There is a case to be made that some roles should be cast with actors/actresses that are incredibly attractive. For instance, in ‘There’s Something About Mary’, the Mary character must be a highly desirable female that would drive men to great lengths to get her attention. If a woman of average looks was cast as Mary, the movie would have suffered.
I would argue that Gyllenhall was miscast as Batman’s love interest given the character’s history of love interests (Halle Barry, Julie Newmar, Eartha Kitt, Anne Hathaway, Kim Basinger, etc) who have inevitably been true beauties.
I am not personally offended when less attractive females are cast in movies (for instance, Gyllenhall was amazing in ‘Secretary’), but I also understand when the casting of less attractive women take certain viewers out of movies. Just as there are better characters to be cast as ‘witch’ or ‘homeless woman’ there are actors better cast as ‘handsome millionaire’ or ‘toned lifeguard’. It’s more than opinion, it’s appropriate casting.
I remember some critics laughing at the casting of Cameron Diaz in “There’s Something About Mary” - talk about inappropriate! She was supposed to be an orthopedic surgeon! She would, IRL as such, have to do strenuous physical things, manhandle and manipulate major bones and joints. And there was that frail, emaciated creature who looked like she could barely lift a Cosmo cocktail with both hands to her mouth!
I don’t buy this either though. I’d wager that the vast majority of the world’s love triangles involve ‘average-looking’ people fighting tooth and nail over each other. Very often to drastic extents. I find a regular-looking love interest makes a movie feel more authentic, not make it suffer. But that’s me. It totally worked in the British ‘The Office,’ for example, without Dawn being any kind of bombshell.
Sure, but as I said, if a studio makes a bad casting decision I would think people would be annoyed with the studio. Not foam over with vituperation at the actor for being “zombie ugly” or “looking like a war zone”.
Especially if the actor in question is a young Hollywood star whom, say, at least 90% of people sexually oriented towards the star’s gender would consider more objectively good-looking than at least 90% of other people of that gender.
There are a few others that I consider to more or less be in the same category: Bette Davis (every time I see her googly eyes I think of Marty Feldman), Sara Jessica Parker (with her around I don’t know how much sex I would’ve wanted in the city), Hillary Swank (she got whacked with an ugly tree!!), and my personal favorite one to ridicule in that regard, Julia Roberts (how she ever obtained the nickname “America’s Sweetheart” is beyond me. Every time I see that skank’s likeness I have a visceral reaction that trends towards vomiting). Disgusting troll-wives, all of them. If I were the last man left on earth and any of them were the last woman our species would die out, I can guarantee you!
Thank you for illustrating what Evil Captor was talking about, racepug. I assume that disgusting post was just for effect and you’d never say something like that with a straight face.
The thing is, racepug, every one of the women you named except the late Bette Davis is a healthy, well-groomed, well-cared-for woman under 50 who has earned widespread fame and significant wealth on the basis of being considered exceptionally good-looking. So you can’t possibly think that your personal feelings of revulsion toward them are in any way objective or universal or normative.
That doesn’t mean that you have to find those women attractive, of course, but you can’t be unaware that millions and millions of sane and reasonable people do find them attractive.
So why are you so violently agitated about their lack of attraction for you? I can certainly understand your simply being unimpressed by them because they don’t happen to be your type, but how do you get from there to such over-the-top emotional hyperbole as “visceral reaction that trends towards vomiting” and “disgusting troll-wives”?
She has good teeth, good posture, and a good job. What’s to not like?
In reality, Uma Thurman’s no great beauty, but she looks like a woman I would’ve happily dated, back in the day, and, better yet, looks like a woman who might’ve dated me. Accessibility is an attractive feature.
I think these types of celebrities are archetypes more than just pretty people; I think they evoke an emotional reaction that goes beyond just “she looks hot.” I think if they did not, nooone would be talking about them; they would not really be that good at what they do. I do feel that the culture of this board leans more towards certain things than others - for example, this thread arises in response to people having a negative reaction to Maggie Gyllenghal, but none really rose to the the defense of Kim Kardashian when there was a thread bashing her to no end several weeks ago - ftr I don’t find anything really wrong with any of this.
Depends. Are you so violently repulsed by all women you don’t happen to find attractive? Do you also “ridicule” them as “skanks” and “troll-wives” simply because they’re not appealing to you?
Do you feel as though Julia Roberts and Hilary Swank are in some way obligated to be attractive to you, and deserve to be punished for failing in that duty by being insulted and mocked?
I mean, hell, I see guys all the time that I don’t think are attractive, and some that I find downright ugly, even if they happen to be movie stars. But if I experienced emotions of anger or disgust toward them on that account, or had a “visceral reaction that trends towards vomiting” upon seeing images of them, I would be freaked out to the extent of seeking counseling. That just doesn’t seem sane to me.
I remember when Alicia Silverstone got cast as Batgirl after gaining a few pounds. I also remember LOTS of people being pissed about it.
Ironically, if the producers of that movie hadn’t given her a costume that was three sizes too small, I doubt the ire wouldn’t have been nearly as bad.
I see one relevant Cracked article has been mentioned already. Here’s a relevant extract from another article: “Basically, they’re not actually thinking about their arguments – because they’re not trying to convince you, they’re trying to explain to themselves why they’re so fucking sad. And this particular explanation is so appealing because it gives them a villain. It’s tough to rally the troops around depression, or insecurity, or anything else that doesn’t have a concrete cause, but have you ever tried blaming other people for your problems? It feels fantastic.” Source: 5 Uncomfortable Truths Behind the Men's Rights Movement | Cracked.com
That thread was revived by a one-and-done poster just to insult Gyllenhaal. Someone with that much anger actively searching google for conversations where people don’t agree with his assessment says more about the poster than about the phenomena. No matter how attractive I may or may not find Gyllenhaal (or Davis, or Swank, or Parker, or Roberts, et al), the attitude displayed by ballermd in the previous thread and racepug in this thread is far, far uglier.
Whom one finds attractive and why they find someone attractive are very personal appraisals. Sure, there are some things that are very commonly attractive, traits that we are predisposed to like, but there is really no universal constant. It’s one thing to say “I’m not attractive to Uma Thurman”. It’s another to say “Uma Thurman is an ugly skank and you’re wrong for finding her attractive”.
Honestly, I think it’s basically ingrained misogyny that causes such a reaction - the same reason there are MRAs; some guys feel like they’re owed an attractive woman, even a fantasy version, and when said woman doesn’t live up to their ridiculous standard they’re filled with rage at the injustice of it all.
I just don’t see what you are seeing as anger. I would not say racepug seemed angry until his post was ridiculed. I’m not saying he was being rational, but anger just isn’t what I got from that post. The exaggeration is so great that I read it more as comic hyperbole. Those are the types of comments I’d expect by reviewers at TWOP (may it rest in peace).
I have seen anger involved in this sort of thing, but it’s usually in the form of being mad at other people for daring to find person X to be attractive. But more often I think it’s about proving how much better you are than these other people.
Well, that combined with the simple fact that celebrities are on a different scale. Just like there’s Hollywood Fat, there’s Hollywood Ugly. There are plenty of actresses I’d date in a heartbeat that I would not say are attractive for actresses.
