For example, in Red Dawn, I think it was five kids, fought back, and they did better than they would have if they let the occupiers rule them. They didn’t really win, but they on the path of not losing.
So what made it so believable was that the kids were cute, big and strong. They looked like winners in Hollywood style. It is also about utility. But it is not really about Charlie Sheen.
What Charlie Sheen was doing, in my opinion, something Elvis Presley and Monroe couldn’t do without social media, he spoke out directly to the public, and especially to his fans, who made him who he is, to a point, a winner, a movie star, wealthy, maybe not that healthy and debatable whether wise, which is not the same as being stupid.
So Charlie Sheen is possibly in a better position cause he listened to his own drummer.
Charlie Sheen appeared to be aware of his resources and generated some funds, and his comedy act is debatable whether it was funny, some people liked it and some didn’t, just like any stand up comedy act. With more funds Charlie Sheen was possibly in a better financial position.
It is not the medium that is the problem, it is the message. And people can win even when something has been lost. And it takes smarts to figure out how.Have you learned?