So Buffy invented that?
Hey, who are those OLD GUYS singing Britney Spears' "Satisfaction"? They're totally ruining it!
Jennifer's Body???
- Thread starter Gil T.Azell
- Start date
So Buffy invented that?
Hey, who are those OLD GUYS singing Britney Spears' "Satisfaction"? They're totally ruining it!
over. It's no biggy.
Jennifer's Body doesn't interest me and I'm not going to see it unless I get a free e-ticket or something. I just take issue to people saying something ripped off something else when that something else isn't original either. It's not nearly as bad as people saying John Woo's style is a ripoff of The Matrix, but I do see it along the lines of people saying Wipeout is a ripoff of MXC.
Why can't they get Megan Fox to do a high quality movie kinda like Anne Hathaway got with Devil Wears Prada. I like her, but the movie selection is awful.
Probably for two reasons:
One, her tats would mean that she has to have extensive makeup, CG-retouching or wardrobe to cover them up, unless that tats fit her character. I'm guessing a tat of Madonna on the arm and the Decleration of Independence scrawled on your right shoulder blade (I know it's not the DoI) isn't going to suit a lot of characters.
Two, she can't act worth a shit.
Your example of a high quality Anne Hathaway movie is "Devil Wears Prada"? I don't see how that's a huge step up from junk like "The Princess Diaries" or "Bride Wars". A better choice would be "Rachel Getting Married" or even "Brokeback Mountain" (I have problems with that movie, but I can't deny it's way more mature and intelligent than the majority of the other movies she's done).
I've not seen Rachel getting Married yet. I used Devil wears Prada because it was opposite Maryl Streep and while they all suck, the oscars did recognize that movie. At the time I thought it was a good example.
Just looked up IMDB and Hathaway was in Brokeback. Imagine that.
Perhaps, but her having tattoos depends ont he director's "vision" for the character and the types, places and styles of tattoos she has may not fit very many characters. (The madonna tattoo and the lettering on her right shoulder stick out in my mind the most.)
If you're a director of a movie and you've a choice between equaly talented actresses, both are of the same attractivness and using one of them means no wardrobe restrictions or special makeup and one means having to have her always in long sleeves, no exposed back, or having to use heavy make-up/CGI who are you going to choose?
I might wait for the DVD.
That lake scene was filmed north of Vancouver, BC. in the Capalano(sp) lake.
That lake scene was filmed north of Vancouver, BC. in the Capalano(sp) lake.
Neither. The only actress I go see because of her beauty is Eva Mendes. But I think Eva is a decent actress.
In that particular set of circumstances I'd hire whoever could put the most butts in the seats. Covering up tattoos with makeup isn't that big a deal.
Angelina Jolie's extensive tattooing doesn't seem to negatively affect her career.
On her day, though, Jolie can act. Fox ? Not so much.
True, but it doesn't take a whole lot of acting talent to be successful in Hollywood. Ask Keanu Reeves.
Well, by Fox's own admission, she hasn't exactly been called upon to do an awful lot capital-A Acting in her roles so far, and she's said she doesn't blame those who've doubted her acting ability, because she hasn't had to show any such ability thus far. Refreshingly honest, I thought...
And to be perfectly honest, Bay isn't the best director to get a person's acting chops out. Ben Affleck, I'm looking at you.
Similar threads
