Hailee is too ugly - Romeo & Juliet Discussion

[–] narf131 11 years ago

Not a Juliet? .....maybe. Ugly? ....not anywhere near.

reply

[–] kyan93 11 years ago

Yes, she is. Douglas Booth looks far better & next to him she looks unattractive (ugly). Also, Steinfield's features don't work for me. She looks 10.

reply

[–] gayspiritwarrior 11 years ago

Don't worry; nobody's going to force you to see this.

"The value of an idea has nothing to do with the honesty of the man expressing it."--Oscar Wilde

reply

[–] ikke_for_let 11 years ago

First off this actress is s a 16 year old girl. She's not fully developed. The subject is entirely inapropriate.

Secondly check the OP's history. She (the OP) seriously has an obsession. I'd suggest therapy.

reply

[–] jacowium 11 years ago

If Hailee is sixteen, then she is already venturing beyond the age of Juliet as characterised by The Bard himself. Furthermore, considering the Elizabethan age in which the play was written (long, long before Victorian morals held sway), nothing is inappropriate as far as this production is concerned.

I don't mean to argue, just presenting a counter-argument, based on my own schooling of Shakespeare.

Please click on "reply" at the post you're responding to. Thanks.

reply

[–] ikke_for_let 11 years ago

The production is fine. But I think it's inappropriate in the extreme to call a 16 year old girl ugly on an internet board.

reply

[–] jacowium 11 years ago

Yes I agree with that. I suspect your comment was aimed at the original poster though, and not me! Hailee is certainly beautiful in my eyes.

Please click on "reply" at the post you're responding to. Thanks.

reply

[–] Thorakus 10 years ago

It is not innapropriate and when people like you say that is it really irk's me since this statement usually comes from my fellow Americans. The legal age of consent in the US is 18 in only 10 states, 17 in about 10 states, but is 16 in the remaining 30 or so. Therefor for the most part the age of consent would be 16 in USA.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ages_of_consent_in_North_America

It is also 16 in most 1st world countries. So there is nothing wrong with anyone, regardless of age, looking at a 16 year old in a sexual manner. It cracks me up how Americans still think of 16 year old's as children given the age of consent in America and most of the rest of the world.

Now I will concede that there are stipulations to the 16 age of consent in some of those states but for the most part, once a person is 16, statutory rape goes away.

And before anyone says anything I have a 14 year old daughter and still feel 16 is an appropriate age for men or women to make that decision whether its with an older person or not.

reply

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] acaciajules 11 years ago

Well, Juliet is supposed to be like 13/14, so isn't younger better?

Chase: Wow. Yeah, I get it. House is adorable. I just want to hold him and never let go.

reply

[–] SnapCrackledThePop 10 years ago

This is true, but we don't want to watch a 13/14 year old playing Juliet.

reply

[–] MydnightRose 10 years ago

I didn't think she was ugly, but next to Douglas she coulent compete. Douglas could have played both roles, that's how pretty he was. I used to think Juliet was supposed to be plain because the first version I saw had Claire Danes in the role. I'm still not entirely sure how good looking she is supposed to be. Olivia of course was beautiful but Claire nor this new chick are that stunning.
Romeo is almost always played by a skinny pretty boy. I think Gabrielle Wilde would have been good.

Brian Kinney & Justin Taylor

reply

[–] batbhai 11 years ago

Me too...she's not even close to the portrayal of Claire Dianes.

reply

[–] lynsey_poushay 11 years ago

I agree, but the whole movie wasn't anywhere near as good. But considering Romeo+Juliet was a contemporary telling set in Venice Beach, I wasn't expecting much comparison.

reply

[–] priestly-nichols 11 years ago

I don't get why everyone has such a hard-on for Claire Danes... I think she is one of the most unattractive actresses that everyone seems to keep insisting is attractive.

reply

[–] Pythonet 11 years ago

Kirsten Dunst has her beat in that department. Those teeth. Ick. Danes is usually pretty good. Also, she got Hugh D'Ancy to marry her, so, how bad could she be? :)

reply

[–] cljohnston108 11 years ago

I don't get why everyone has such a hard-on for Claire Danes... I think she is one of the most unattractive actresses that everyone seems to keep insisting is attractive.

Agreed. There is no more beautiful Juliet than Olivia Hussey, IMHO.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romeo_and_Juliet_(1968_film)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZLVlajiihI

reply

[–] KaylaNimon 11 years ago

I agree with you!

reply

[–] Screen_Queen 11 years ago

Steinfeld is gorgeous. Since you are so critical, why don't you post a picture of yourself and let us judge you? You must be stunning to make that kind of audacious statement. Steinfeld is anything but ugly.

