Is All the World Really a Stage? Are Famous People Multi-Role Actors?

[Peter]

I've been looking at totallylookslike.com type threads for a while and I believe that many (maybe all) famous people also secretly play someone else famous, with tricks such as latex and temporary prosthetics to appear different. The incidence of lookalikes among the famous is high considering the really famous number just a few hundred. A much greater incidence of dopplegangers than among a similar number of friends, family and colleagues.

This video purports fake photographs where the two different characters of the same supposed actor come together in a montage. I'm not an expert on photos but I know some here are https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A6Z_vEjZuEE

[Newsbender]

It's a very interesting topic and I'm sure it does happen (David Bowie as "record executive" Jack Steven and Michael Jackson as Dave Dave are both compelling examples) but I'm not convinced by this guy's videos (I've only watched three so far). I think he is over reaching from what I have seen so far. For example, I don't think Liam Neeson is Ralph Fiennes. They don't even look that similar to me...

[Peter]

My first reaction was like yours but then why would they merge two photos and pretend it's one?

[Newsbender]

I'm not sure i understand the question, by "they" do you mean the Nutwork or the channel owner?

I watched a bunch more if his videos, still not sure what to make of him. He certainly makes some wild assertions. In one video he claims his parents were transgender based purely on some old photos where his father is a little effete looking and his mother a touch on the manly side.

[Peter]

The nutwork - creating the photos.

As to the channel owner, I've seen all his videos and I think he should delete his first five which includes the one about his parents. He did say in a later video that he was freaked out at seeing his parents make devil signs in family albums and it colored his earliest videos.

[Flabbergasted]

We must avoid the trap of Goldbuggery, wherein we are too eager to draw comparisons to typical physiognomies and claim it's likely for them to be the same underlying actor despite obvious problems. However, in cases of characters that make spare appearances to fluff up a PsyOp (especially fake "persecuted whistle-blowers" and "wall of tears" contributors, such as victim/vicsim "family members") we should take careful note of those careful appearances.

[Mansur]

Probably 99% of everything that goes under the heading of 'exposed fraud' has yet to be exposed. This figure is unfortunately not from official statistics - if one prefers to rely on such things...

A common phrase for internet chat rooms is to 'create content', without any further definition; they probably do it for a living.

Even if we assume that there are no stipulations from YouTube or other 'providers', these 'contents' are, due to the obvious sever limitations of the individual, highly restricted and most easily controlled.

It is a market with well-established 'laws of supply/demand.'