Really she has practically no appeal and none of her movies have been hits on the box office (excluding Twilight which was successful in spite of her). She is a very bland and boring actress with not an ounce of charisma in her body. She was also the wrong fit for this type of role the whole action girl type just doesn't suits her. Well to be honest I think no role suits her but I digress.
shareMy brother and I agree that she's so bad at acting, she's basically Hayden Christiensen with tiny breasts.
shareShe’s actually a good actress if you watched movies other than blockbusters like Personal Shopper, Panic Room, etc. I agree she’s terrible in blockbuster type movies, but do some research before giving an opinion.
shareI've seen the movies you've mentioned and I agree she's a female Hayden Christensen
shareIf you don’t think she was good in Personal Shopper than your opinion doesn’t matter.
shareSo he doesn't agree with you and in so his opinion is then invalid, hmm ok.
What you just wrote doesn't matter because you disagree with me and the previous post, see how that works.
It is his opinion, it is neither right or wrong, hence why it is called an opinion, same as yours.
My opinion is Kristen Stewart is a terrible actress. Agree or disagree, doesn't make it any less relevant.
Actually an opinion can be wrong. For example, if I said in my opinion I’m better at baseball than Babe Ruth yet I can’t even hit a 20mph fastball obviously I’m not better.
shareBut we were not talking about baseball.
And your reply doesn't help you.
You can't hit a 20mph baseball = That is a fact not opinion
Babe Ruth Can hit a 20mph baseball = That is a fact not opinion
So your conclusion is based on fact not opinion.
His opinion is valid. He doesn't like said actress or film, that is his opinion on this subject and cannnot be wrong.
Doesn’t matter in my opinion I’m better
share"Actually an opinion can be wrong."
No, it can't. Opinions are inherently subjective. If something can be wrong then it's objective, and thus, not an opinion.
"For example, if I said in my opinion I’m better at baseball than Babe Ruth yet I can’t even hit a 20mph fastball obviously I’m not better."
That wouldn't be an opinion, it would simply be a false assertion. Baseball skills can be objectively measured to a degree, certainly to enough of a degree to objectively establish that Babe Ruth was better at baseball than someone who has no baseball skills at all. If you were claiming that e.g., Pete Rose was better at baseball than Babe Ruth, then it would be an opinion, because they were both great at the game and there are too many variables and unknowns to objectively establish that one was better than the other.
Except I’m saying in my opinion I believe I’m better than Ruth at baseball which is simply not true.
share"Except I’m saying in my opinion I believe I’m better than Ruth at baseball"
And that would be incorrect usage of the word "opinion," because it's not an opinion at all, it's a false assertion. It's like saying "In my opinion, two plus two equals five." That's not an opinion, it's a false assertion.
a view or judgment formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge. That’s exactly what I just said
shareI said:
"And that would be incorrect usage of the word "opinion," because it's not an opinion at all, it's a false assertion. It's like saying "In my opinion, two plus two equals five." That's not an opinion, it's a false assertion."
Since you didn't actually address that, your tacit concession on the matter is noted.
Anything that can be proven wrong is not an opinion, it's a demonstrably false assertion.
How can you prove Ruth is better than me at baseball? That’s impossible it’s subjective
shareYou already proved it in your original statement:
"For example, if I said in my opinion I’m better at baseball than Babe Ruth yet I can’t even hit a 20mph fastball"
Babe Ruth could hit a 20 MPH pitch, as well as much faster pitches. That is a well-documented fact. You can't, so he was better. Plus, proof isn't even necessary, because you already admitted it:
"obviously I’m not better."
Only subjective statements can be opinions. Objective statements are not, and can not, be opinions. For example:
The statement, "Apples taste good," is an opinion. The statement, "Everyone thinks that apples taste good," is not an opinion, because it's falsifiable, i.e., it only takes one person who doesn't like the taste of apples to prove that statement wrong.
Ok I’m better than LeBron at basketball in my opinion. You can’t prove I’m not.
shareHow many NBA titles have you won. The answer is zero. You are not a professional basketball player playing at the highest level.
So you are not better than Lebron James and can be proven quite easily.
You need to learn the basics of opinion vs fact.
Facts are black and white, opinions are subjective.
Opinion = Micheal Jordan is better than Lebron James.
Fact = Barry Bonds hit more home runs than Babe Ruth
Someones opinion that is infact an opinion and cannot be quantified in any many cannot be wrong, it can be argued and discussed and disagreed with but cannot be wrong.
For example in my opinion Serenity is one of the best scifi films ever made, you can disagree but i cannot be wrong about it because it is completley subjective based on my own opinion and likes.
Don't think you will see the difference otherwise you wouldn't have continued to argue your false point.
You’re using a stat to say LeBron is better than me. I can just use movie reviews to say Serenity isn’t the best ever. It’s an option bud
share"Ok I’m better than LeBron at basketball in my opinion."
That's not an opinion, it's a mere assertion, and in all likelihood, a false one at that.
"You can’t prove I’m not."
It doesn't matter whether I, personally, can prove it wrong or not; it only matters that it could be either proven wrong (as likely as the next sunrise) or proven right (snowball's chance in hell) via a contest of skill. If proven wrong it's a false assertion. If proven right it's a fact. Neither false assertions nor facts are opinions.
In any case, you've moved the goalpost, and, comically, your new position contradicts your old position. You originally claimed that opinions can be wrong (even though something being wrong [or right] inherently means it's not an opinion), and now you're trying to argue that something is an opinion because it [allegedly] isn't wrong.
