![]() |
|
|
#1 | |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: August 2005
Posts: 345
|
This is just a typical bit of celebrity fluff, but it's still encouraging to hear. Apparently, Megan Fox - she of the vampishly attractive face but miserably underweight body - was fired by Michael Bay from Transformers 3 because even he, a Hollywood director, couldn't countenance her malnourished frame.
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepag...eight-loss.html The pertinent points: Quote:
Bravo to the director for requiring her to gain weight. I can't say that I enjoy his films (although I loved the old Transformers TV show back in the '80s, when I was a kid), but this was an excellent decision on his part. I wish other directors would follow his example - and that fashion editors/agents/bookers would do likewise, firing models who are too thin, and choosing fuller-figured, healthier, more beautiful models in their stead. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#2 | ||
|
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 101
|
One more bit of info in that article was worth noting:
Quote:
Arterton is very thin, of course, but like Christina Hendricks, she's not quite emaciated, and is by her own admission a curvier-than-average star. And unlike Megan Fox, who seems altogether unhappy with her appearance, Arterton seems quite pleased with her body. http://www.contactmusic.com/news.ns...-curves_1142252 Here's the text: Quote:
A U.K. size 10 isn't even faux-plus, as the article acknowledges, but it IS above the emaciated Hollywood standard (and above Megan Fox's weight, that's for sure). I love Gemma's observation that what's truly aberrant is not how curvy she is, but how freakishly small the designers' sample sizes are. Let's hope that the Transformers role goes to Arterton. It would be a fine victory of a curvy actress over a skinny one, and would hopefully set an example to other Hollywood directors and actresses to favour a marginally curvier look. |
||
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|