Was it “better” that it happened, and thus we get to see it? Else I doubt any of us (or hardly any of us) would ever have known this interview occurred.
At least the players in major sports leagues get Press Coaching, which is why we pretty much don’t hear anything interesting at all out of anyone during interviews anymore. “Jim, how does it feel to have skated your rear off for fifty-nine minutes only to have your goaltender give up a terrible goal like that with 37 seconds left in the game all because he was staring at some woman in the crowd and it cost your team the Stanley Cup?” “Well, Bill, it’s always a team sport, and I think as an organization we’re obviously disappointed to not win the big one, but we’ll learn from this and definitely we’ll be back next year…” blah blah blah blah.
OK, so this could easily be called creepy. On the other hand, he could have said something else equally ridiculous and had it not been directed at the interviewer we would have had (or might have had) a different reaction. I took it as ridiculous, and an attempt to be funny. I was sorry that it seemed to set the interviewer back on her heels (understandably). But why would Carrey (or anyone) do this in an interview, especially in this day an age, knowing it would be broadcast to - well, widely, I suppose - without it being seen as an attempt to be funny? Sometimes they fall flat. It did. If the interviewer was offended, then an apology is called for. If she was not?
I don’t think I’m really taking a position here - just bouncing it around (ah! Thus the “BoingBoing”!)…
