Am I The Only One Who Feels Bad for Megan Fox?

[Refractive Reflections]

^^ It's genuine, open, and heartfelt posts like the one above Leo656, is one of the reasons why I respect your opinion. The post hits a resonating theme I'm sure others can relate to, with a particular family member or friend that they tried to help (maybe not as extreme as drug/alcohol/tobacco abuse, but for sure a direction in life that was destructive) and the immense frustration that accompanies it, but somehow just couldn't despite all best efforts. The post cuts through all the pretentious posting and sarcasm.

[Wildcat]

Leo656: Last Obviously, though, I don't literally wish death on people. Usually

Usually...O_O

lol

Seriously though I can understand being against drugs or abusive behavior. I think marijuana is really cliche. Even when jokes are made on TV and audiences cheer and the 420 thing is just stupid imo. I myself have NEVER done ANY drugs and don't want too.

As for Megan Fox, I dont think she deserves all the hate she gets but I don't feel bad exactly. People say they don't like the image or rep they're given but tend feed it...like shes posed for MAXIM and other magazines. Thats a little hypocritical.

[Luckyday]

I'm starting to accept the idea that she is April. I once saw screen cap picture of her jumping on a trampoline so maybe they're purposely playing the angle of Hot April. Maybe she is a character who tired of being a pretty face and wants to be taken seriously thus giving her a solid reason in risking her life to expose the foot clan.

[Leo656]

Realistically, they could'a done worse. Could'a done better, but still. I was really mad for like 5 minutes and then I got over it. Lots of stuff they've announced since then has been worse than her.

At this point, I'm actually thinking she may be one of the brighter points of the film.

[IMJ]

Originally Posted by Doom Cookie

Let me th---no.

Megan Fox wasn't terrible in the Transformers movies because her part was written badly. She was terrible because she's a terrible actress. Compare, for example, Natalie Portman in the SW prequels. All three movies, including Portman's role, were cringeworthy. Yet she gave the best performance she could and actually elevated the films somewhat.

If Megan Fox were really bothered by being famous and attractive, or by the prospect of helping to ruin movies, she'd stop acting and posing for cheesecake. It's not like she'd be in the poorhouse if she stopped now, or even three years ago.

Can you give us some specific examples of moments in Transformers where Megan Fox's acting detracted from the movie, or was otherwise unconvincing that she was her character?

[CyberCubed]

Natalie Portman is a talented actress though, unlike Megan Fox. I'd honestly rather Natalie Portman play April.

The character she's playing in the Thor movies is almost the same type of character anyway.

[Candy Kappa]

Feel sorry for Megan Fox, Why?

She is one of the most untalented people in the acting business rivaled only by a handful few. Yet, she gets big budget jobs riding only on her looks and cheesecake capability.

Originally Posted by CyberCubed

I've never done drugs or smoked in my life, and I only drink very rarely. At least I know I'll never die from drugs/drinking/lung cancer.

You're a goddamn idiot if you think lung cancer only happens to smokers

[chrisdude]

If everyone thought she sucked in Transformers, and she still got a big gig like this, shouldn't we feel happy for her, now?

[Jo Dawn]

I didn't mind Jennifer's Body, for what it was supposed to be. Bad.

However, I don't think she's a very good actress. *shrugs*

I have nothing against her personally, of course. I don't know her, and that would be silly.

But... I don't care if you're the nicest person in the world; that doesn't make you a good actor/actress. Nor should it be the reason you ARE the actor chosen for the job. In my mind, if you're not a good actor and won't add to the movie in a positive way, I don't want you in it.

[Davetello]

Originally Posted by Leo656

I've never understood the Royals. I totally wish them no ill will... but what do they DO, anymore, really? WHY do we still care? It's not like we have media reporting daily, every second, on every detail of the lives of Jimmy Carter or George H.W. Bush, and they are literally EXACTLY as important, to anything, as the British Royal Family. The Kennedys, same thing. Forget the entire fact their entire legacy and family fortune was born out of organized crime, that's ancient history, what's baffling is that they're so BELOVED, to this day, despite only one of them (John) doing anything REALLY important, his brother (Bobby) being sort of but still rather less important, and another one (Teddy) becoming a beloved public servant despite being 110% for killing someone in a drunk driving accident. JFK had probably the hottest wife in Presidential history, but aside from that and being a clan of alcoholic serial adulterers, I simply don't get the continued fascination, to this day, with anything attached to the Kennedy name even a little bit, even if ol' Jack did avert the Cuban Missile Crisis. Everybody gets ONE, man...

