Hard but Fair? - An Open Letter to Scarlett Johansson
July 6th 2007 13:16
Internet Movie DataBase recently posted a link that piqued my passing interest and then grabbed my attention head on as I read. "Open Letters" posted in the blogosphere to various celebrities are nothing new. Entire wars are fought online with poison pens... keyboards, moving away busily as Perez Hilton and Candy Spelling or Paris Hilton or Britney Spears or The Hoff and whoever duke it out to see who has the biggest... ego!
But what you will read in the following open letter is a tragically honest depiction of what can happen when you are converted from being a newcomer to an up-and-comer to "it!" in too short an order.
Scarlett Johansson is a brilliant actress, and one of the bright shining hopes for Hollywood's future... but, there is a certain horrific truth to the open letter that follows. It was originally posted on The Pulse Magazine website. I DID NOT write it - I'm overemphasising this on purpose because whoever DID write this epic letter is brilliant and deserves all credit and more for doing so!
Hollywood’s Latest It Girl
Dear Scarlett,
Like any good twentysomething, I enjoyed your company at first. In films like Girl With A Pearl Earring and Lost In Translation, your roles were sparse but intimate, quiet but telling. You played the reserved yet intriguing young woman with an old soul. Plus, you weren’t all that bad to look at.
Then, somewhere between those two films and your first Woody Allen picture, “it” happened. Literally. You became the latest victim of Hollywood’s “It Girl” fanaticism.
Clara Bow was the first back in 1927. Though the term originally came from author Elinor Glyn, whose book It was made into a movie starring Bow. Glyn described “it” as, among other things, “…that strange magnetism which attracts both sexes,” while Dorothy Parker aptly narrowed things down to a certain physical feature: “It, hell. She had those.”
Like Bow, Scarlett, your open-mouth countenance and strategically-lifted bosom were soon plastered on the cover of every major entertainment magazine on the newsstand: Vanity Fair, Elle, Marie Claire, InStyle, New York, Interview, Entertainment Weekly, Vogue, and Allure. Esquire featured you as the year’s sexiest woman alive. This isn’t to forget your television appearances hocking perfume for Calvin Klein and playing the lead in both a Bob Dylan and a Justin Timberlake music video.
As if that weren’t enough, there were all the movie roles. Whenever there was a part you were even remotely qualified for, your agent was sure to get a call. It’s par for the course in the entertainment industry and audiences thrive on this kind of lush overexposure. During the Grammys, there was even talk of you recording a pop album and doing a run on Broadway. It hardly matters that you’ve never sung a single note in your life. You’re the new thing, baby!
From 2004-2006, you had prominent roles in several major movies: In Good Company, Match Point, The Island, Scoop, The Black Dahlia, The Prestige, and even SpongeBob SquarePants. But despite all these lucrative offers, did you really have to say “yes” to so many? Even Jude Law must be shaking his head every time your name appears on yet another marquee.
I suppose it wouldn’t be quite so bad if you were simply a better actress. Recently, I’ve found myself imagining other actresses who could have done a much better job with your roles. Aren’t you even a little tired of playing the exact same character in every movie? Though you’ve certainly mastered that bit of Stanislavski magic known as staring blankly at another actor with your mouth open, it cheapens a film when a character who deserves actual depth simply receives the “Johansson stare” instead of an actual performance.
While it’s easy to blame Hollywood for this name brand casting, you are still to blame for electing to take the path of least resistance and accept roles for which you’re remarkably unsuited.
Michael Ventre calls this phenomenon of actors ignoring quality once they’ve become famous “Affleckization” after Ben Affleck’s terrible run of films following Good Will Hunting. However, the trend actually began much earlier and could equally be named “MacGregorization” or “Cageization.” At least with Hollywoodland, Affleck has rediscovered his potential. Sure, his acting’s still not much to look at, but he does have some sense of the error of his ways (ahem, Gigli) and may yet surprise audiences with a role he can pull off convincingly in the near future.
My only hope is that you eventually find your way as well, Scarlett ~ before it’s too late. Because if history is any indication, your It Girl bubble will burst worse than a dot com’s. And then what will you do? Clara Bow’s career ended with the arrival of talkies. Yours might end because frankly, my dear, we just won’t give a damn anymore.
