The curse of being beautiful!
-
Archived from the IMDb Discussion Forums — Margot Robbie
The_Ashes_of_Eden — 11 years ago(February 15, 2015 02:04 PM)
Margot is one of those people who are blessed with extreme good looks. But for me, this blessing can be a curse. For people like Margot, life is effortless. She breezes through life getting everything she wants. This halts character development in real life and causes beautiful people to create shallow, depthless on screen characters. The character developed by being ugly, poor, or otherwise aflicted, is critical to creating deep, edgy, powerful characters. This is why, to me, people like Margot are disinteresting on screen - beautiful, but ultimately boring! I would prefer to hire a slightly less attractive actor who has been through personal hardship, has at times been poor, desperate and out of work, but during this time has developed the character which is critical to squeeze the most out of roles.
-
Squeegie_Beckenheim — 11 years ago(February 15, 2015 06:26 PM)
Oh wow. Umm.. I don't know where to begin. Beauty has nothing to do with what life deals you. You don't know her and sounds b68like you make snap judgments about a lot of people on very superficial grounds.
And it's called acting, what does the actors personal life have to do with the character?
the user formerly known as jah-84
Take me as I am, or leave me the way you found me -
The_Ashes_of_Eden — 11 years ago(February 16, 2015 10:21 AM)
It's not a snap judgement, it's a generalisation, but some generalisations have merit, just like the one I offered about beautiful/richer people finding life easier than uglier/poorer people. Studies have found that beautiful people generally are more popular and more successful than ugly people. Of course to every rule there's the exception, but "generally" beautiful people make beep actors because they haven't developed the depth required to play interesting characters. Beautiful people tend to be more self-aware. They notice how mu5b4ch people notice them and they find it extremely difficult to distance themselves from themselves - I have spoken to some beautiful people I know about this and they seem to confirm that this is the case. Uglier people seem to find it easier to detach their mental selves from their physical selves. They have tougher lives because they don't get the level of acceptance or success that beautiful people naturally get and so they tend to make far better actors, playing far more interesting characters with far more depth and emotion. Some beautiful people might be good actors, but they are the exception to the rule. How often have you seen a beep actor on screen i, say, daytime tv soap opera. Sure they're nice to look at but horrible at acting. They seem to get into acting just so they can show the world how good looking they are without having the tools to make a good job of it. I attach this to Margot because she seems to be equally attractive but disinteresting and I bet she's a lovely popular lady in real-life, lacking the tools to play deep interesting characters herself.
-
Squeegie_Beckenheim — 11 years ago(February 17, 2015 12:59 PM)
Rich people have an obvious advantage in life but again it doesn't shield them from pain, their problems may be different and in some cases have the means to combat them, but it doesn't mean they don't experience difficulty. You think being popular and successful means people are happy, that is a very simplistic view.
Beauty is subjective. Acting is a talent, not a product of beauty and popularity (although fame can have those attributes) but then acting is judged subjectively too.
the user formerly known as jah-84
Take me as I am, or leave me the way you found me -
Squeegie_Beckenheim — 11 years ago(February 18, 2015 12:16 PM)
Everyone has personal taste, you could say someone is classically beautiful but they are not your type for example.
the user formerly known as jah-84
Take me as I am, or leave me the way you found me -
lukejbarnett — 5 years ago(June 06, 2020 04:03 PM)
that's what i've been thinking in the last few years. there is a way to prove beauty. just like how if you think someone looks like someone it's proven because you saw it. if you are as beautiful as margot is in the wolf of wall street it's a fact that you are beautiful and everyone thinks this.
lukejbarnett -
Fusion72 — 11 years ago(February 27, 2015 10:03 PM)
I've always been curious about it. Collectively we can all agree certain people are attractive, regardless of whether we personally find them attractive. I fear for when we 'crack the code' to beauty. The human eugenics race will come into full swing.
-
Nicotinamida — 11 years ago(March 14, 2015 05:12 PM)
Bradley Cooper has a noticeable asymmetrical face, and he's considered extremely attractive. Shailene Woodley and Kristen Stewart may be not your cup of tea, but they also have asymmetrical faces and are considered attractive. Shannen Doherty was famous in 90's not just because her bad temper. She was considered a very sexy and beautiful woman, and her face is undeniably asymmetric. On the other hand, there are a lot of famous people with more symmetrical faces that are not considered sexy, beautiful or attractive by the masses.
Fun fact:
Babies tend to stare at me with eyes open wide, like they can't avoid it. And believe me, they don't turn their faces, specially if I238 begin to make silly faces. Lol! I'm not an attractive woman, I'm below average.
What can I do? Kill myself because I'm not Gisele? No, thanks.
Sometimes people can't avoid to look to the ugly. I've heard a lot of people with physical deformations that sometimes change their features to something that can be considered ugly by many, and they complain about how frequently people stare at them and how uncomfortable they feel about it. So the "look longer" stuff doesn't apply for - at least "just for" - beauty.
I'm a very shy person - des5b4pite I like to look at babies and make silly faces -, and as far as I can remember, I mean, since I was a very small child, it's not easy for me to stare at a man I consider extremely handsome,
au contraire
, I avoid it!
Spoiler Alert I know that my english is not perfect. I'm not a native speaker and I'm still trying to learn it by myself. -
Eva_Marrie — 9 years ago(May 21, 2016 06:00 AM)
"Bradley Cooper has a noticeable asymmetrical face, and he's considered extremely attractive. Shailene Woodley and Kristen Stewart may be not your cup of tea, but they also have asymmetrical faces and are considered attractive."
'Attractive' should not be confused with 'good-looking'. The aforementioned actors may be considered attractive by some, but they're certainly not beautiful in the classic sense. -
Tinny-Tinette — 9 years ago(May 13, 2016 07:18 AM)
I'm not implying that your assessment is completely wrong, but it seems like you're putting good looking people in a pedestal. Yes, it's certainly true that several attractive people gets better advantages in business situations than people with the extreme opposite, looks but you're still making it look like if this was a regularly thing that happens to the majority of beautiful people (despite your claim that there's an exception to every rule, but still). I happen to know several attractive people that are exception to the rules. Beautiful people that are not put on a pedestal because of their good looks.
However, you do seem to have a wrong perception about their acting and label them as if being attractive is synonymous to being lackluster in acting. Hence it's not. I'm not claiming that your statement is completely wrong, but I think it's not fair to actually label attractive actors as generally mediocre in their work. And that less attractive people have superior skills. An skilled actor is skilled in their work, regardless of their looks. And I'm sorry if my assessment comes across as condescending or belittling, hence it's not my opinion. But I wanted to cite my statement.