William Shatner is 83. That is amazing to me. I hope I'm that with it and well put together if I make it to 83. I suppose being worth $100 million doesn't hurt, but it still gives me some hope.
George Takei is 77, clearly an old man, but no one seems surprised by how "with it", humorous, and interesting he is. Why does Shatner get a double-standard?
77 or 83 is longer than any male in my family has lived that I know of. It seems to me that a lot of Hollywood types are under a lot of pressure to stay thin, stay good looking, etc and often go to the gym religiously and eat healthily. I imagine if we followed that model we'd all be that sharp and good-looking at that age.
You may be correct regarding a Hollywood lifestyle, but I think there's a bit of confirmation bias here. There's only a relatively small number of elderly celebs who are still active in the public eye, and those actors who have suffered the typical problems of aging get little attention until the inevitable obituary.
Probably has more to do with wealthy access to the best medical care/prevention. As for being 'with it' I'm sure having a wife 27yrs younger helps. Plus he already had a handheld device in the 1960s so second nature to him :P
This is a broad social generalization so please take it with a grain of salt, but I do think there is an element of truth to the notion that Japanese people take good care of their elderly maintaining their dignity and keeping a healthy respect for their elders. The perception is that they age more gracefully. In western / european cultures, growing old is treated like a shameful disease. Hence the double standard.
Saw him on stage about a year ago and he was the most lucid and sensible person there (of the 5 other captains). Avery Brooks certainly was not with it at all.
Well I recall AB getting into some kind of self compelled nonsense and the only person to step up and start talking and change the subject was WS, everyone else was just sitting there gawping.
Because actors are famous for being "lucid and sensible"...?
(This is not a dig at Sir Stewart, I'm just pointing out that the two concepts "working actor" and "lucid/sensible person" are not necessarily linked -- as demonstrated by Brando, Depardieu etc.)
I think the point is simply that if using the title (which is purely optional) then it is standard to use the first name. So Sir Stewart would be somebody else.
I still can't get over the, "I need more face time!" Yea, another generation, but selfish, narcissism is never cool.
He does look good for his age though, but so do most leading men who didn't lose their hair?
