Criminal is powered by Vocal.
Vocal is a platform that provides storytelling tools and engaged communities for writers, musicians, filmmakers, podcasters, and other creators to get discovered and fund their creativity.
How does Vocal work?
Creators share their stories on Vocal’s communities. In return, creators earn money when they are tipped and when their stories are read.
How do I join Vocal?
Vocal welcomes creators of all shapes and sizes. Join for free and start creating.
To learn more about Vocal, visit our resources.Show less
Jones may appear, based on those examples alone, to do no wrong in Hollywood. This made it incredibly shocking when he was arrested in 2002 for possessing child pornography and even trying to coerce a 14-year-old boy into posing for nude pictures. Even though he pleaded no contest and was only sentenced to probation and registration as a sex offender, his career was thoroughly destroyed. There were even complaints from the South Carolina community where the movie Who's Your Caddy? was being filmed because families were around him.
I was able to overlook his personal issues even if others wouldn't. There were no reports of him actually touching the boy in question, and he did his time (though he did get arrested twice for failing to renew his registration). Surely, his body of work could override this personal black mark, right? This got me thinking of whether people could separate artists' personal troubles from their artistic output. Was it possible? To answer that, let's look at a few more examples.
I can understand people having an incredibly low opinion of him now as a person, but does that tarnish his existing work? While I do acknowledge that the reports of his sexual misconduct are absolutely disgusting, I still think his performances in front of the camera were fantastic. His performance as the serial killer in Se7en was one of the greatest villain performances I'd ever seen alongside his part as Verbal Kint in The Usual Suspects. He was magnetic in Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil and Pay It Forward. In fact, his performance in Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare made that one of the few Call of Duty games worth playing for the story. Believe me, I'm leaving out a ton of stuff here. Should all that acclaim be completely nullified because of what he was doing when the cameras weren't rolling?
In the end, it comes down to the audience's personal values. Some people may ignore the personal screw-ups in favor of their great work while others have reinforced the connection between the two so tightly that CDs and DVDs get thrown away. Even I'm subjective on that front as shown by how I went to bat for Phil Spector's artistic output but not Chris Brown's. I would say that the output should get a fair shake regardless. A person is not defined by one aspect alone, after all.
Thoughts on this? Let me know, and take care.