Sincerely,
Len Sousa
SIZZLE!!! If Scarlett's career dies due to overexposure we will be horrified! Check her next major release The Nanny Diaries due out in Australia, September 27... did someone just say overexposure???
But what you will read in the following open letter is a tragically honest depiction of what can happen when you are converted from being a newcomer to an up-and-comer to "it!" in too short an order.
Hollywood’s Latest It Girl
Like any good twentysomething, I enjoyed your company at first. In films like Girl With A Pearl Earring and Lost In Translation, your roles were sparse but intimate, quiet but telling. You played the reserved yet intriguing young woman with an old soul. Plus, you weren’t all that bad to look at.
Then, somewhere between those two films and your first Woody Allen picture, “it” happened. Literally. You became the latest victim of Hollywood’s “It Girl” fanaticism.
Clara Bow was the first back in 1927. Though the term originally came from author Elinor Glyn, whose book It was made into a movie starring Bow. Glyn described “it” as, among other things, “…that strange magnetism which attracts both sexes,” while Dorothy Parker aptly narrowed things down to a certain physical feature: “It, hell. She had those.”
Like Bow, Scarlett, your open-mouth countenance and strategically-lifted bosom were soon plastered on the cover of every major entertainment magazine on the newsstand: Vanity Fair, Elle, Marie Claire, InStyle, New York, Interview, Entertainment Weekly, Vogue, and Allure. Esquire featured you as the year’s sexiest woman alive. This isn’t to forget your television appearances hocking perfume for Calvin Klein and playing the lead in both a Bob Dylan and a Justin Timberlake music video.
As if that weren’t enough, there were all the movie roles. Whenever there was a part you were even remotely qualified for, your agent was sure to get a call. It’s par for the course in the entertainment industry and audiences thrive on this kind of lush overexposure. During the Grammys, there was even talk of you recording a pop album and doing a run on Broadway. It hardly matters that you’ve never sung a single note in your life. You’re the new thing, baby!
From 2004-2006, you had prominent roles in several major movies: In Good Company, Match Point, The Island, Scoop, The Black Dahlia, The Prestige, and even SpongeBob SquarePants. But despite all these lucrative offers, did you really have to say “yes” to so many? Even Jude Law must be shaking his head every time your name appears on yet another marquee.
I suppose it wouldn’t be quite so bad if you were simply a better actress. Recently, I’ve found myself imagining other actresses who could have done a much better job with your roles. Aren’t you even a little tired of playing the exact same character in every movie? Though you’ve certainly mastered that bit of Stanislavski magic known as staring blankly at another actor with your mouth open, it cheapens a film when a character who deserves actual depth simply receives the “Johansson stare” instead of an actual performance.
While it’s easy to blame Hollywood for this name brand casting, you are still to blame for electing to take the path of least resistance and accept roles for which you’re remarkably unsuited.
Michael Ventre calls this phenomenon of actors ignoring quality once they’ve become famous “Affleckization” after Ben Affleck’s terrible run of films following Good Will Hunting. However, the trend actually began much earlier and could equally be named “MacGregorization” or “Cageization.” At least with Hollywoodland, Affleck has rediscovered his potential. Sure, his acting’s still not much to look at, but he does have some sense of the error of his ways (ahem, Gigli) and may yet surprise audiences with a role he can pull off convincingly in the near future.
My only hope is that you eventually find your way as well, Scarlett ~ before it’s too late. Because if history is any indication, your It Girl bubble will burst worse than a dot com’s. And then what will you do? Clara Bow’s career ended with the arrival of talkies. Yours might end because frankly, my dear, we just won’t give a damn anymore.
Sincerely,
Len Sousa
SIZZLE!!! If Scarlett's career dies due to overexposure we will be horrified! Check her next major release The Nanny Diaries due out in Australia, September 27... did someone just say overexposure???
| 51 |
| Vote |
Add To: 
subscribe to this blog
Comment by tlcorbin-raginravensview
Quite the letter, a worthy read.
Raven
Comment by JohnDoe
Film & TV on DVD
I liekd Scarlett in Ghost World, but found she became less rich in character quickly.