|
Post by Hamatron on Jan 19, 2015 23:26:51 GMT -4
Yeah. Her PR team really should be working to make her more glam or charismatic or something when not playing Ana. Right now it's like they are trying to go the Dakota IS Ana route, which is risky since the character is so disliked. And dull. And stupid.
|
|
|
Post by discoprincess on Jan 20, 2015 10:59:32 GMT -4
Damn, she's bland as hell. She's the brunette version of Suki Waterhouse(?). In 2 minutes, I won't be able to remember her face. I still can't pick Suki out of a line-up either. From DListed: Say what you will about Blake Lively, but she had more spark on the cover of Vogue than Dakota Johnson.
|
|
|
Post by Auroranorth on Jan 20, 2015 12:16:24 GMT -4
At least Blake can pose. Dakota just looks kind of blah.
|
|
addison
Lady in Waiting
Posts: 488
Aug 28, 2006 18:09:06 GMT -4
|
Post by addison on Jan 20, 2015 17:28:19 GMT -4
She has absolutely no spark. Jezebel had a couple of unbelievable quotes from the article:
I really don't buy that she's recognized so much outside of London, she doesn't stand out at all. and where the heck did they get the comparison to Vivien Leigh?? She wishes she had Vivien Leigh's looks or talent. They should have used Kristen Stewart, they have matching charisma levels.
|
|
|
Post by angelaudie on Jan 20, 2015 17:42:35 GMT -4
She looks bored in the 50 Shades previews, bored at Golden Globes, and once again looks bored on the cover of Vogue. Her blandness wouldn't be so bad if she was some great talent. Tom Hanks seems to have a rather boring personal life and nothing deep to say but no one cares because he can act. It doesn't appear Dakota is so fortunate.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Apr 20, 2024 6:07:33 GMT -4
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2015 17:43:25 GMT -4
She doesn't sound too enthused about her acting career. It's just this intruding and somewhat exciting thing that exists at the moment. She's like a more pleasant and likable version of Kristen Stewart.
|
|
|
Post by Augustus on Jan 20, 2015 18:18:57 GMT -4
Good god, she's blander than bland. You can be living quite a boring life, but still have a certain inner spark, I mean Tom Hanks is a good example. He seems to not take himself too seriously, but cares about his work. And all the while enjoy it whilst he can.
Dakota however...not even beige is that bland. But she also sounds like someone who wasn't encouraged to look beyond the entertainment industry, but was more or less expected to end up in front of the camera in some capacity.
|
|
|
Post by GoldenFleece on Jan 20, 2015 20:27:27 GMT -4
and where the heck did they get the comparison to Vivien Leigh?? She wishes she had Vivien Leigh's looks or talent. They should have used Kristen Stewart, they have matching charisma levels. I'm going to guess that it's a very superficial comparison, like how any time a new singer/group that comes along and inspires hoards of screaming, crying girls, someone lazy reporter will say they're the next Beatles. Gone with the Wind was an extremely popular book with a highly-anticipated movie adaptation, with a working but largely unknown actress cast as the heroine after a very long, publicized search. If you stand back and squint...and ignore how GWTW won a Pulitzer at the time, that acclaimed stage and movie actresses of the day were desperate for the role of Scarlett and the movie won 8 Oscars, including Best Actress, while Fifty Shades of Grey was critically derided as one of the worst books ever written, established actors of both sexes expressed horror at being linked to it and the movie will be lucky to escape Razzie infamy...the situations with Vivien Leigh and Dakota Johnson are totally the same!
|
|
thneed
Landed Gentry
Posts: 816
Jun 19, 2006 0:42:40 GMT -4
|
Post by thneed on Jan 20, 2015 20:53:33 GMT -4
She doesn't sound too enthused about her acting career. It's just this intruding and somewhat exciting thing that exists at the moment. She's like a more pleasant and likable version of Kristen Stewart. Oh man. She sounds exactly like the child of rich famous Hollywood celebrities. It's funny. It must be nice to be so connected you can take a whole year off after your big break, instead of working your network trying to build a career like the plebs have to. Also, "Oh, what a burden it is to be famous! I wish I could lead a quiet life, on a gorgeous ranch house that looks like a Williams and Sonoma catalogue, and occasionally play with the picturesque farm animals I pay to keep on my expensive rural property, once my staff has cleaned them up for me (just like Marie Antoinette used to do) and I'll wear jeans in my distressed leather boots, and be this nurturing earth mother, but in a classy way, not a hippie way," is my second-favorite thing celebrities say. ("If I weren't an actor I'd be a marine biologist/human rights lawyer/novelist" being my actual favorite). Also, what's the big deal about Anna Wintour giving her the cover (and subsequent tongue bath)? That's, literally, AW's job. The entire celebrity/entertainment/fashion press is a giant circle jerk. Everyone who makes money or has a big project gets hyped to death as the most awesome thing to ever awesome. She's getting all this attention not because she's her, but because the "50 Shades" auience has a lot of overlap with the "Vogue" audience and some publicist called some other publicist. Honestly, I'm glad she was compared to Vivien Leigh. It makes a nice change from comparing every Tom Dick and Harriet to Marilyn Monroe and Audrey Hepburn.
|
|
|
Post by Atreides on Jan 20, 2015 23:50:53 GMT -4
That photo looks like what you get when you a buy a frame at Target, not a cover of Vogue.
|
|