Usually I think Emma is a pretty girl, however any poster or photo I've seen of this film her face looks so chiseled and homely. I'm actually disappointed they chose her to play the role, she just doesn't seem to fit. Who do you think would have been a better choice?
shareLily Collins
shareConsiderong her face is half eyebrows' hair she should have played the Beast. No makeup needed
shareReally you're defending Emma Watson by attacking another actresses eyebrows?! A little shortsighted don't you think?
To you, Baldrick, the Renaissance was just something that happened to other people, wasn't it?
Emma Watson
"Facts are necessary, without them you must remain silent."
[deleted]
How about Amanda Seyfried? She has got the voice.
shareNo she hasn't.
When all of your wishes are granted....
Many of your dreams...will be destroyed
Yes, Amanda Seyfried. Good choice. But 8-10 years ago. Not now.
http://cdn1.ouchpress.com/media/celebrities/206/amanda-seyfried-1058.jpg
Have to disagree here...I think Amanda Seyfried is far too bland looking and her voice far too shrill for the role of Belle. She looks like so many of the other "starlets" in Hollywood. Emma is may not be a stunning beauty but she is pretty and brings intelligence to the role that Amanda couldn't begin to project.
"A man's kiss is his signature" -- Mae West
Here se go again
share