When you grow up, your heart dies.

reply

[–] moviemaniac-14 11 years ago

You don't need to be a Cy Young winner to spot a pitcher who doesn't belong in the MLB and needs to be knocked down a couple of levels. Similarly, the OP may be ugly as *beep*, but still able to render reasonable judgements about other people's attractiveness. And with how subjective such *beep* is, who are we to take a swipe at the OP?

reply

[–] howdy2525 11 years ago

she's not ugly at all - but I'd like to see her in a movie with a guy her own age, 16, not 21 like douglas is (and not pretending to have sex in a movie when 17 or younger, even though that's what happens in the play) - I'd also like to see her playing American characters and not English characters

reply

[–] gayspiritwarrior 11 years ago

Please, there is no sex in the play.

"The value of an idea has nothing to do with the honesty of the man expressing it."--Oscar Wilde

reply

[–] acaciajules 11 years ago

Sure, if you ignore the wedding night....

Chase: Wow. Yeah, I get it. House is adorable. I just want to hold him and never let go.

reply

[–] gayspiritwarrior 11 years ago

Sure, a director can put sex into the scene if s/he thinks it will sell, but Shakespeare calls for none in the play.

"The value of an idea has nothing to do with the honesty of the man expressing it."--Oscar Wilde

reply

[–] acaciajules 11 years ago

He hints at it though. And talks enough about it.

Chase: Wow. Yeah, I get it. House is adorable. I just want to hold him and never let go.

reply

[–] CamileL 11 years ago

The couple never gets to consumate the wedding in the play.

reply

[–] norman-dostal 11 years ago

absolutely wrong, ignoramus. Romeo sleep swith Juliet and wakes up in her bed-duuuhh

reply

[–] gayspiritwarrior 11 years ago

Not in the play. In the movie, yes. The director changed it. And calling names doesn't make you right, only rude.

"The value of an idea has nothing to do with the honesty of the man expressing it."--Oscar Wilde

reply

[–] forvanityssake 11 years ago

But it IS in the play. They're waking up together after spending their first night as a wedded couple. Why else would they be talking about the birds that are, in fact, waking them up? And why else would they be together in the morning? This is a pair of extremely hormonal newlyweds who can't keep their hands off each other that we're talking about. Just because every movie adaptation makes the scene a bit more explicit doesn't mean that it isn't what Shakespeare intended. If you read the play, it's quite clear.

That being said, I do like your signature line.

----

Take it in what sense thou wilt.

reply

[–] gayspiritwarrior 11 years ago

Of course the consummation is implied, but it happens before the start of Act 3 scene 5. We're back on the balcony in this scene, and Juliet's first words are,

"Wilt thou be gone? It is not yet near day.
It was the nightingale, and not the lark,
That pierced the fearful hollow of thine ear.
Nightly she sings on yon pomegranate tree."

He's leaving, and she's trying to convince him not to. The wedding night is between scenes. There's no sex in the play, which is all I've been saying, all along.

"The value of an idea has nothing to do with the honesty of the man expressing it."--Oscar Wilde

reply

[–] forvanityssake 11 years ago

Oh, I was never claiming that the consummation happened onstage! I was basing my post off the latter half of the one you replied to, where the user mentioned Romeo waking up in Juliet's bed after they spent the night together. It seemed that you were disputing that entirely, which I thought was odd. Simple miscommunication.

----

Take it in what sense thou wilt.

reply

[–] cereza1000 11 years ago

Is this your reason? Is too ugly? what a poor reasoning.

reply

[–] Remy_Azhary 11 years ago

Come on! Don't you know? Romeo and Juliet is not so much about the teen couple themselves. The play is solely focused on Romeo himself. Notice how the name 'Romeo' stands out each time you say the title?

Exactly!

A 'Romeo' has got to be attractive, handsome, even pretty! So it doesn't matter if the girl is ugly or what! At the end of it all, it's all about the guy, not the girl. In short, the play itself has a rather gay ring to it, don't you think?

reply

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Februarydreams 11 years ago

I like Hailee, but I don't think she fits the part. Sophie Turner would've been perfect too.

The best things are last

reply

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] BooknMovieFan 11 years ago

I'd have to disagree with all of you who say that Hailee is not gorgeous. She isn't gorgeous as a 25 year old is seen to be gorgeous, but she is certainly a gorgeous sixteen year old. She has this radiant look about her, and despite what some of you think, I think her eyes are one of her best features.

Look at this clip released today from Yahoo. She just radiates, in my opinion.
http://movies.yahoo.com/video/romeo-juliet-clip-balcony-161010147.html

reply

[–] GhostGlow 11 years ago

It truly is amazing the kind of girls that are considered ugly by random people online. Like seriously, you really think she's ugly? You must have some amazingly high standards. Ugly... really. This is just mind blowing stuff here.

reply

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] girlongoing 11 years ago

shes not ugly at all, shes actually really pretty. but i do agree in the fact that i probably wouldnt have cast her as juliet. she looks too young next to douglas booth. but in shakespeares romeo and juliet, juliet is actually quite a bit younger than romeo. shes supposed to be almost 14, and romeos age isnt specified so he could probably be anywhere from 16-20. i guess they were going for a true to the book road.

reply