Am I alone in thinking that Kristen Stewart chick should try to smile?
Posted by Alcon (Member # 6645) on :
There was an article in the New York Times about her the other day. I completely understand why she isn't often caught on camera with a smile on her face. I probably wouldn't be either were we switched.
Occupational hazard!!! Yes, it is a little bananas with the whole Twilight thing, I get it. When you make your money on ticket sales and entertaining people, you take the good with the bad or you have no fans and then no job. She just looks like she would rather be standing in line at the DMV! Even Jodi Foster smiles at movie premiers.
Posted by The White Whale (Member # 6594) on :
I think she's cute whether she smiles or not.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:Am I the only one?
If you're on the internet, the answer to this question is always "No".
Posted by Alcon (Member # 6645) on :
quote:Occupational hazard!!! Yes, it is a little bananas with the whole Twilight thing, I get it. When you make your money on ticket sales and entertaining people, you take the good with the bad or you have no fans and then no job. She just looks like she would rather be standing in line at the DMV! Even Jodi Foster smiles at movie premiers.
No, no it is not an occupational hazard. Or rather it need not be and should not be. Their job is to entertain us in movies and television by convincingly playing the roles of their characters. It is not their job to let us into every aspect of their private lives. And it is entirely possible to enjoy an actor's performances with out wishing to know every little detail of their personal lives. We demand so much privacy for ourselves, and yet we take offense when these actors request some? It's hypocritical and silly.
And to head off a possible argument, you may say that for the amount they get paid, we should be allowed to stalk them and know every aspect of their lives and worship and idolize them. Well, I would be willing to bet that they'd be more than happy to take a significant pay cut if we would just leave them the heck alone. And personally I think this is the way we should go. Pay those involved in making movies and television less, and then let them be.
We would all be a lot better off I think if we stopped trying to live vicariously and obsess over these celebrities.
Posted by Darth_Mauve (Member # 4709) on :
or
"Laugh clown. Laugh!"
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:We would all be a lot better off I think if we stopped trying to live vicariously and obsess over these celebrities.
Speak for yourself. Posted by Alcon (Member # 6645) on :
quote:Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head:
quote:We would all be a lot better off I think if we stopped trying to live vicariously and obsess over these celebrities.
Speak for yourself.
That's not to imply there's necessarily any vicarious living or obsessing taking place that needs to stop
But where there is it must stop. Right this instant. Or there'll be no dinner for you.
Posted by paigereader (Member # 2274) on :
Not where I was going at all. US magazine and People and all the other crap, I agree is weird and creepy. Not smiling outside the movie you are in makes me think you are not proud or you are too good to be standing there.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote: Not smiling outside the movie you are in makes me think you are not proud or you are too good to be standing there.
I know that I'm too good to be standing there. It's not surprising that she feels the same way.
Posted by scifibum (Member # 7625) on :
quote:Originally posted by paigereader: Not where I was going at all. US magazine and People and all the other crap, I agree is weird and creepy. Not smiling outside the movie you are in makes me think you are not proud or you are too good to be standing there.
I don't know Kristen, but I can think of other reasons not to be smiling that don't rule out professional pride or humility. Social anxiety, for instance, can be a beast.
Posted by Shanna (Member # 7900) on :
She ISN'T proud of the work she's doing. There are numerous reports of her complaining about the Twilight franchise. She seems to consider herself above it all.
Posted by Alcon (Member # 6645) on :
quote:She ISN'T proud of the work she's doing. There are numerous reports of her complaining about the Twilight franchise. She seems to consider herself above it all.
I don't blame her. They aren't good books. The movies aren't much better. The franchise is ridiculous over commercialized. And she's actually a really, really good actor who's capable of playing some pretty serious and difficult roles. Who has played some serious and difficult roles.
Admittedly, she'd probably be better off just not taking herself that seriously and trying to have fun with the Twilight franchise, but I can still understand why she'd look rather grumpy about being at a Twilight premier. I know I'd be grumpy - perhaps even despite myself - were it me. Not to mention just outright terrified of all the obsessive middle school fans.
Posted by Corwin (Member # 5705) on :
quote:Originally posted by Shanna: She ISN'T proud of the work she's doing. There are numerous reports of her complaining about the Twilight franchise. She seems to consider herself above it all.
That's like considering yourself to be above sea level. All of us are. Posted by paigereader (Member # 2274) on :
So, if they split the last book into 2 movies we get to go through this 3 more times? YEAH...(note sarcasm) Pull a Bewitched/Darren Stevens and get her out for the last 2. I am not sure her attitude will sit well with future directors and producers. When you really have to promote a movie and the actress doesn't seem to like to, do you hire her?
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
quote:Originally posted by Shanna: She ISN'T proud of the work she's doing. There are numerous reports of her complaining about the Twilight franchise. She seems to consider herself above it all.
Good.
Posted by Tara (Member # 10030) on :
Good posts, Alcon... Paigereader, you are judging something you know nothing about. I know what you were saying was mostly a joke, but any serious argument you might make on the subject could be refuted with my statement.