You just admitted I was right. It’s an opinion simple as that son
share"You just admitted I was right."
This laughable, out-of-left-field assertion of yours is a non sequitur, given that it doesn't logically follow from anything I said. Consider it dismissed out of hand. This is also a...
Reading Disability Alert
... for you.
"It’s an opinion"
Already refuted, thus dismissed.
"simple as that son"
Comical Irony Alert
In any case, since you didn't present any arguments or anything else that was valid in any way, your tacit concession on the matter is noted, again.
Wrong I said an opinion and you admitted it child
shareYour non sequitur is dismissed and your tacit concession remains noted, simpleton.
share^^Butthurt much
shareThe only movie I’ve seen that I liked Hayden Christensen in was Shattered Glass where he plays this guy who constantly lies.
shareOne of the best lines I’ve seen, AmeriGirl, “Hayden Christensen with tiny breasts.” Possibly with bigger balls, however; but that’s not saying much.
shareShe may not be everyone's cup of tea, and even if she does not have wide appeal, still has a strong core group of fans. It seems everyone featured in the remake were trying to go against established casting choice; where instead of being enlightened glamor girls with lots of charm and brains, focused on charisma, realistic adolescent looks as seen on the 21 Jump Street TV series, practical smarts being secondary though still there.
~~/o/
I think she’s a good actor and I would be surprised if her performance has anything to do with the box office failure of this movie. It just doesn’t seem like there was much enthusiasm for another remake of the franchise.
shareI've heard that this was a fun popcorn action movie. It was probably hurt going in by other films overstaying the girl power trend, which is not in itself a bad thing, it just needed fresh marketing. This movie could end up being a sleeper hit once it lands venues outside the box office.
~~/o/
You say she's not a draw but there really are no draws any more. Consider how popular ScarJo is and she has the same problem if she's not in a Marvel movie.
It's more about the quality of the entire project and whether the actor/actress was lucky enough to be asked to come on board.
She isn't a draw and never has been. For some reason Hollyweird has been pushing her in major lead roles for years despite her not having a significant audience interested in her to justify getting so many prominent roles all this time. Of course this is just conjecture but I think it's part of a Hollyweird experiment to see if they can will into existence a lesbian A list actress of mediocre talent. I get similar vibes from why Hollyweird is shoving Ruby Rose & that Carla Delvagina... or whatever her name is down audience's throats. Two more lesbian actresses who can't act or draw audiences.
shareYOU REALIZE YOUR TWISTED VIEW ON LESBIANS IN HOLLYWOOD COMPLETELY TORPEDOED YOUR WHOLE RANT INTO IGNORANCE,RIGHT?
shareHow is that? Hollyweird does push these particular actresses despite having limited talent & next to no box office draw. My conjecture theorizing why I think that is doesn't change that & is more or less beside the point.
shareI still don't how Ruby Rose happened, in Australia she was just a presenter on a music video show. She was never a big deal down here.
shareAll three look like lesbians. They should have called it Charlie's Dykes.
shareFrom what I have noticed, she always looks bored and as if she would rather be somewhere else. The dyke hairdo in this film as well really robs her of the little attractiveness she had too. Not to mention she is the wrong build (as are the other two) and wrong actress altogether for an action film.
It would be like casting Steve Carell as Rambo.
"From what I have noticed, she always looks bored and as if she would rather be somewhere else."
I've often said that that's what I didn't like about her. I've been told that's just her "anxiety". I'm still on the fence about it, personally.
"Not to mention she is the wrong build (as are the other two) and wrong actress altogether for an action film.
It would be like casting Steve Carell as Rambo."
Man, this exactly. My wife and I were talking about it, and just this morning I said, "It's not because they're women. It'd be just as silly if it were DJ Qualls going 'round the globe, kickin' ass and takin' names."
Gina Carano, Ronda Rousey - women like that are believable. Heck, even actresses like Michelle Rodriguez or Regina King that can look the part.
When men like Qualls, Rowan Atkinson or Leslie Nielsen are cast in these roles, not only are the roles intended to be all-around comedic, their stature and lack of abilities is often the main joke.
Though, for some reason, with these new age female action films, we're supposed to believe it and take it seriously - and I mean SUPER CEREAL - and if you don't, then you are obviously a misogynistic incel that needs to "mansplain" (whatever the fuck that is).
Yep for sure.
It's like they don't put any thought into the films and storylines and then finish the job by throwing in whoever to star in them. I don't know if it is a long term strategy to eventually lower the audiences expectations so much that that they just start showing films which are nothing but a blank screen with subliminal comments appearing here and there and perhaps a soundtrack that is played on some weird frequency that it is also subliminal.
If we are expected to assume that the people who make these films have some brain function that is all I can think of as to why they keep doing this. Because otherwise they need to seriously go back to creative writing school as well as complete business 101 because they are really failing at what they supposedly do best, which is making movies people want to see.
And constantly attacking your market for your failures is just beyond retarded.
http://www.agcwebpages.com/BLINDITEMS/2020/JAN.html
98. ENTERTAINMENT LAWYER 01/08 **11**
https://www.crazydaysandnights.net/2020/01/blind-item-11_8.html
Back to back bombs where this A- list mostly movie actress was the one used for marketing is really going to bring the career to a crashing halt as a lead actress. Kristen Stewart (Kristen Stewart Floats Above the Deep-Sea Dumbness of Underwater)
https://time.com/5761932/underwater-review-kristen-stewart/