You know i understand that you would want a pretty girl in the lead but at the cost of quality to a already lacking movie is it honestly worth it. There are tons of beautiful women out there of can really act, i guess what im trying to say is i dont really understand the choice in Roise
shareShe did QUITE well, especially for a relative newcomer, and honestly her role didn't require much more anyway. Plus, after the blowout with Megan Fox at the last minute, the most important thing was that she'd be available on next-to-no notice, do her job, and continue her own good working relationship with Michael Bay. Not too hard to figure out, really. Rosie was awesome. :P
sharei honestly had no problem with carly and think she did a pretty solid job what i did have a problem with was yet another token useless hot girl character...we wanna see transformers...we can look up porn any time we want on our computers
shareNEWSFLASH: CGI is ridiculously expensive, especially for the degree of realism seen in these films. If you wanna see photosrealistic Transformers onscreen then you need to allow the producers to make the films as broadly appealing as possible. These movies have to rope in as many paying viewers as possible to even simply break even financially, let alone turn enough of a profit to ensure MORE Transformers films get made. That means sexy actors and actresses are practically a given.
share[deleted]
I think i should make it clear that im not against casting an attractive person all im saying is their are thousand of hot girls who can act to, and like you said this is her film debut so she was a relative no name to most people, so why take a chance on basically a hot amatuer who acting skills are minimal at best and hope everything turns out okay, than just hire real actresses who also happens to be hot.
shareAnd AGAIN I point out that the role did not require a particularly well-trained or experienced actress...all that was required was someone to take over for Megan Fox on incredibly short notice and who had a demonstrably better working relationship with Michael Bay than the actress she replaced. Furthermore, she had good chemistry with the film's star too and that was that. Why should the production have unnecessarily wasted precious time & tons of money when they already had exactly what they were looking for with Rosie anyway? And in the end she held her own just fine regardless, even in the midst of difficult circumstances & working opposite far more seasoned pros, so ultimately the complaint rings hollow and moot in any case.
share[deleted]
With a few script changes i think that that film have have been a lot better with either of those actresses, it would have had less sex appeal, but can you honestly say that you wouldnt want see meryl streep in transformers.
share[deleted]
Amanda Seyfried would have been fit the bill.Good actress plus looks.But then again this is a Micheal Bay film everything is just pretty to look at.
shareThey've gone after a pretty face since the beginning of motion pictures.
shareShe LOOKED bad, she acted bad.
-------------------------------------
Victims, aren't we all?
What I wonder is - why couldn't they find a hot chick who still had human lips?
The Doctor is out. Far out.
since dumb as ameriKKKans only go for looks and not for talent, thanx hollywood for brainwashing the *beep* out of people!
shareYeah I'm sure that in your country (whatever it might be, since you didn't bother saying what vastly intellectual superior country you came from), they'd never cast someone in a movie based on looks. Ever think to yourself that maybe the only country on the planet who's big movie releases are released EVERYWHERE in theaters for the most part happens to be from here in the United States? Perhaps because people, even in your "superior" country are going to see our movies.
And while I'm sure you will answer pissing and moaning about us *beep* Americans, something tells me you will leave out what country you come from. Ones like yourself always do.
I think the point is to get a cheap hottie because her performance matters much less than her sex appeal. A talented actress would likely be much more famous and expensive, money that they'll rather spend on special effects. It's Michael Bay, I mean. I'm not saying it's a good thing, his movies are drivel, but don't expect him to cast Natalie Portman for Transformers. You're asking McDonald's to use quality, non-industrial cheese for their cheeseburgers.
share