P.S. Also, raise your hand if you also had a Volvo before Twilight!
P.P.S. When did Speak become a movie?! I'll have to see that!
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by Corwin:
quote:Originally posted by Shanna: She ISN'T proud of the work she's doing. There are numerous reports of her complaining about the Twilight franchise. She seems to consider herself above it all.
That's like considering yourself to be above sea level. All of us are.
Don't we have any Dutch posters?
Posted by paigereader (Member # 2274) on :
So, tell me what I need to know...
Posted by DDDaysh (Member # 9499) on :
eh, she's a sorry Bella anyway
Posted by Shanna (Member # 7900) on :
quote:Originally posted by Alcon:
quote:She ISN'T proud of the work she's doing. There are numerous reports of her complaining about the Twilight franchise. She seems to consider herself above it all.
I don't blame her. They aren't good books. The movies aren't much better. The franchise is ridiculous over commercialized. And she's actually a really, really good actor who's capable of playing some pretty serious and difficult roles. Who has played some serious and difficult roles.
Admittedly, she'd probably be better off just not taking herself that seriously and trying to have fun with the Twilight franchise, but I can still understand why she'd look rather grumpy about being at a Twilight premier. I know I'd be grumpy - perhaps even despite myself - were it me. Not to mention just outright terrified of all the obsessive middle school fans.
I don't see her talent but regardless, it seems like she is taking herself too seriously. My friend does makeup for film and worked with Kristen on a film. "Adventureland" maybe. She does mostly local stuff here in Louisiana but occasionally she gets out. Anyway, she had nothing kind to say about Kristen. My friend described her as snobby, elitist, and obsessed with "indie films." Anything else was below her.
I can understand why someone wouldn't want to do a franchise like "Twilight." So anyone in her position SHOULD NOT HAVE TAKEN THE JOB or found something positive in the experience.
Her attitude just seems really ugly.
Or maybe I'm just sick of her seeing face everywhere at my bookstore. Its just way too depressing working in a building filled with great books and spending my day mostly selling "Twilight," People Magazine, and James Patterson (how I hate him!)
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
Maybe she feels the same way?
Posted by Tara (Member # 10030) on :
quote:Originally posted by Shanna: Her attitude just seems really ugly.
I'll repeat - who are you to judge? You don't know her. You're talking about something you heard via someone else about someone you don't even know. Why are we even talking about this?
quote:Originally posted by Shanna: Or maybe I'm just sick of her seeing face everywhere at my bookstore. Its just way too depressing working in a building filled with great books and spending my day mostly selling "Twilight," People Magazine, and James Patterson (how I hate him!)
Maybe YOU need to re-evaluate exactly who is "snobby and elitist".
Twilight may not be the best book ever, but people like it. It's fun. And some people insist on taking it so seriously. Just chill out. And stop gossiping about someone's personal life about which you really know nothing meaningful at all.
Posted by PSI Teleport (Member # 5545) on :
You know, I think this is simply a case of not doing your homework. Both Kristen Stewart and Robert Pattinson admitted to never having read, or even heard of, the Twilight series when they saw the scripts and accepted the jobs. Neither of them had a clue that they were stepping into teeny-bopper worship-status. It's no wonder they hate the way this has turned out. I was surprised when they came back for the subsequent movies, but I'm sure the studio offered them as much money as humanly possible to keep them there, since the Twihards had locked onto them.
Posted by The White Whale (Member # 6594) on :
I like Ebert's first paragraph of his review of the new movie:
quote:The characters in this movie should be arrested for loitering with intent to moan. Never have teenagers been in greater need of a jump-start. Granted some of them are more than 100 years old, but still: their charisma is by Madame Tussaud.
Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
quote:Both Kristen Stewart and Robert Pattinson admitted to never having read, or even heard of, the Twilight series when they saw the scripts and accepted the jobs. Neither of them had a clue that they were stepping into teeny-bopper worship-status.
And this is supposed to be an excuse?
Posted by PSI Teleport (Member # 5545) on :
An excuse for what? I mean, I thought the subject in question is whether or not Kristen Stewart should try to look happy at premieres. I don't think she needs an excuse to not look happy if she's not happy.
The consequence of her choices is her unhappiness, if that's how she really feels. But I see no reason that she should have to wear a fake smile.
Posted by SoaPiNuReYe (Member # 9144) on :
Some people geared towards the spotlight and some people aren't. I don't think Kristen Stewart intended on becoming so famous so early on in her career because most of her catalogue consists of pre-teen B-movies and snarky indie flicks (which I despise). But honestly I don't think she has much to complain about. B-Movies, with the exception of Ridley Scott's Alien and James Cameron's Terminator, usually don't have any legs on them, and when it comes to directors the entire indie film scene is pretty much talentless with the exception of Ramin Bahrani. I think when she gets older she'll come to look at the Twilight saga as a positive experience.
