are found not guilty and that's the headline.  Then the victim's family can legally take you to the cleaners for your life savings anyway?  Huh??

I don't know if the O.J. situation was an unusual use of both courts or not, but in the case of say a chemical company which caused deaths and birth defects due to chemical dumping; I would think that would be a case of whether or not they were found criminally liable, they should also be taken to court for civil liability so the victims can recoup something for what was done to them.

Would that, however, apply to the O.J. case? Where there victims besides Nicole and Ron?

I asked the same question at the time. I understand that different standards are applied to criminal and civil cases, but it just seemed to me that the judge should have looked at the not-guilty verdict and thrown the case out.

This is nothing related to the specific case, just seems like common sense to me. Two courts can't be in disagreement and both be right.

Blake excelled in his role aspirational copper in 1973's Electra Glide in Blue, and, as Hollywood is so keen on remakes, why not recast him as Officer Wintergreen or have him play the sergeant? Ridley Scott could put in a good word in for him. It's always good to see once-popular veterans doing what they should be doing, even if they prove to be lesser parts -they get noticed.
Alternatively, he might be advised to get in touch with cult film-makers like Quentin Tarantino. QT rediscovered B-movie extroadinaire David Carradine and gave him one of his best roles as the mysterious villain 'Bill' in kill Bill.

Eirik,
I'm not looking to start a problem here. The reason I say he's guilty is because of what Menard said. I also recall him saying that when his trial is done, he's going to spend the rest of his life to find the real killer. It just seems odd that he would think the killer is on a golf course. The whole trial was also a show of what poor police work was involved in the whole case.
Not looking to start a debate but I've been around long enough to have formed 2 opinions on the court system in general:
1) Despite what is said, generally you are guilty until proven innocent.
2) Money buys justice.
Like I said, just my opinions and I don't fault anyone for having their own. I just wanted to clear up where I was coming from.

I'll agree with odinn7 about the money buys justice thing. If OJ had been a common working class guy from 'hood his ass would be sitting on death row. That is if the cops hadn't blown him away during his little televised chase.

Scott Peterson remarked after the Blake verdict "I wish I had killed my wife in California"

I'm finally back after my very stupid computer block me from coming in here. So I read your smartass post to me odinn 7.  Will I have to say this first that you started first with the yelling at me so I told you to stop it but now your trying to start trouble with me. I like my name big I use to have a smaller name but everybody had the same name so I change happy now?

Smartass post...moi? Like Yoda you are. I no didn't started the yelling I justed only was emphasising a point I wuz making. You name sure is big it funny that you have smaller name once but everybody haved the same name so you change I happy now.

Oh...that was wicked (heh..heh)

Wow an oldy but not a goody joke Mr. Comedian do you got anymore lame ones.

Just precisely how old are you DARKWOLF? I had better composition and temperment when I was in elementary school. If you have a self-persecution complex where you have to blame others for your lack of understanding, I suggest you take it somewhere else as odinn7 deserves a lot better treatment than being blamed for something which only exists in your mind.

Some people think Cpt. Kirk had something to do with it.....

So Menard you think odinn7 had the god given right to yell at me for given my own opinons about the new  things I read, heard, and seen on tv about the O.J case huh interesting.

I would state, yet again, that he did not yell at you, but, what is the point. as you seem to not be able to either comprehend a simple exchange in communication, or you are just simply self-obsessed and cannot accept any truth which does not fit within the constraints of your singularly narrow ego.

That was a rather long way of saying that nobody yelled at you.You just want to believe they did.

Um... just an observation, but I gathered from one of his posts that DARKWOLF lives in Germany.  That could possibly mean that English ain't his native language.  Granted, you may not have known that, but would you guys be doing so well in a second language?  

odinn7 - I wasn't angry, it just depresses me how the media has degraded peoples' faith in the justice system while making it almost impossible for that justice system to operate.  They have no shame in whipping up mob mentality, intruding into the courtroom, tampering with the nationwide jury pool before charges have even been pressed.  It's crazy.  Just recall if you will what went through your mind when the FBI announced Richard Jewel was the suspect in the Olympic bombing.  You assumed he was guilty, I bet.  I did too, but I've changed my outlook since that case.  

