… to reuse a proper old-fashioned consonant headline.
This Stuff title could have read “Bigger than Potter”, to better match the more-famous misquote of Lennon’s statement about Jesus, or better yet, could have stolen the headline best employed by the promoters of Twilight: Hotter than Potter, because ultimately that’s what this story (and image) are about: Emma Watson as the new see-brainy-girls-are-hot-too icon.
The choice of secondary image in the story itself (at right) possibly hints at a different characterisation: quirky, awkward-but-in-a-cute-way, ordinary, unthreatening.
Watson might have better career prospects according to her fans but I reckon Daniel Radcliffe, by taking on serious and apparently demanding adult roles such as Equus, has made stronger moves to avoid ending up typecast.
It seems that life after Potter will be easily more interesting than the series itself.
She will do what every smart girl who has been typecast as sweet and innocent does: get her kit off in a steamy art film.
Technically, the part in Equus is a demanding adolescent role. I guess part of the reason you don’t hear of it being performed often (aside from the outdated psychology) is it’s hard to cast.
Because of course, people do this because they really want to, and not because they’re being starved of legitimate roles in an environment where they are viewed only as sexual objects. :P
When did Kiwipolitico start covering celebrity and ‘entertainment media’ BS?
I’m quite disappointed.
I don’t care about the celebrity/entertainment aspects of the story, I care about its discursive and symbolic aspects. Emma Watson is a highly constructed public persona, a role model, and a particularly influential one because of the seamless way her character blurs across her actual self. To a large extent the package has been sold on the basis of authenticity – that she really is the humble brainy one, just like on TV. The article and two contrasting photos show up a bit of the construction.