Posted by Teshi (Member # 5024) on :
I believe that people who have a public job like being a politician, a teacher, a salesman, waiter, a reporter, an actor have "looking happy when required" as part of the job description. In fact, I say at least 50% of people have "lookig happy when required" as part of their job description.
If you can't at least pretend to smile and be a pleasant person when you're in the public eye, then perhaps those jobs aren't really for you.
An actor doesn't have to love what he or she is doing, and they think the movie is a piece of crap, but someone who is an adult and a professional will smile at a public event just like a door-to-door salesperson who hates his or her job will smile when a potential customer opens the door. They don't have to share their personal lives, they just have to fulfill this part of the job just like the rest of us do when we're selling coffee to irate customers for minimum wage.
You don't just have to show up, you also have to be pleasant about it-- even if you hate it.
Posted by PSI Teleport (Member # 5545) on :
quote: If you can't at least pretend to smile and be a pleasant person when you're in the public eye, then perhaps those jobs aren't really for you.
The public eye? For a famous actor, the "public eye" is a constant intrusion into their personal lives, whether or not they feed it. Actors are hired to do what they're told during the making of movies. They're not hired to promote their own image in the off-time; it's up to them if they want to do that. If I were an actor, I'd do the exact same thing. Make the best movie I possibly could, and then adopt a stone facade all the rest of the time to hopefully encourage the paparazzi to leave me alone.
Now, premieres are a slightly different issue; there's no doubt that an actor's producers probably want him or her to do the best job they possibly can to promote the movie. That said, they don't have to continue to hire that person if they feel that their aloofness outweighs their ability to draw in a good showing at the box office. But things like that never do. If anything, controversy surrounding Kristen Stewart's personality will likely bring in more money, not less.
So whose rule is it that actors need to look happy? I would argue that there is no rule. I mean, look at Johnny Depp. He just got named People's Sexiest Man alive again, and I don't think I've ever seen that man smile at a premiere. So what? He makes great movies and people pay to see him. That's all his bosses care about. It's not his job to tickle our fancies when he's not being paid to do it.
Posted by Teshi (Member # 5024) on :
I didn't have to look hard. Enough to know that Johnny Depp does smile frequently at the premieres he attends-- and reasonably genuinely.
Kristen Stewart also sometimes smiles, but photos of her looking happy are fewer.
No, actors don't have to smile when they're off the job any more than waiters and teachers do. But premieres are on the job. It's part of the job as a star to attend premieres.
And yes, I think that being an actor and having people prying into your life is cause for anger and misery, but I'm not asking them to like that. I expect them to try to prevent it as they deserve to. Premieres are a different issue.
This said, having looked at her photos, it could be that she doesn't like the way she looks when she's smiling (she does seem to have a very slight underbite), or that she thinks that it's part of her look as an actress on Twilight or general, which are entirely different reasons for not smiling.
Posted by daventor (Member # 11981) on :
My feelings about the different responses of actors to their celebrity status is this (moving beyond Kristen Stewart to the more general topic):
1) Yes, nobody should have to deal with paparazzi constantly following them around, and being constantly in the public eye would be annoying.
2) However, if you are an actor, then generally you want a lot of people to see your stuff and you want a certain level of fame because it is that fame and recognition that is going to allow you more acting opportunities.
3) Part of being famous is that lots of people are to going to be interested in you and idolize you in a way they don't other people. This is not really rational but it is how it is. I know if I were to cross paths with Nathan Fillion or Amy Adams I'd become way excited to meet them and relate the story to friends, even though, despite their charms, both people are just regular human beings like any other person I cross paths with.
4) So, now that you're in that position of having people constantly recognize you, you have two options of how to respond: A) Get really angry and annoyed at everyone, acting condescending about the whole thing while at the same time using that fame to rake in the cash and do the different movie projects you want. B) Just learn to be chill and try to make each fan's encounter with you positive (unless we're talking super-intrusive or really, really creepy [which I guess a lot of Twilight fan encounters would be, though I doubt Kristen gets quite as much of the creepy as Robert or, now that New Moon's out, Taylor]).
5) For myself, I think if I were in that position I'd go for option B (don't know for sure till I'm in that position); I think in general you'll be more happy with that path. Remember, if you're a successful, famous actor, you're part of a very tiny, privileged minority in the world, one who makes way more money than most people for just playing pretend (Yes, I know acting can require discipline and work but it's still a heck of a more "fun" job than telemarketing or fast food [speaking from my own experience, anyways; I love acting]).
Posted by daventor (Member # 11981) on :
Oh, and in response to the actual topic of this thread: Yeah, I wish she'd smile more.
Posted by theamazeeaz (Member # 6970) on :
quote:Originally posted by Tara: Good posts, Alcon... Paigereader, you are judging something you know nothing about. I know what you were saying was mostly a joke, but any serious argument you might make on the subject could be refuted with my statement.
P.S. Also, raise your hand if you also had a Volvo before Twilight!
P.P.S. When did Speak become a movie?! I'll have to see that!
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)