Does money buy justice?  It buys a better defense attorney, sometimes.  The Dupont family could buy OJ Simpson 100,000 times over, but that Dupont guy who murdered the wrestler in Pennsylvania back in 1995 is in jail and will be for a long time.  The only thing his money bought him was it bought off the media and got them to ignore the case.  OJ is free because the cops (due to incompetence or lack of evidence) couldn't make a case.  Not because he had the "dream team" of lawyers.  Geragos couldn't save Scott Peterson.

And I also don't believe that people are considered guilty until proven innocent by the legal system.  Only by people who spend too much time watching cable news.

I don't believe that DARKWOLF is from Germany as he's using Adelphia (Cleveland, OH it looks like) for internet, I think it is Wence you're thinking of. But, that's all irrellevant really...

I apologize DARKWOLF, but in all honesty, I was not yelling in that original post. I was simply stressing a point by typing in caps. You decided I was yelling and came back at me for that. This is why I did what I did. No excuses, I'm just explaining my reasoning for doing it even though it was wrong to do. And yes, to answer your previous question, I do have plenty more lame ones. I believe this is why my wife hates my sense of humor as she is not immune to me either.

Eirik, I made those statements about the legal system not because I have been blinded by the media. I have seen and experienced these things first hand but on a smaller scale. I don't even bring the media into this consideration. This is all that I'm going to say on this topic because I don't think that beating a dead horse will do us any good. I have my opinions and everyone has theirs. Believe it or not, I do respect others opinions in most cases even though I may not come across as though I do.

Menard, thank you for sticking up for me. This was the wrong battle but it is appreciated.



Post Edited (03-24-05 13:29)

Sorry - you're right.  It was Wence.

If you can separate the OJ case (or the Blake or Michael Jackson or Peterson cases) from the media coverage and believe that somehow that coverage didn't effect your perspective on it, then more power to you.  Dunno what you've seen on a smaller scale, but I'll readily admit that our justice system isn't perfect.  In fact, it's the worst justice system in the world... except for all the others.  : )

Sometimes a civil action is the only way that justice can be obtained, when the verdict is not guilty.

As an example , in the state in which I live, though not in the city, a number of years ago, a female teacher was shagging one of her male students. Which came out, because the student commited suicide over his part in this affair and for other reasons. And because he was under the age of consent, the case was brought up as a criminal case of statuatory rape. Now the teacher and the student were not the only ones who knew what was going on. The student had some of his male friends watching what was going on, from outside, through the window. Even with their testimony to what they had seen, the jury still brought in a verdict of not guilty. Bascially, because at the time that the case was tried, jurors  found it hard  to believe that a female could rape a male (statuatory or otherwise.)

Now was justice served. Maybe yes or maybe not. But his parents , who had lost their son, didn't feel that way, so they took the teacher to civil court and sued her for damages. The civil case was then settled out of court for an undisclosed sum of money.

Firstly, they ALL did it!! The only one who didn't do it was Scott Petersen. I know this because I was in a car with Scott, Ted Kennedy and some campaign workers in Martha's Vinyard when the whole thing went down.

Secondly, Robert Blake and OJ Simpson will be co-starring in a remake of Hitchcock's Strangers On A Train,  musical score by Phil Spector.

Thirdly, I take it back....Scott Petersen DID kill his wife, and guess what Dutchman...he did it in California....no, really, he did.

Lastly, Menard,  regardless of what you have heard, “irregardless” is a redundancy. The suffix “-less” on the end of the word already makes the word negative. It doesn’t need the negative prefix “ir-” added to make it even more negative. Not a word...nope it ain't. Oooohhh I've come over all peevish-like!

It would be nice if in your peevishness you were original: Irregardless (http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/irregardless.html).

The correction is appreciated, however, I am still too attached to my bad habits to change them. (:

Menard wrote:

> It would be nice if in your peevishness you were original:
 
How can peevishness be unoriginal? Even the correction was original, not mine, but surely someone's originally. I have it in my favorites list. Saves typing. I'm going to have it printed on cards and distributed at airports, railway terminals and public gatherings. The battle against "irregardless" will be a long, hard slog. Those who aren't with us are with "irregardless". Onward Pedantic Soldier!!!

> The correction is appreciated, however, I am still too attached
> to my bad habits to change them. (:

My son feels the same way about wetting himself and picking his nose. Still, we dare to hope!

I find it funny that before he murdered his wife, Robert Blake played the Mystery Man in Lost Highway which did involve the main character, Fred (Bill Pullman), murdering his wife, Renee (Patricia Arquette).  Oh, the irnoy! :p

Thank you for them kind words. You are so sweet.