I wonder why she was chosen for Fleur?

This message has been deleted by the poster

They seriously played down her beauty in the film. I'd seen her in something else before she was cast as Fleur, and I was so excited they'd got her because of how beautiful she is. But for some reason they really toned it down for the film. I don't know why.

Seriously, check out this photo, and tell me she's not beautiful enough for Fleur.

http://www.clemence-poesy.org/gallery/displayimage.php?album=273&p os=1

But to be fair, seeing as Fleur is essentially written as the most beautiful girl in the world, anyone they cast would have been criticized as not being stunning enough.

But to be fair, seeing as Fleur is essentially written as the most beautiful girl in the world, anyone they cast would have been criticized as not being stunning enough.I was going to say the exact same thing.

Clemence is gorgeous, no doubt, but I don't think any actress would have been able to live up to how beautiful Fleur is supposed to be. It's like picking an actress to play Helen of Troy, the most beautiful woman in the world; whoever they pick, the decision isn't going to make everyone happy.


"Greatness inspires envy... Envy engenders spite... Spite spawns lies..."

Everyone in Hollywood is beautiful so you can't differentiate a "beautiful" person based on beauty. Clemence is beautiful and unique, so that makes her a good choice.

Meh. Based on the book, I pictured Fluer as this exotic, absolutely stunning and captivating women: Tall, athletic build, curves like crazy, full pouty lips, silky skin, soul piercing eyes; long, thick, golden blonde-silverish hair, and kind of gives off a subtle but definite glow. Clemence maybe got three of the eight I just mentioned.

I agree that Clemence is very beautiful, but Fluer is supposed to be out of this world, insane gorgeous. But if you haven't read the book, the movie doesn't tell you that she is part Veela, and supposed to be drop dead gorgeous. She's just some chick.

-The General has spoken.

it's funny actually, they reversed everyone's looks in the movie. accoding to the book, Hermione and Luna are supposed to be plain, while Fleur, Cho and Ginny ae gorgeous. In the movies, Fleur is ordinary-looking, Cho is plain, Ginny is ugly and Hermione and Luna are pretty.

Agreed. Also similar with the men (with the exception of various actors who played Tom M. Riddle).
Or they can at least get some girl who look like Serena in Gossip Girls, not exactly drop dead gorgeous, but sexy and pretty.
Because Fleur has a lot of sex appeal, but Clemency is very girl-next-door. Just look at her in Gossip Girl.

Clémence's character in Gossip Girl was supposed to be the girl next door variety. Her looks were toned down and she had to appear simple and plain. Clémence can be quite breath-taking, I thought her first scene in In Bruges when Colin Farrel's character sees her for the first time was fantastic as well as the scene when they are at the dinner and she smiles and winks at him after deliberately making him feel bad when she lied about her friend being murdered because he made a joke about child abuse.