But yeah, I really don't understand the "Cult Of Celebrity" at all. I've been around lots of famous people, and they all burp and tell racist jokes when they're drunk like everyone else does. They just happen to be prettier while doing it.

Yes, you make great points. Obviously the American presidential families are like 'royalty' too, but at leats they've been elected somewhere along the line i.e. it is somewhat democractic, if a bit shady. The royals are where they are because their ancestors were bigger murderers than mine...

Many royalists are silly and believe that republicans dislike the royals through envy - it isn't that. Republicans generally lean left - we are egalitarians. We believe everyone is born equal, so the royals are the ultimate affront to our philosophy and political views. They are very, very hard to stomach.

Look at the fuss over this new baby prince. I made a hypothetical (if somewhat extreme) point when he was born last month...what if he grows up to be a wife beater or a murderer, but one of the many unknown babies born that day grows up to develop the cure for cancer (saving many royalists' descendents, by the way)? Wouldn't that demonstrate in the most profound fashion what a joke this 'monarchy' nonsense truly is?

Life should be about merit - what you're worth should be about what you do and how you treat people, not what vagina you exited. Sadly, many people in Western society are sheep who are easily controlled by a bit of celebrity and media indoctrination, so we have to put up with this garbage.

And as much as I moan about 'celebrities', at least they are famous for a reason, unlike the royals.

[Captain PunchYouHard]

Originally Posted by IMJ

Can you give us some specific examples of moments in Transformers where Megan Fox's acting detracted from the movie, or was otherwise unconvincing that she was her character?

No, I do not remember specific details of a spectacularly terrible movie I saw three years ago. I'm certainly not about to watch it again.

I will say, however, that every time she attempts the "smoldering temptress" thing in any movie, she comes across like a child beauty pageant contestant.

[FrostXxBitex]

I don't hate Megan Fox, I really don't mind her. But no matter how much yellow you put her in, she will never be April O'Neil.

[CyberCubed]

Megan Fox should have done a nude scene years ago.

[Leo656]

I agree with everything Davetello and CyberCubed said in their most recent posts.

[Coola Yagami]

TMNT isn't Shakespeare. And April doesn't need some Oscar winner to play her. As long as she plays the reporter out to get a story no matter what, that's all we need.

It's not like the movie is gonna have any super serious drama tear-jerking 'really makes you think' moments anyway. Or even if it does, those scenes will go to the Turtles, Splinter and maybe Sachs. But not April.

So who really cares? Megan's fine. As for her being hot.... classic April is considered one of the hottest cartoon characters of most people's childhood, so why shouldn't a hot looking young woman play her?

[sgtfbomb]

Great acting isn't limited to "tear jerker" moments or purely serious films. It can even be applied to action films. The simple fact alone that this isn't meant to be serious doesn't excuse it from having piss poor acting nor does it mean you shouldn't approach the film with any kind of standards. "But it's supposed to be dumb" has always been such a daft excuse for having zero standards.

Fox is an OK actress at best. She's there for looks, obviously, but that doesn't mean her lousy acting is beyond criticism. Yes, this even applies to Ninja Turtle movies.

[MogwaiNinja89]

Originally Posted by Leo656

There's absolutely nothing admirable about people with drug and alcohol problems, and even if you feel sorry for them you're still "looking down on them", sooo... I'm not sure I get the problem? Right is right, smug or not.

Who is saying they are admirable? Nobody said this. I agree that they make the choice to put themselves through this. But that does not mean they should be shunned and ignored. It's about finding a way to try and help them that doesn't enable them.

[MogwaiNinja89]

Originally Posted by FrostXxBitex

I don't hate Megan Fox, I really don't mind her. But no matter how much yellow you put her in, she will never be April O'Neil.

Why do people have this delusion that April is this shining example of a female figure in modern fiction? What, you look up "All Time Great Fictional Female Characters" and you'll find April O-Freakin-Neil next to Scarlett O'Hara and Ripley or something? No. She's a two dimensional character at best that is either there to get into trouble or provide a little tough sass once in a while. That's it.

[Powder]

Read a comic once in a while, guy.

[MogwaiNinja89]

Originally Posted by Powder

Read a comic once in a while, guy.

Same applies to the comics, guy.