Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Mary-Kate Olsen steps out solo as "Weeds" regular (plays Christian who loves Jesus and gets high).
Reuters ^ | 08/23/2007

Posted on 08/24/2007 7:18:05 AM PDT by SirLinksalot

LOS ANGELES (Hollywood Reporter) - In her first major solo role without her twin sister, Mary-Kate Olsen is returning to series television for the first time since 2002 with a co-starring role on Showtime's dark comedy "Weeds."

Olsen will play Tara, a devoted Christian girl living in the newly developed megachurch community Majestic who becomes a love interest for Nancy Botwin's (Mary-Louise Parker) son Silas (Hunter Parrish). Olsen will appear in 10 of the 15 episodes of the show's third season, which premieres August 13.

Since their debut on ABC's hit comedy series "Full House" at age 9 months, Olsen and her twin sister, Ashley, have starred together in a string of kids- and tween-oriented series and movies for television and video. In 2001-2002 they starred in the ABC Family sitcom "So Little Time." They most recently starred in the 2004 feature comedy "New York Minute," which the two also produced.

Olsen's role on the edgy Showtime series about a pot-dealing mom (Parker) also is a departure from the wholesome, PG characters she and her sister have played and opens a new chapter in her acting career. Olsen's treatment in 2004 for an eating disorder was widely reported.

"'Weeds' isn't your 8 o'clock family fare," series creator and executive producer Jenji Kohan said. "It's an adult show with adult subject matter, and we're confident Mary-Kate is right for the role. She came in and read with Hunter and was absolutely charming and real and seemed like a great fit. Audiences have seen only one side of Mary-Kate, but here we'll see her in a whole new light."

In addition to Olsen, joining the "Weeds" cast this upcoming season is previously announced Matthew Modine.


TOPICS: TV/Movies
KEYWORDS: antichristian; christian; culturewar; hollywood; liberalbigots; marykateolsen; olsentwins; religiousintolerance
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-91 next last
To: HamiltonJay

Big Love actually has it’s moments....I have seen a few episodes...it’s very unusual


61 posted on 08/24/2007 8:31:52 AM PDT by wardaddy (hillbilly car wash owner outta control)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick
If she’s going to be realistic as a pot smoker, she’ll need to eat something.

LOL! I nominate that for post of the day!

62 posted on 08/24/2007 8:32:10 AM PDT by RosieCotton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus

Yea, a 18 month old toddling in and saying a line or two once a week is so exploitational(rolling eyes)


63 posted on 08/24/2007 8:32:31 AM PDT by HamiltonJay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: r9etb

OMG, she looks like that socialite Astor who just passed at 100 in that picture.


64 posted on 08/24/2007 8:34:28 AM PDT by sharkhawk (Bear Down Chicago Bears)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: SirLinksalot

So I wonder when the woman-beating Muslim trying to spread their faith with threats of death will make an appearance on this show?


65 posted on 08/24/2007 8:36:28 AM PDT by Brett66 (Where government advances ? and it advances relentlessly ? freedom is imperiled -Janice Rogers Brown)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #66 Removed by Moderator

To: SirLinksalot

Mary Jane for Mary Kate


67 posted on 08/24/2007 8:42:37 AM PDT by Retired Greyhound
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus

“The Olsen twins are just the latest examples of children sacrificed by their parents on the altar of Fame.”

Exactly the words I was looking for on the Lindsey Lohan thread. I feel sorry for all of them.


68 posted on 08/24/2007 8:48:10 AM PDT by tumblindice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: ccmay

You obviously haven’t been keeping up with medical science. One joint does as much damage to the lungs as a PACK of cigarettes. But you’ll never see this FACT of science shouted by our counter-counter-counter-culture media. Or anyone for that matter.

Don’t get me wrong. I support your right to do whatever you want to your own body, but at least be informed about it please. Everything in moderation. Although I am reminded of a TShirt Hell shirt “I drink in Moderation* (* - Moderation is an imaginary place that exists wherever I am.)”


69 posted on 08/24/2007 9:16:16 AM PDT by AntiKev ("No damage. The world's still turning isn't it?" - Stereo Goes Stellar - Blow Me A Holloway)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: AntiKev
You obviously haven’t been keeping up with medical science. One joint does as much damage to the lungs as a PACK of cigarettes.

Behold the kind of "logic" that keeps alcohol legal and marijuana illegal.

I said that marijuana is less dangerous and damaging than alcohol, and AntiKev responds that it is more dangerous than tobacco. This may or may not be true, and even if it is, very few marijuana users smoke two or three joints every single day. But it's not even remotely a refutation of my point about alcohol.

