Quirky. The word everyone is searching for is effin’ quirky. And it’s overused, yet entirely appropriate.
I don’t know if it’s possible to track things like this, but I bet if you searched for the number of uses of the word “quirky” in the media (including the internet) before Zooey Deschanel’s career got off the ground, and compared it to the number of uses after, you’d have, like, a gazillion and four percent increase.
When a person is so much like their character, I tend to not believe that they are being typecast. It’s possible, of course, but I think the simpler explanation is that they don’t have that much range.
Just because someone is called “the next [insert good actor here]” doesn’t mean they really are that good–often they were just really, really good in one role, and everyone just assumed they’d be as good in others.
Still, after how she acted on Craig Fergussen when she got the golden harmonica (which she didn’t deserve), I’ve always thought she was a manipulative bitch. (I note that I haven’t seen her back on the show, either.) So maybe she could pull of that type of character. But I’m not sure she’d want to–her image is all about her being the quirky girl next door, not someone who uses her quirkiness to get her way. It might add menace to every other film where she’s acted that way–it worked that way for me.
I’ve heard her on a couple of podcasts, and she was a lot less interesting than I would’ve expected. I don’t think she’s “ditzy” either in real life or in her roles, more “cute eccentric” which I suppose is “quirky” as WhyNot asserts, but she’s not anywhere near as charismatic as her roles imply.
The problem is that there is a stereotype that has become quite popular recently - the Manic Pixie Dream Girl. Beastly Rotter links to the TV Tropes webpage on this stereotype, but if you Google on the phrase you’ll find various other websites about it. Why this particular image is so popular right now is hard to say, but at some point someone in Hollywood decided that Deschanel is the perfect woman to fit into this slot. Because of this, no one wants to cast her in other roles at the moment. She doesn’t really embody this idea that well. Among other things, she’s actually ten years too old for it. That doesn’t stop the people in Hollywood from insisting that she’s perfect for such roles, and they’re not going to listen to her or anyone else complaining that she should do more diverse roles.
I only know her from two movies (Almost Famous and Hitchhiker’s Guide) and the pilot of New Girl, and the three roles have barely anything in common. If I were inclined to do your homework for you, I’d urge you to say that she’s not typecast as a ditzy girly-girl.
Not sure I’d put her in the lead on a gritty cop show; there are other Deschanels more suited for that.
Emypies writes:
> I am an A2 Film studies student . . .
O.K., it appears to me that you are a British secondary school student and what you’re asking us to do is to do your homework for you. This thread has been reported.
I read it as his hwk assignment being to ask people whether they think the actress is typecast. I don’t think that’s against the “no homework” rule.
To put all of this talk to rest, she needs to snag herself a role as a serial killer. Not one who is quirky, mind you, just someone who really digs shooting people.
Worst case is she’s the new Goldie Hawn. But is that so bad?
The “no homework” rule is asinine anyway.
What’s this about? I don’t watch Craig F. (although I love him), and I’m curious about this incident. Never heard the manipulative bitch theory before…
I
She should head down a Sandra Bullock direction.
mhendo writes:
> The “no homework” rule is asinine anyway.
So start a thread about getting it changed. That’s what you should do when you think a rule is bad. Just deciding to ignore it means that you’re O.K. with it being more and more inconsistently applied until it slowly disappears from disuse. That means that, until the time that the rule finally disappears, there will be cases where it gets enforced in some cases and not enforced in exactly equivalent cases.
She could do worse than to emulate Goldie Hawn or Sanfra Bullock; both have Oscars and Bullock gets paid big-time money.
Two things:
One reason i expressed my opposition was precisely because your raising it in this thread was actually silly and misplaced. As Simplicio suggests, it seems reasonably clear from the wording of the OP that what s/he is seeking is not some definitive measure from within the television industry, but the opinions of people who actually watch the actress in question, and their opinions about whether the actress is becoming typecast.
2. You’ve been here 13 years. Is it really that difficult to learn how to use the quote function?
This isn’t Usenet?
There was an episode of Bones where she played the sister of Brennan- her actual real-life sister. I only vaguely remember the ep (i guess it did not make that deep an impression) but i dont THINK she was quirky or ditzy. I vaguely remember her being a bit of a bitch. Anyone else recollect?
She was quirky to the extreme! She had a Benjamin Franklin obsession if I remember correctly… and was quoting his sayings all throughout her lunch with Bones and her father.
Correction - she played her cousin.
IIRc she was quirky smart rather than quirky ditsy, but I may be misremembering
Brian
I file quoting Ben Franklin at various times throughout the day (and dinner specifically) as decidedly “quirky ditsy” but YMMV.