it's a complete,utter joke the fact that she apparently was considered for the role of anastasia in fifty shades of grey
there's no way that this PG13, Disney type, lightweight, "actress" could ever show any skin in a movie.
shareShe is a joke, Dakota is a million times better.
sharewithout a doubt lucy reminds me of those "actresses" who are on shows like gossip girl and in PG13 rated horror movies because they never show their tits.
shareIndeed, Dakota was the perfect choice for this role and she knocked it out of the park.
Lucy is a c level actress at best.
exactly the c level comment. just think though if magically lucy got the part, one of the two actresses would have had completely different career trajectories, with lucy getting a lot of big parts in big movies and dakota, her career would have been not much different though, as she's a talented actress, lucy not so much.
interestingly dakota hasn't done much for her career since 50 shades of grey, she hasn't capitalized on her fame or success. only appearing in a few big movies that were not that big like bad things at the ok corral or whatever it's called, such a dumb name for a movie.
yes, dakota was the perfect choice. i never understood people saying no one wants to see her tits. uh she's one of them most beautiful girls i've ever seen in 50 shades of grey. and her tits are two of the most beautiful and most perfect tits i've ever seen.
dakota's acting made 50 shades of grey good and better and the movie improved her career.
What do you mean that she hasn't done much. She's had 7 movies come out in the 2.5 years since the last 50 shades came out with two more in pre-production. They might not have all been blockbusters, but that's respectable. The movie you are referring to with the dumb name is Bad Times at the El Royale, and I'm guessing you haven't seen it as the name makes sense.
shareit doesn't matter if the name makes sense in the context of the movie what matters is it's a dumb ass title that is hard to remember and doesn't exactly roll off the tongue. it's not a good sounding title to a movie. movies have to have good sounding titles. in hollywood they work on making the best titles they can think of for movies.
no one is going to remember that title 10 or 20 years from now. they'll be just like me trying to remember the name of that movie because it's an obscure sounding title with the el royale and also it's a generic sounding title bad times which makes it more unlikable as a title and hard to remember. another thing hollywood tries to not do, make a generic title to a movie.
the only movies i've seen trailers of with her in them since the 50 shades of grey movies are this movie and black mass. so i guess all her other movies since 50 s o g have been bad movies because they haven't been marketed professionally.
Wow. So only mass marketed movies are good? Hahahahaha.
in hollywood they work on making the best titles they can think of for movies Again...hahahahahahaha
Look, I don't know if you are trolling or not, but I'm really not sure what your ideas of good movies are. 50 Shades were mass marketed and those are horrible movies.
think about the title of that movie it's horrible. it's really hard to remember and it's not catchy and it's generic. it's not an original title.
my point was not about the quality of her movies since 50 s of g my point was about her career as a star in hollywood not being great as since 50 she's only been in 2 big movies that i know of.
50 shades movies are not horrible movies. the first one anyway was quite entertaining and well made although still porn kind of movie. it's debatable i guess if it's a softcore porn movie or a legitimate movie.
DONT YOU EVER GET TIRED OF SOUNDING SO MORONIC?
share"no one is going to remember that title 10 or 20 years from now."
That must be why I've recommended it to people since I've seen it... without having to look at my notes, lol. You must have a terrible memory!
no, i have a great memory. it's because it's such a stupid and uninspired and unremarkable and boring and generic title.
share"Bad Times at the El Royal". Generic. Boring. Unremarkable. Hm. Lol. You got me, man. Congrats on the subtle trolling.
shareit wasn't trolling. it was the truth. i mean can you think of a more bland title to a movie? or a herder to remember title because its so generic?
shareYES...THOUSANDS UPON THOUSANDS...YOURE AN ODD ONE.
shareHotel of Secrets.
Bad Night at the Hotel.
Weird Encounters.
I don't know... use your freakin' imagination !
Plus, Bad Times at the EL ROYAL is not specific enough? How is that a generic title?
because it sounds very generic and non specific and not special. el royal could very well be el mariachi and it would have the same sound an meaning as el royal because it's bland and generic and unspecific.
share[deleted]
[deleted]
I believe she’s been topless in a movie though.
sharewho?
shareLucy Hale
sharei just got aroused. no way, i thought she was one of those fake, disney show actresses who only "act" in PG13 teen horror movies when they get older or star on no nudity shows like her show pretty little liars.
shareThe movie is Dude...,short scene....but definitely her
shareso, why is she doing her career in the opposite direction? an actor should start out in shit pg 13 horror movies and then mature and advance to good movies when they get older a few years later. why did she make 2 stupid and pointless kid pg 13 horror movies after making an adult and good movie?
share