-ccm

70 posted on 08/24/2007 9:33:14 AM PDT by ccmay (Too much Law; not enough Order.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: SirLinksalot
I can't argue with anything you say here. But that is the province of religion, not law. Nothing in your argument persuades me to support governmental criminalization of marijuana.

-ccm

71 posted on 08/24/2007 9:37:55 AM PDT by ccmay (Too much Law; not enough Order.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: TheGunny
Um...what are no such thing?

You really don't have much of a train of thought, do you? You said: You are sadly mistaken. The “injunctions” are against intoxication of any kind. I say, those injunctions are no such thing. They refer to "drunkenness" only, and I defy you to find a shred of proof that this refers to anything other than the effects of excess amounts of orally-ingested ethyl alcohol.

-ccm

72 posted on 08/24/2007 9:41:52 AM PDT by ccmay (Too much Law; not enough Order.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: guinnessman
I'm simply saying that common sense should tell you that, if you can't pray while intoxicated, then maybe you shouldn't get intoxicated.

I fully agree, and that is one of the many reasons I do not use marijuana or any other illegal drug at all.

But it is not a justification for keeping marijuana illegal, when the far more dangerous drug ethyl alcohol can be found for sale on the shelf of any grocery store.

If you support keeping marijuana illegal, and alcohol legal, then you are not serious about saving young peoples' lives. Period, end of story.

-ccm

73 posted on 08/24/2007 9:45:07 AM PDT by ccmay (Too much Law; not enough Order.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: bray; RockinRight
Do you have any way of knowing that these suicides were caused by drugs? I can just as easily assert that these men would have committed suicide sooner, but were kept alive by self-medicating with illegal drugs. I don't know and neither do you.

-ccm

74 posted on 08/24/2007 9:48:37 AM PDT by ccmay (Too much Law; not enough Order.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: SirLinksalot

So since they’re trying to make a Christian look crazy for smoking pot.. does that mean all the liberal pot smokers are crazy too?


75 posted on 08/24/2007 9:52:08 AM PDT by Trillian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ccmay

I don’t know.

However, I still don’t buy the “drugs make me closer to God” BS that addicts use as an excuse to sit around wasting their lives.


76 posted on 08/24/2007 9:55:57 AM PDT by RockinRight (Fred Thompson once set fire to a crowd of liberals simply by puffing his cigar and staring real hard)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: hardback

She does have that "caveman" look that many men are attracted to.

77 posted on 08/24/2007 9:57:44 AM PDT by RckyRaCoCo (sing after me......de-por-ta-tion cha-cha-cha)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: ccmay
The Bible does not prohibit marijuana use; in fact, Genesis 1:29 explicitly states that it is permitted: "And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat."

Then why not drink some hemlock tea? Oh, that's right. Just because it comes from a plant doesn't mean it is good for you.

Yet there are plenty of so-called "Christians" here on FR and throughout society who are quite happy to condemn pot smokers between gulps of their martinis.

Since I don't drink alcohol, it's apparently okay that I condemn pot smokers. What I particularly condemn is trying to justify sin by twisting scripture.

78 posted on 08/24/2007 10:07:31 AM PDT by MEGoody (Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: ccmay

This is not an exhaustive list but some I found in the NT that concern sober living and clearity of thought and purpose. Enjoy.
1 Peter 1:13; 5:8, Titus 2:12, 1 Thessalonians 5:6, 1 Peter 4:7, 1 Timothy 3:2,3; Titus 1:8, 1 Timothy 3:11, Titus 2:2,
Titus 2:6, Titus 2:4, 1 Thessalonians 5:6,8, 1 Timothy 2:9
Romans 12:3, Titus 2:12, 1 Peter 4:7; 5:8


79 posted on 08/24/2007 10:19:28 AM PDT by TheGunny (Re-read 1&2 Corinthians)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: MEGoody
Then why not drink some hemlock tea? Oh, that's right. Just because it comes from a plant doesn't mean it is good for you.

Anybody can grow a hemlock, and nobody will lock them up, confiscate their home and car, cancel their student loan, and prevent them from ever holding a government job, owning a gun, or obtaining a professional license. And so it should be with marijuana.

Anyone who thinks I use marijuana, or that I am arguing that marijuana is a good thing, or that those who don't use it should begin doing so, needs to go back and re-read what I wrote. I don't use it and think it unwise for anyone else to use it.

But I believe that there is no Constitutional or moral basis for banning it outright, especially while the far more dangerous drug alcohol is readily available. I know for a fact that anti-marijuana laws lead to more deaths than the toxic effects of marijuana use, because even the DEA admits that nobody has ever died from a marijuana overdose.

-ccm

80 posted on 08/24/2007 11:38:43 AM PDT by ccmay (Too much Law; not enough Order.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-91 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson