Emma's quotes to remember

DISCLAIMER: This blog is my opinion. I'm not saying everything I say is true but I'm not making anything up. I pride myself on using facts, evidence, sources, and deductive reasoning. I'm not an inside source but I was not born yesterday. I use Emma's words showing her inconsistencies with what she says versus what she does. Everything she says is actually the opposite of who she is when you pay attention to what she actually does. She preaches about being honest and true to yourself when she isn't. She claims virtues and convictions she doesn't adhere to. She constantly portrays a false sense of modesty, morality and ethics that she never follows. It's not her actions that bother me. She can smoke crack for all I care. It's all her deceptions that built up her fake persona she gets lauded for. She is more of a brand than being the genuine article. Emma is a prettily weaved illusion designed to trick you. She is a celebrity (they get so much attention in society) and she is pretty (beauty culture obsession), and these days that’s as good as being a god (celebrity worship syndrome). This blog was not created to point out what an awful human being she is. I don't believe she's a horrible person but when it comes to a stereotyped fake celebrity she fits the mold perfectly. This blog was created as a push back to the mindless adoration and to point out what others refuse or fail to do. I don’t know Emma the private person but what I do know is Emma the public person (celebrity) is full of contradiction, hypocrisy and deceptions. Her entire public persona is built on being the anti-celebrity but in reality she's ever bit of the fame hungry attention seeker she claims not to be. Celebrities should be looked at as products. They're trying to sell us (the consumers) something by using the same marketing ploys we see in ads every day. They make millions doing this. We have every right as consumers to call bullshit when the product does not work as advertised. Celebrities made a choice to be public figures and can walk away if they wish, so anything they put out there is up for debate.

QUOTES OF EMMA'S TO REMEMBER: "There seems to be this feeling that all of us were bursting to break out of these images we had created but that’s never been the case (2009)." and "I do not think I "ought" to be a model of reference for my fame. But I want to do something good by using my public image and reputation (2009)." and "Actually, I'm quite shy, I've never liked attention and money. I feel myself a little bit like Finding Nemo's Dory. I just keep swimming and don't turn around to watch the mess (2010)." and "I think you should be yourself because otherwise, you'll be on the wrong path and the results are not gonna be pretty (2010)." and " It's very weird. I have to kind of like switch heads. Sometimes I manage it seamlessly, and other times I feel rather all over the place. I explained to a friend that sometimes I feel a bit schizophrenic, like I have a split personality (2010)." and "In terms of a role model the cleanest way to live as a human and artist to be true to yourself (2011)." and "Never have something to hide or lose (2011)." and "Fame was never something I ever aspired to and it's not something I aspire to now really (2011)." NEW ONES (I find these new ones peculiar because I've said she's fake and a brand repeatedly since February 2011: Is she trying to come clean?): "Let’s say there’s a side of me, the one represented in the media, that does not match who I really am in private life. (2012)." and "It kind of does feel that way [like I am a brand]. That’s just something I’ve come to realize, that there’s a public persona (2013)." and "When you’re playing someone else and you’re playing a public persona for the media, you almost lose your own identity and who you are." and "I try my best to be as authentic as I can. I try to be real, but I also understand there’s a distinction between the me that walks red carpets, and the me that is just myself, at home (2013)." and "Similar to you, I used to try to hide what I was doing, and I would end up in these awkward positions where I would have to go and do something [for work] but I would say I was doing something else. I would try to hide that I had a car picking me up—I would hide the car around the corner so that people would think I was walking. All of these elaborate kinds of schemes to pretend I was like everyone else (2013).”

ONE MORE EMMA QUOTE TO CONSIDER from an interview in 2009, "Did you ever steal any of the props? “Yes, I did. We were doing a scene in Gringotts and there was all of this plastic gold that’s in there, but Dan, Rupert and I spent like the whole week smuggling it out for crew members who wanted souvenirs. They weren’t giving any of it away, so we nicked it. We were actually competing in the end and I got really good at it. I looked like the innocent one, so they nobody really noticed me, but they checked the boys. So I think I got about four or five pieces out. That was funny.” And that's the just of it. Emma looks to innocent to be anything other than what she makes herself up to be. It makes doing this blog rather difficult at times because people do not want to believe Emma is anything but honest. There is also the issue of Emma stating for years she is just like the fictional character Hermione. People get confused between Emma the actress and Hermione the make believe character she was portraying. They are nothing alike.

OTHER QUOTES: "The great thing about Emma is that she's a chameleon that can communicate anything you ask." - Mario Testino. "Any actor who tells you that they have become the people they play, unless they’re clearly diagnosed as a schizophrenic, is bullshitting you.” - Gary Oldman. "The image is one thing and the human being is another...It's very hard to live up to an image, put it that way." - Elvis Presley. "It is much easier to be honest than to be caught up in a bunch of lies. At least this way, you know who you are." - Mila Kunis

Two pages to check out:
1.) meettherealemmawatson.tumblr.com (me)
2.) emma-what-son.tumblr.tumblr.com (no affiliation)

September 16, 2011

Is Emma Watson a secrect b*tch?

Before you read below please check these few posts out that I've done with photo and video proof to how not so nice Emma Watson can be. Emma Watson diva moment with publicist (youtube video).Emma Watson diva moment with driver (Photos of her yelling at him), and Emma Watson diva moment on Perks set. Click my diva labels on the right side of my page to see other postings. Don't forget her bitch face photos here, here and at the bottom of this post here including a youtube video. Those are the short list of thing I have posted. There are many more like that. It would probably be best to you if you check these links first and then read this post to put it into perspective.

Below is a story a fan posted on their blog and ONTD posted it. It's older but if you checked the links out above it make it relevant. Now things like this you have to be cautious about because there is no real evidence or source. If you clicked the link above to put this story below into perspective it is highly plausible this is not as far fetched as you would think. On one hand you are grappling with the image you are used to seeing but on the other with regards to my posts above it is not the one you are used to seeing. Then you have stories and comments like the ones below.

From ohnotheydidnt.livejournal.com Feb 2008

"I was always a fan of Emma Watson, she seemed sweet and friendly. I even met her when I was shopping last year (i got her photo which was taken from me and posted on a certain website). I was so excited to hear that my friend had a part as an extra on Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince. So yesterday was my friend's second day of filming. She had so many wonderful stories to tell me about her experience, including one not so wonderful story which has changed my views on Emma Watson forever. Even my friend who was an Emma W fan was reeeeeally shocked by what she saw.

Here is the story: "There was a muddy pathway where some extras were trying to get through without falling into the mud. Emma pushed through the extras shouting "excuse me I'm coming through!!!!"
she pushed a small young extra out the way, but luckily the extra was caught by another extra just in time so she didn't fall into the mud. A girl said to Emma " what do you think you are doing?" Emma shouted back "how DARE you talk to me like that! Do you not know who I am!!!!!??" Luckily the girl replied "yeah, you are the girl that moves her eyebrows 500 times in the movie." Emma just scowled and gave them an evil look while walking off."

Now you can either believe this story or not believe it, its up to you. I was a fan of Emma's so its not like I am doing this because I hate her or something." http://randomtyper.blogspot.com/ (this blog with the story has been deleted)


Emma really does have a mean looking stare here or what?

Photobucket

Here is the report from a guy who meet her 'famous' boyfriend at a club. And what he said today at the comments: "Damn, I should meet more famous people, seems to be good for my blog. What did he say. We started by asking him if it was actually even fun dating her, you probably don't see her a lot at all and stuff... And he went like, yeah that's quite annoying but you know, we both live quite busy lives and stuff so. On which we joked to him and said ( I should though mention that that was after a couple of beers =) ) : " Sex has to be great then.. ? ", on which he nodded with a a satisfied and " I can't help it " kind of face. On which we went on asking him some things about how she was and if he got any advantages out of her fame and stuff." Source: koenc.blogspot.com (this blog still up). Her fans commented on this second story at emma-watson-fans.net if you want to read their comments.

Remember in my last post I referenced a post I did where Emma told a UK radio talk show host that she looks good naked and she respects "his" opinion? If the second story is true I suspect it is Tom Ducker.


The autograph seeker later that day…

In my first blue link about about her bitch face with her publicist I sourced article of people complaining on set to Emma's diva-ish behavior and these few comments are reacting to it. All are people who commented on ONTD.

From ohnotheydidnt.livejournal.com July 2009

Comment from glas_smaragaide "bugger off. And yes I've met her bitch ass twice. 1. Phoenix prem in London. Took my nephew and niece and waited hours to hopefully meet the trio. My nephew loves Emma. He was the only little boy amongst all these girls. She acted like a stuck up cunt. Like it was a big hassle to have to deal with the fans. Rupert was awesome, took pics signed autographs. Dan was sweet and gave my niece a hug. Met Matt and Evanna."

Comment from offinlahlahland "The guy who leaked the script excerpts from ootp and hbp said she can be a bit testy on set, and extras have said she completely ignores the lot of them. This wouldn't surprise me if it were true."

Comment from veridis_quo "believe it, a long time ago I read some article about the costume artist on set, and the lady said Emma was difficult to please or like if she didn't like them she wouldn't wear the outfits"

Comment from tabby_93, "long story, but here's the jist of it we were on vacation in the same place as her, and she wanted to go out diving (we were going out diving so of course witnessed all this) and she came just before we were about to get on the boat, but she was told she would have to wait until the next boat at 1.00 pm. she got really irritated (she wasn't screaming or shouting or anything, though) and she said something along the lines of "I can't believe you would make somebody like ME wait until the next boat!"

Emma's newest bitch face last week in NYC



From closermag.fr July 2011 (French Magazine) "When one asks me if it's difficult not to be big-headed, I often want to say: ' everything depends on the way one behaves with you '. The only moment when I was not down-to-earth anymore is when I had a figurine in my effigy between my hands. I really thought I was dreaming!" (Translated from French of Watson fan site). Now was her publicist and driver acting bad with her if you clicked on those links?

Echee says: I put this in my between the lines label even though I think the source is credible due to the blue links with evidence I provided to support Emma's personality and attitude traits that person blogged about. My between the lines posts are basically asking is this happening in a rhetorical way. What we know of Emma or what they say and how she portrays herself is this polite innocent girl thrusted into the position she is in. If you take into accounts the story and my links (especially the diva ones) you will catch a glimpse of the possibility Emma is not that nice and easy to deal with. There have been tons of rumors of her being quit testy and moody on set and with people including her old stylists and assistants. Rumors are hard to prove but if you weigh in my links and everything else here it's not too far fetched if you ask me. If you also consider all the deception, contradictions and hypocrisy I've shown in this blog about her I ask why not? With all her documented whining why not?

I know this may be hard for some to stomach but to ease your doubts and second guessing let me say something personal. In the same year I learned that Santa Claus, Easter Bunny and the Tooth Fairy was made up make believe, lol. =) It rocked my world but I got over it. As for the stories and comments from ONTD from other people. Even though it's widely known as speculation and rumor or just people making things up or has some vendetta, I find it credible and believable based on what I know from what I've posted on her diva and whinny ways on top of everything else. I will say I am more sure of her being a diva and testy with what I've posted than these stories or comments because I have a source, photos and video for it. The stories like these makes you doubt unless you have something credible to back it up. Something else or similar to the claim. I do believe my stuff more than this but I don't cast it aside as not true either.

What do you think of these claims? What do you think of the links of my posts I provided? Does it make this seem like it's true, possible or you don't know? What vibe to get from Emma in her interviews both in print and video? Is it one where you are going how pretty she is or one where you feel something is not right here? Do you think she's just having bad days or she has issues? What do you think of those MTV bitch face reactions to award winners? I also ask if she is so perfect why can't she hold onto a man? Why does she jump from high end company to high end company in such a short time period (like she does guys) if she's such a valued endorser? What happened to Channel? Could it be true she is just too much and asks for too much from men and companies like Burberry and People Tree? Do you think she will last with Lancome? How much of what you see of her while the camera is on is a show and real in your opinion? Did she thank her fans for her TCA awards yet? We are talking about an actress here. Don't forget that.

Both stories and links to both blogs are from ONTD.

Update: From thehothits.com Feb 2012, “Daniel Radcliffe has revealed that he and Emma Watson got into some massive fights on the set of the Harry Potter films -- and they weren't about who got the most mirror space in their dressing rooms. Daniel explained that he and Emma frequently engaged in debates about serious topics including religion and politics, and their arguments would get so heated that they would completely stop talking to each other! He tells Britain's Radio Times, "Oh, God. We used to argue about everything. Religion. Politics. I remember one of the big arguments we had on the fourth film - we didn't speak to each other for a couple of days - was about... She was arguing about the Latin language, that nobody knows what it sounds like, what a Latin accent should be. And I was like, 'Yeah, but it's still spoken a lot in the Catholic church.' "Such a w**ky argument, looking back, and it got totally out of hand. She was furious; I was livid." And Daniel has some advice for anyone attempting to start an argument with Emma. He adds, "I certainly would advise anyone, if you're going to debate with her, know your s**t."

image

202 comments:

1 – 200 of 202   Newer›   Newest»
Anonymous said...

Luckily the girl replied "yeah, you are the girl that moves her eyebrows 500 times in the movie."


Yeh I heard that story before......but as if the extra had the bottle to say that. Probably behind her back as Emma walked off.

I really want her butch female body guard to get a beating :D

Anonymous said...

I'm posting this from a post a couple down because I think it's relevant and some of your quotes came from the same post just different pages:
http://ohnotheydidnt.livejournal.com/35181854.html?page=3#comments

Scroll down a bit, user 'curtaindown' she first comment about Equus and dan's dad calling her a bitch :p

Now I'm mainly focussing on curtaindown who was apparently an usher while Dan was appearing in Equus.

curtaindown: "All true. A few years back during the my Equus months, Dan Rad's dad said to me himself that Emma was a stuck up bitch.

And I've met her too, and she's really snooty. I dont get the Emma Watson love."

I'm not going to copy and paste every post curtaindown made but she(?) seems credible and doesn't have a beef with Emma and is very specific in some other posts regarding when JKR went to see the show etc.

Now this:
"Here is the story: "There was a muddy pathway where some extras were trying to get through without falling into the mud. Emma pushed through the extras shouting "excuse me I'm coming through!!!!"
she pushed a small young extra out the way, but luckily the extra was caught by another extra just in time so she didn't fall into the mud. A girl said to Emma " what do you think you are doing?" Emma shouted back "how DARE you talk to me like that! Do you not know who I am!!!!!??" Luckily the girl replied "yeah, you are the girl that moves her eyebrows 500 times in the movie." Emma just scowled and gave them an evil look while walking off." sounds very fan fictiony to me.

So what's my point? Not sure. curtaindown sounds legit, the quote above, not so much. Someone posted on ONTD that they met George Craig and asked him about Emma. He said she was bitchy and he was better off without her. No way to know if this is true or not.
But remember the saying, it doesn't matter how beautiful the girl is, somewhere there's a guy sick of her shit.

nette said...

I agree with the anon above about the first story. It does sound like fan fiction. The whole "do you not know who I am" sounds very cliche.

But I have heard stories over the years about how bitchy or snotty Emma is. Perez Hilton posted a story during the filming of DH1 on how some of the crew members were sick of Emma showing up late to the set and having a bad attitude towards them. Of course they denied it. (I think you may have posted this story, Echee, but I don't remember).

I don't remember when this comment was made, but someone on ONTD said that a friend (or cousin) of hers worked on one of the HP sets as an extra and Emma displayed the same bitchy attitude towards the extras.

I don't know if any or all the accounts are real or fake, but I doubt different people over the years would say the same thing about her if it wasn't true.

Anonymous said...

I don't think people should just shrug off a story because of the way it's written. Someone on another post here said that the story about the girl who was an usher for Equus was talking out of her ass because 'how can someone meet these people so many times?'

Quite frankly, if you have connections, of course you're going to meet them, maybe just once, maybe a few times. Her job also allowed her to met Ddan a few times. I believe what his father said lol. And with this other person: Just because someone writes descriptively doesn't mean that what they wrote is false. Quite frankly, if the person wrote with less description, people would be more likely to say it's not true. I mean would you believe this:

"So my friend who was an extra told me that one day on the set of some scene, Emma pushed through all the extras and said, "..." to which my friend made a snappy comment back saying, "..." and then she just huffed away."

The person wrote with as much detail as they could. If I met Emma and had a story to tell, I'd make sure it was well written and descriptive, too. Without those two things, it would lack credibility because it would sound like some fabricated story.

ANYWAY,

same thing as Nette said: "I doubt different people over the years would say the same thing about her if it wasn't true." These bitchy-on-set rumors have been going around for YEARS. Ever since the 4th movie. It's obvious she only continued as Hermione for the money (remember when everyone was waiting to see if Emma was going to sign on for the rest of the movies like the rest of the cast? Well she did when she was offered a hefty raise!) - so this bitchy attitude doesn't surprise me. She hasn't given a fuck about the HP movies since the 3rd movie. So of course she's going to be a dick on set to anyone. She doesn't want to be there. It was just about money.

And the clothing comment doesn't surprise me. That'd be why Hermione started dressing like Emma after a while. I remember in one of her earlier interviews (around 3rd movie) she was all like, "omg I FINALLY got them to get me out of those robes and into jeans." (and a nice little rainbow belt and pink hoodie...wow)

I just don't get why people catered to everything she wanted. It's not like she's the daughter of the queen or something.

Anonymous said...

I'm looking forward to the tell all books!

Anonymous said...

echee, this post is rubbish and you know it. when there are no news, dont post. posts like this dont help you at all.

posting a picture where she doesnt smile and calling it "newest bitchface" come on. thats so forced. you also shouldnt tell people that they are blinded when you believe every comment and blogpost on the internet that is negative, its the same fucking thing.

Anonymous said...

I always believe when there are many rumers about the same thing is because there is definetly something out there. I is not hard to believe that Emma is that bitchy. Look at how she talks and look.

I want to give her the benefit of the doubt but she sure makes it almost impossible.

And no one can possibly be all that bitter and with there faces with a permanent bitchy face like Emma does. So I am starting to believe that's her face, but then why so happy when she willingly goes to places that she knows is going to get her photographed. ;)

Anonymous said...

why do you still write she said she looks good naked? look at the effin sauce. its a celeb fake nude site that spoofs aricles like that. thats where you get your "facts"?

Anonymous said...

"no one can possibly be all that bitter and with there faces with a permanent bitchy face like Emma does. So I am starting to believe that's her face"

it IS her face. she has a huge chin with a little overbite. when she closes her mouth and doesnt smile it looks like this. look at photoshootings they never make photos from such an angle because she doesnt look good like that. its her normal face. echee just tries to deceive people with that.

Anonymous said...

From the post above... "What vibe to get from Emma in her interviews both in print and video?"

I have watched almost every video there is of Emma doing research. I think Emma does a pretty good job in video interviews. Maybe I am distracted by her looks and not really listening to her words, though. I admit that possibility.

"Do you think she's just having bad days or she has issues?"

I don't think she was always a bitch. There are negative stories about her, and some of them are undoubtedly true, but there are positive ones, too. A lot of people who know her seem to like her. She was a diva bitch sometimes, but a decent person overall (just my opinion)

"What do you think of those MTV bitch face reactions to award winners?"

Those were not that bad in my opinion. Having Johnny sit three seats away was weird. Having that women who was sitting next to her work on her hair while they were in the audience was weird. Normally a person like that would be back stage somewhere. That was sort of a diva moment.

"Do you think she will last with Lancome?"

No actress lasts with Lancome. There will be some other actress for their next perfume or whatever.

- Gilbert

(Let me know if I still sound like an obnoxious, little fanboy stan.)

Anonymous said...

no no you sound like BIG fanboy stan xD just kiddin'

you have some good points

Rose said...

Regarding the look on Emma's face in the Piccadilly Circus shot from DH 1 filming, it appears she is looking at Dan. As to what is going through her head, who knows? It all depends on how one wishes to perceive that moment.

Anonymous said...

"it IS her face. she has a huge chin with a little overbite. when she closes her mouth and doesnt smile it looks like this"

No it isn't. Look at her face when she was sitting on Johnny's lap in NYC. Tell me if you see the same type of face like in these photos.

"why do you still write she said she looks good naked? look at the effin sauce. its a celeb fake nude site that spoofs aricles like that. thats where you get your "facts"?"

She did say that on a radio show. The facts are right. I don't know where you get your facts. I hope not from watson fan sites.

"echee, this post is rubbish and you know it. when there are no news, dont post. posts like this dont help you at all"

It makes you angry more than you think it's forced. If you want fan fiction posts go to Eden's blog

Anonymous said...

I don't see anything wrong with this post. It makes you think. What is the big deal?

That video of her giving attitude to that lady says it all right there. Looks like a stuck up bitch to me. If I was that driver she yelled at I would have told the bitch to shut up.

Anonymous said...

Gilbert is right about Lancome - you don't "last" with Lancome. They constantly get new ambassadors for it, so it won't be anything shameful once she's not with the label anymore.

This curtaindown person is full of it. I'm sorry, but he/she just is. Dan Radcliffe's dad just isn't going to talk to you candidly like that, period. Or at all to be honest. Likewise, that Emma pushing people out of the way story sounds like pure farce. If it sounds too crazy to be true, it probably is. And since we have no substantiating evidence, I'm not giving it any second thought.

I have heard equal amounts of "stories" of "meeting" Emma Watson so many times on the Internet. I don't believe a single one of them. Words are words, and when it comes to celebrities, it's frequently just gossip.

As for these "bitch faces," I just don't see it. I think it's mildly funny to call them bitch faces, but it's not that she's walking around with a bad attitude 24/7. It's just a neutral expression. Look around you; almost everyone's neutral expression, if photographed, could look uncaring or even sort of mean.

Echee said...

You have all these positive stories of Emma from fans and then you have negative ones. Why are the positive ones accepted while these ones are brushed asisde? It's possible. I've shown you Emma's attitude in action with my links so why would it be far fetched that it is not true? There is evidence in video and photo form. As for the bitch faces. They are bitch faces. I don't buy this crap its because of her jaw. Come on. What photos are you looking at? She is scowling at the camera.

I respect everyones opinon. And gilbert quit commenting making points and then re-comment under another anonymous complimetning yourself.

Echee said...

And I dont mean the anonymous person that commented above me. The one that commented below Gilberts post.

Anonymous said...

"You have all these positive stories of Emma from fans and then you have negative ones. Why are the positive ones accepted while these ones are brushed asisde?"

I don't believe any of them. I was about to calrify that after I made my post, but I figured that it might not make people read the original so I didn't.

But yeah, fan "stories" about whether Emma is the biggest angel or the biggest asshole don't cut it for me. I would believe any fan story so long as it had substantial evidence to back it up. It might be too much to ask, but video wouldn't hurt.

People frequently film celebrities or take pictures with them when they see them. Not all of them post to Youtube or anything, but if it was "youtube material" (like so many of these stories seem to be) one of them would at least make it (UNCUT!) to youtube.

As for the bitch faces, I still don't see them as bitch faces. As Rose said,

"Regarding the look on Emma's face in the Piccadilly Circus shot from DH 1 filming, it appears she is looking at Dan. **As to what is going through her head, who knows?** It all depends on how one wishes to perceive that moment."

Echee said...

And I did not say this story was true. I said it's believable based off what i have shown regarding this sort of stated attitude.

The youtube video. If you can't clearly see emma gets an attitude when that lady goes over to tell her she has to walk down with rupert and then turn around and give a smoldering bitch face glare to someone off camera you are blind.

Her yelling at the driver. You can see she came out of there hot and bothered over something with her hair all over the place while other females hair are in place. There was no wind if you make that an excuse. In the car you can see her start to get angry and animated with her driver and she is yells at him. The paps caught this and that when you get the deer in headlights opps you caught me.

I've got all sorts of excuse from people for things I post like she has adhd, quotes are taking out of context, I make up quotes or off the wall things like there was 8 blizzards on the east coast and thats why she missed an entire 15 week term at Brown.

The issue is your percieved image of her that has been forced down your throats wins out even though it can be proven what she is, say and about can be debunked, disproven and laid out with evidence. That and her looks. Like that anon said, "it doesn't matter how beautiful the girl is, somewhere there's a guy sick of her shit." She looks innocent to you with that british posh accent.

I think I passed my personal comment quota on my own blog for the day

Anonymous said...

"In the car you can see her start to get angry and animated with her driver and she is yells at him. The paps caught this and that when you get the deer in headlights opps you caught me."

Key word - paps. I don't see how you can blame someone for getting pissed off with the paparazzi. I'd tell me driver to GTFO of there too.

Remember that one where her friend pushes the pap, and then the car wouldn't star?. All the while the paps are yelling "Where are you going?! Nowhere! Emma, do magic! Emma, what's next?!?!" It's plainly annoying, degrading, and none of their business. No celebrity has ever said that they like the paparazzi, and pretty much everyone hates them. I don't mind if celebrities get testy with paps. They're all scum.

It's the stories I hear about celebrities talking extremely amicably or testily with everyday people that are the ones to call into question. Notice that i account for BOTH the positive AND negative here. I don't believe either of them, because they're equally full of shit.

"The issue is your percieved image of her that has been forced down your throats wins out even though it can be proven what she is"

Where did I ever say that I believe all of the positive stories and don't believe the negative ones about her? Why are you acting like I'm assuming that only the positive stories are true? Isn't it ironic that YOU'RE assuming and shoving words down my throat?

There are plenty of negative things you've posted that I think are credible. But it's simply stupid to sit here and say, "derr, well, if I made some good negative points about her earlier, then why shouldn't this also be true?"

This is why:

"The idea that correlation proves causation, is a logical fallacy by which two events that occur together are claimed to have a cause-and-effect relationship." (Wikipedia)

Correlation does not automatically imply causation. Period.

Anonymous said...

"Correlation does not automatically imply causation. Period."
You guys always want video evidence and photos. This blog provides them. Video not so much. Still you question the possibility.

I see the point being made here with the links and this stories.
"There are plenty of negative things you've posted that I think are credible."

The track record of this blog to provide sources and evidence is astounding. You have to admit that.

Anonymous said...

Is this post the insanity post I've been hearing about? I always thought that was referring to a quote or something she had made

Anonymous said...

I'm not grasping the arguement here. There is proof of Emma's testy attitude.

What more do you want to say these stories are possbile? In denial much?

Anonymous said...

"This curtaindown person is full of it. I'm sorry, but he/she just is. Dan Radcliffe's dad just isn't going to talk to you candidly like that, period. Or at all to be honest"

You're certainly free to believe what you want, but is it really that hard to believe that over a period of weeks/months that Dan's dad was hanging out with the ushers that he might've gotten to know them and felt comfortable enough to talk candidly?
You have to go to the actual post and read all of curtaindown's posts. They don't seem to have it out for Emma and are simply stating what happened.
They also mention that they were working a different show and Tom Felton and Emma both saw it at different times and Tom was nice and Emma was snotty.

If you're expecting an usher to take video you'll be waiting a long time. That's a good way to no longer be an usher. Also I believe curtaindown said they didn't even mention it until after they had left the show due to them being aftraid of losing their job.

"Correlation does not automatically imply causation. Period.

Where there's smoke there's fire. This isn't a court of law. Nothing is going to be proved beyond a reasonable doubt.

Rose said...

Does anyone have a link to the source in which Emma states "My boyfriend thinks I look good naked"?

And to everyone who is posting under Anonymous: Would it be so difficult to select the Name/URL option and then type in a fake name, or at least type in Anonymous followed by some numbers?

nette said...

@Rose

http://www.nudography.com/News.aspx?IDNews=1518

Anonymous said...

check this out

http://udoj.wordpress.com/2007/07/23/emma-watson-naked-oh-hermione/

http://www.beautyden.com/celebrity/emma-watson-good-naked.shtml

She does say it but the I trust his expert opinion is not spoken of here. She says she's been told she looks good naked.

Shy my ass!!

Anonymous said...

^same anona as above. I agree it was Ducker she was speaking about.

Anonymous said...

I might be willing to take my clothes off for a Bertolucci film, if it was a part that really made sense as part of my character ~ Emma Watson 2009

nette said...

@ 2nd/3rd anon: The link I provided does mention the "I trust his expert opinion" quote.

Anonymous said...

Wow this post got a lot of heat since I last checked. I'm the anon who said that she doesn't understand why people dismiss these stories just because the person telling them isn't like, The Times or some sort of official figure of media publication.

Anyway, I'm astounded at the anon who says all these stories are false. There are many positive Emma stories too, but by your thinking - since these are AVERAGE people - those are false, as well. I mean, all of these fan encounters are by average people, some who were extras, an usher at an Equus showing, etc. But you believe all of these positive stories. You may say you don't, but you're dismissing the negative ones and accepting the positive, therefore making it seem as though you only accept positive (which would then make why you dismiss the negative actually make sense). Contradiction, much?

Fan/bystander/co-worker encounters are exactly what they are. There will be varying stories. If there was ONE story EVER claiming Emma to be testy, then I could understand why people would dismiss it. But there are a number of stories. You cannot deny this.

So I just don't get it. You obviously accept the positive stories because you're not dismissing them in any way. That means you're speaking with a predetermined positive opinion of Emma. Of course you will deny anything negative. It's just hilarious because the positive Emma encounters are made by average people too who could just as easily lie about their encounter.

And I agree, there is a difference between scowling and having no expression. Emma scowls a lot at the paps. She occasionally smiles. She occasionally hides her face. She does a lot of things, but to say that "her face is just structured like that" is a sort of stupid comment, no offense to the anon who wrote it.

And haha shy girls don't tell people they've just met that they've been told they look good naked. Hell, even girls with morals don't say that. She's an interesting person, that's for sure.

Anonymous said...

Ugh we're talking five years ago.

There is nothing on the net with audio. I went to BBC live site. There is nothing from 2006. There data base does not go back that far. What the other anon posted is the real version in my opinion. I'm not taking anything away from Echee's. It could be the right one. There are two diffrent versions. It's worded different. The meaning is the same. Some dude thinks she looks good naked.

What we do know is she not been a virgin for five years. I wonder if she's a screamer or moaner? What's her favorite position? =D

Rose said...

Thank you for the link, nette.

Anonymous said...

haha I dunno if the "that was five years ago" statement was suppose to help her or what. Her saying that when she's just 16 and under constant media/public watching (since she was supposed to be a role model and all), made the comment seem a little disturbing and inappropriate (also unnecessary) (and side note, since ppl seem to like to dismiss her "unnecessary comments" - she could have easily said that yes, she would go nude in a scene if the script called for it; there was no need to say ~I've been told I look good naked, so I have little to worry about). I mean, so what if she lost her virginity at 16 or earlier. It's the 21st century. But it's just pathetic how she plays this innocent girl card when she's anything but (in societal terms).

And I agree with the anon who wrote the very long comment. If someone doesn't believe a negative story about Watson because it was given by some average person, they shouldn't believe the positive stories either. They're all told by people who have had some sort of encounter with her. They should all be taken in the same way, but it seems when someone has something negative to say about her, the person who said such negative "false words" is automatically assumed of making it up. It def is contradictory. The people who say she's an angel could be talking out of their asses, too.

Echee said...

I saw the two different quotes on this I look good naked thing. It’s the only one other than the warrior princess one where you get differing variations of what she said. I read a lot of quotes from different websites. Sometimes they have a quote I use and then other times they have the quote but with more of what she said.
My thinking was how many YouTube videos of her has been removed like the one where she was told she was whining by the MTV interviewer, the one where she said she could put her leg behind her head followed by awkward silence and rambling on her part (I watched that and posted it under my Prince Kate “poor girl” post), the one where she told the mtv interview she’d go take her dress off if the fans voted 100 percent on her dress and there was one where she was getting rude with fans that was taken down. All for some FCC violation of some sort. All negative things. I wonder how long it will be until the letterman drunk clip and my angry with the publicist video will be removed for some form of violation?

So there is truth somewhere in all this. I chose one. The other one is may be the more realistic version to some because it’s not as bad with referencing a guy as an expert.

What did Matthew Lewis say about Emma? She loves raunchy jokes. What did Emma say about rob pattison? He tells rude jokes and we all love it. So it’s not far fetched Emma has a little bit of a dirty mind. This girl goes to strip clubs for one and in no way is that my reasoning for this. It's all the other things as well.

Anonymous said...

Wow that ONTD post is a mess. I love how everyone claims it's misogynistic to say she is a diva (ignoring the fact that it may just be that the boys are normal) and then makes excuses that she must be on her period so it is ok. So who is the real sexist?

Anonymous said...

"My thinking was how many YouTube videos of her has been removed like the one where she was told she was whining by the MTV interviewer, the one where she said she could put her leg behind her head followed by awkward silence and rambling on her part"

Are you serious with the whining thing? The Internet is stronger than publicists, trust me. I just googled and no inkling of the mtv interviewer saying she was whining came up. It might have happened, but was the context different to where it wasn't an accusation, more like messing around? I think I very very very vaguely recall it - was it with Josh Horowitz as the interviewer?

"What did Matthew Lewis say about Emma? She loves raunchy jokes. What did Emma say about rob pattison? He tells rude jokes and we all love it."

Also googled this and didn't find it anywhere. I'm not saying I doubt you, so don't take it that way, but can you give more info?

Anonymous said...

haha there's no doubt emma's sort of raunchy. anybody see the pic of when she met her gay-porno alter ego? she seemed thrilled to meet him and take a photo with him. as echee says, she goes to strip clubs too. no doubt miss innocent isn't that innocent - which is chill, but she shouldn't prance around like some squeaky-clean virgin haha she's gotten around, no doubt.

Echee said...

I said the wrong cast member. it was Robbie Coltrane. I would not make something up if I did not read it. I read the pattison quote to but I can't find it. She said, "Rob tells dirty jokes and we all love him for it." I am aware anything I post the readers can seach for it themselves.

http://www.iheartwatson.net/quotes/emma-rather-likes-rude-jokes/

"Emma rather likes rude jokes.”

Vanity Fair: ‘One Bewitched Coed’ June 2010

Echee said...

Correction: Rob is actually robbie Coltrane. His quot aboe and this one matches. So my point is valid.

http://www.iheartwatson.net/quotes/robbie-is-always-telling-us-completely-dirty-and-inappropriate-jokes-that-we-are-far-too-young-to-be-hearing-but-we-love-of-course/

“[Robbie] is always telling us completely dirty and inappropriate jokes that we are far too young to be hearing, but we love, of course.”

My mistake. I read so many damn quotes from her its hard to keep up sometimes. I read something on emma and rob recently so maybe that's where pattison popped in my head.

However again I would never post something or say something I did not read before unless it was my opinion.

Anonymous said...

Thanks for the clarification. Now that you linked the quote, I actually remember reading that from Robbie Coltrane too.

Echee said...

A couple of years ago Josh Horowitz said "All I hear is a bunch of whining!" after emma was complaining abut her filming. Emma says "Sorry, just ignore me!" Then she goes into how she know she's lucky and stuff.

It was on youtube and Bing but they removed it. Its not on MTV archives. I can't find it.

Anonymous said...

It's honestly kind of sad that people need to like, verbally slap her in the face for her to realize how lucky and fortunate she is. Someone clearly doesn't appreciate what she's got......typical silver-spooned bitch. Yes, her parents are rich, but she wouldn't have most of anything that she has today if she weren't casted (and agreed to stick it out another 4/5 movies due to a pay raise) as Hermione. It's almost unbelievable how ignorant and pompous she is. Rather disappointing. She burns bridges quicker than she builds them.

Anonymous said...

@ Echee "I respect everyones opinon. And gilbert quit commenting making points and then re-comment under another anonymous complimetning yourself.."

I only made one comment on this post. I am being good.

Why would you say that anyway? If anything I am self deprecating, I don't praise my own comments. I have asked you to delete some of my comments after I realized how poorly written they were. I have apologized for some of my comments.

@ Echee "I make up quotes or off the wall things like there was 8 blizzards on the east coast "

I thought we were never going to mention that again!

"Correlation does not automatically imply causation. Period."

I like this. I wish I said it.

"Is this post the insanity post I've been hearing about?"

Not really, I saw that post. It involved Emma with bunny ears. It wasn't that bad, but Echee decided to retool it, I guess.

@ Echee "the one where she said she could put her leg behind her head followed by awkward silence and rambling on her part "

This interview is still out there. After Emma made the comment she just said "I'm serious!" There was no awkward silence and no rambling. Are we talking about the same interview and quote, I could be wrong?

G

Anonymous said...

http://www.advertiser-tribune.com/page/content.detail/id/540332/Here-s-a-kicker--Be-active-on-the-waiver-wire.html?nav=5012

There still are ample good quarterbacks in many leagues. The primary one is Buffalo's Ryan Fitzpatrick. The thing about Fitzpatrick is he's kind of like Emma Watson versus Christine Hendricks (Peyton Manning). No one gets excited about showing up at the party with Watson but at the end of the night, you find out she has worked her witchcraft to score big points

What the hell does this mean? Are they calling emma a slut? LMAO

Anonymous said...

"A couple of years ago Josh Horowitz said "All I hear is a bunch of whining!" after emma was complaining abut her filming. Emma says "Sorry, just ignore me!" Then she goes into how she know she's lucky and stuff."

I don't think that was a couple of years ago. I only started researching into Emma around DH1 time. I THINK it's a DH1 interview. I saw it probably a few months back (5 at most? I think).

I think both of the interviews you mentioned are still up somewhere. They won't be by name or mentioned or anything cause it was probably just one questions amongst many others in an interview, that's why it is probably hard to find.

As for the anon above and that analogy:

What a dumb analogy, lol. But I think it's just saying that Emma is like a kicker who's consistent and can score points for "your" team (she'll be fine to take) - cause kickers are always the 'highest scores' on football teams. 3 points per each kick. But Peyton Manning is one of the best in the league at being a QB, the glitziest position there is, and he makes the biggest plays, so everyone will want to meet him.


What a dumb analogy! lol

Anonymous said...

WOW, fuck. I just messed up and mixed Ryan Fitzpatrick's name up with a kicker's! My bad, they're both quarterbacks!

Let me revise my statement:

Ryan Fitzpatrick is a decent QB. Not a top QB. Peyton is A++++++ at QB. I guess they're trying to say that Fitzpatrick doesn't get all of the attention, but he's got hidden talent and he's quite good (the Bills had a great showing in week 1 of the season, which is the team he quarterbacks).

Anonymous said...

Ryan fitzpatrick sucks dude

Anonymous said...

Lol yeah he kind of does. But the Bills did have a great game in week 1, and (for the moment) they seem to be on track.

Anonymous said...

I think they're trying to say Ryan Fitzpatrick has small boobs.

Anonymous said...

Emma needs to grow her hair back! I thought she was going for a bob?

Rose said...

Anonymous said: "Ryan fitzpatrick sucks dude"

This sentence could really use a comma.

Anonymous said...

lol, so that's the connection to Emma

j/k

Anonymous said...

so your source is a site called "nudography"? are you for real?

and for the anon saying there is a audio version of this: go ahead and post it.

Anonymous said...

haha never thought football would be the main topic here!

I'll respond to one of the Emma comments:

"Emma needs to grow her hair back! I thought she was going for a bob?"

Who knows what she's trying to do. It would already be in a bob (actually longer) since it's what, over a year later? She keeps on getting it cut for events so she's prolonging it actually growing out. But it would definitely be grown out by now if she didn't keep on getting it cut. If she really hates her hair (like she leads on in one of her recent interviews) then she should just get extensions. I don't believe she's ever dissed a celeb for having fake hair, so she shouldn't be torn apart for that lmao.

If anyone's interested to get a glimpse of what Emma looks like in Marilyn:

http://i.imgur.com/ce39Ll.jpg

Ruth said...

OMG, I think this comments section is insane! Too funny guys…. HA. The sucking dude, small boobs and kicking of balls describes Emma to a T!!! ROFLMAO!!!

As far as the questions raised by Echee in this post:

I think it boils down to the whole Public Image vs. the Real Emma. She is completely different than the brand/image she tries to portray. Furthermore, without Warner Bros. protection, its getting harder and harder for her to keep up that fake-perfect-Emma-image.

IMO, this is why she gets so lividly pissed at any media interaction that is not completely under her control. She goes ape-shit if her publicist messes up, or the paps get her and she not made-up with her make-up artist in tow (pulls a bitch face), or there are negative quotes/videos online (taken down by her lawyers???)

She appears to be a user and an opportunist. She uses people to promote herself (documented here numerous places), she uses guys and then tosses them out when they've served her purposes.... the list goes on.

It's almost like when a new interview comes out one doesn't know which Emma it will be with. Will it be...

The sweet, charming-innocent-Emma?
The sexy, vixen hot-chick-Emma?
The studious, serious-scholarly Emma?
The poor-pitiful-me-Emma?

She portrays each of these personas in a mutually exclusive fashion, and not very well at that.

Really how many more personas can this girl have?????!!!!!

Anonymous said...

Hahaha Ruth I love your comments. They're always so fun to read.

I really wonder if Emma has some sort of psychological problem. she seems to be a mix of a pathological liar and schizophrenic. I'm guessing a little bipolar, as well (or maybe she just really is a little snot).

But I dunno about ppl here saying that her people made those other ppl take down interview videos. It's possible, but she would have had to pay them a LOT of money. Here's what I mean:

over the summer, Lady Gaga got sued for copyright infringement by uploading videos other companies/media/whatever took during her concerts. Even though the videos were OF Gaga, they technically were owned by the people who videotaped the concert. So she got in trouble for uploading others' videos without permission. I think her Youtube account was suspended for a while.

So same-ish with Emma, you just have to bend your mind to this sort of situation. Even though the interviews are of her, the people who did and videotaped the interview don't have to take down any videos of her just because she wants the videos deleted. She'd have to pay/bribe them to take them down, and I'm sure that's the only course of action that other people would agree to.

But I agree, I think she's going to run into a bit of trouble now that WB isn't protecting her. I kind of wonder if she has the same publicist or if she's got a new one that HP is over. I'm sure WB provided the publicist (and publicists to all of the main cast). Maybe that's why there isn't any "publicist confirmation" that Emma and Johnny are together. If this theory is true, I bet her former publicist is ecstatic to not be working for Emma. I don't think I'd be able to deal with a moody, self-centered rich bitch all the time. (and this is referencing the video where Emma does a bitch face after her publicist told her to walk down the stairs with Rupert for DH lol)

Anonymous said...

"It would already be in a bob (actually longer) since it's what, over a year later? She keeps on getting it cut for events so she's prolonging it actually growing out."

I always assumed a bob was just an even, shoulder length sort of style. I imagined it like this:

Yes, I know it's Maggie Gyllenhaal lol.

http://stars.ign.com/dor/objects/911472/maggie-gyllenhaal/images/maggie-gyllenhaal-20080718042010764.html

But I googled it and it looks like this.

http://bobhairstyles.info/victoria_beckham_bob_hairstyles.htm

OK, NOW I don't blame Emma at all for not going for the bob hairstyle. She has hair that either looks good short or long (like she had it before she cut it), because it's fine, thinner hair. I have that kind of hair. A bob would be my worst nightmare, lol.

I actually wouldn't be surprised if she does hate her hair, cause I certainly hate mine most of the time! ha. Sometimes I think it's great, but many times it's my worst damn nightmare. I imagine she feels somewhat the same, given she's got to deal with a spotlight on her.

I actually did the same thing as her once (cut mine short). Liked it for a while, and then I changed my mind. Opinions don't have to be set in stone, especially for something as trivial as hair IMO. There are more important things that she contradicts herself on.

Ruth said...

To speak of Emma current hair-- I read that quote somewhere too about her going for the "cute-little-bob stage". I think she was talking about Keira Knightley's hair because I think Emma is a Keira-wanna-be. She tried to dress like her when she was in her "Channel" phase.

Emma dressing up like Keira example # 1: http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2007/12_01/ZKeiraEmmaWENN0712_468x708.jpg

Emma dressing like Keira Example #2: http://photos.thefirstpost.co.uk/assets/library/080616people_watson--121360239767098800.jpg

But Emma! Why would you want to be like, act like, smell like anyone else???? OH, what's that Emma? You weren't talking about yourself?? You were talking about the average little people? Oh, okay. That makes sense becasue YOU DO contradict yourself all the time... I guess its Do as Emma's says not as she does.

LOL!

Here's Keria's hair and her Channel perfume ad (which is waaaaaay better than Emma's) But then again, Knightly can actually act so there you go.

http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/Health-and-Beauty/Beauty/Get-the-look-Keira-Knightley.htm

Anonymous said...

danggg, people are being mean today

Anonymous said...

Damn I just lost my entire comment. Okay do-over.

Although Emma won't admit it, I'm sure one of the reasons why she chopped her hair off was because of the 10 years of excessive bleaching/highlighting. And what I mean by the fact that she won't admit it is because she claims that WB didn't allow her to do anything to her hair. But she clearly has. A lot. It really makes me laugh whenever I read about her complaining about that. But anyway, she probably chopped it so short so that the damaged hair is gone and healthy hair can grow in. Makes sense. I think she regrets it though. And she could rock a bob if she was edgier. That sort of hairstyle isn't really the right fit for her. She's probably look like a 4 year old.

I was looking for some pix of when her hair was like, almost as light as her skin tone and found this. She was flirting with a number of guys at some Polo event, it seems:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-1042497/Emma-Watsons-date-dashing-actor-met-polo-carries-bags.html

Aww poor girl OBVIOUSLY can't catch any guys./sarcasm Haha she was so obviously drunk at that Cartier Polo event lmao

But anyway, here's a pic of how fucking blonde/light her hair got over her years as Hermione:

http://www.superficialdiva.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/emma-watson-at-the-cartier-international-polo-day-142x150.jpg

Ruth said...

I've noticed from some of these recent pix that Emma keeps handbags around longer than she keeps her men around.

Anonymous said...

I actually like her hair A.) pretty short, as in when she first cut it or B.) when it's long. I think she IS trying to grow it out very steadily, but as someone said earlier, she's cutting it far too often.

She has a great frame for the short hair or long hair. Medium hair isn't bad, per se, it's just not nearly as good as either of those two ends of the spectrum IMO.

Anonymous said...

Agree with the anon somewhere above who gave another reason for her cutting her hair off - I mean, bleaching from dark brown to blonde constantly totally fries the hair, it's not wonder she had to cut it off - her hair was a fair bit above shoulder-length when she chopped it off, she hasn't had it genuinely long without extensions since CoS, which is when the serious bleaching/highlighting began. Then she whines WB never let her do anything...:/

Echee said...

Funny that you guys would mention blond hair

"If I do a photo-shoot people desperately want to change me - dye my hair blonder, pluck my eyebrows, give me a fringe"

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/celebritynews/4421737/Emma-Watson-describes-her-concept-of-sexiness.html

Is not her natural hair color light brown? Maybe I should make this a post or something. This was the same article where she said she would never be caught out in a mini dress.

Anonymous said...

Mehh I don't know if that merits a post. I just see it as her getting highlights/blonde hair for a while. I think her natural color is light brown. She seems to slide between the light brown/blonder side from time to time. Girls do that, I guess. Lol

Anonymous said...

"Maybe I should make this a post or something"

It's up to you but for me it's too easy. For instance the mini-dress thing is a joke. And this:
"If I do a photo-shoot people desperately want to change me..."

Lot's of ways to go with that.
a) of course they do. You're boring and basic.
b) she's said she isn't comfortable in photoshoots as herself, she'd rather play a character. Which doesn't make sense given the quote above. You'd think she would welcome them changing her.
c) she chose to go with Lancome because they don't change you. Which contradicts the quote above. I realize that's nitpicking but perhaps she should've said "Most of the time they want to change me..."

Actually this same interview she says she'd only date a close friend not a celebrity. Clearly the whole Johnny situation contradicts that as well.

It's an interview from 2009. Like I said, it's too easy to poke holes in it. But it's up to you.

I'm actually more interested in what she's been doing lately. It's like she's either being shoved in your face every day or she's fallen off the face of the earth. There's no middle ground. Maybe she'll pop up this week at London Fashion Week. Or maybe she's hiding after the less than stellar reviews on the Lancome ad, who the hell knows? Actually the pottershots people no doubt do.

And way, way OT but did anyone else see the shit Sarah Hyland got herself into when she dared criticize Lea Michelle on the red carpet? LOL, Emma isn't the only one with crazy stans. In fact I'm not sure I can imagine her stans reacting the way Lea's did. The closest I've seen is the usual avalanche of red arrows if someone dares to be even slightly critical of Emma in the comment section of a Daily Mail post.

Anonymous said...

Yay good to see one anon agreed with me about the bleaching hair thing. It was probably fried as hell after 10 years. I mean, look at Felton, although he had to bleach his hair for his character. Emma just did it because I feel like they let Emma do whatever she wanted because she'd bitch otherwise.

And I believe her hair was light brown when she was YOUNGER. It obviously got darker as she got older. You can tell what her natural hair color is in a lot of pictures where her roots were coming in. It also doesn't help that her eyebrows were unnaturally darker than her hair color. If she really wanted ppl to believe she was a natural honey-blonde, then she should have bleached them for a little bit to pull off the appearance. I'd personally say that she either has medium brown hair or an almost dark brown. It's bullshit she's always says that she's a blonde - yeah maybe 10 years ago haha. But that's okay, I'd rather not have a dunderhead like that represent the brunette community ;P

roots:
Emma trying to be edgy/wearing no pants:
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_UFCsHDQCRG0/TGN6C6hmhLI/AAAAAAAABTA/Ovd5RofRbZU/s1600/emma+watson+long+hair+3.jpg

Eep on the highlighting job done here:
http://l.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/ZRFUz9WmuTceRAXot_JKrw--/YXBwaWQ9eW5ld3M7cT04NTt3PTI1MA--/http://a323.yahoofs.com/ymg/ymoviesblog__11/ymoviesblog-210163050-1299537029.jpg?ymFCvqEDs16q4ih7

She needs an ALL OVER root touch-up...she has the money, might as well:
http://media.the-leaky-cauldron.org/gallery/cast/EmmaWatson/appearances/2008CartierInternationalPoloDayEvent/normal_watson_appearances_cartierpolo2008_25.jpg

Oh and didn't she recently say in that Elle interview that she normally puts on more eyeliner and alters her appearance in some way for photoshoots when the makeup artist isn't looking? And then she claims that they want to change her in photoshoots. Aww she's playing the victim card again.

I agree with the anon who commented about that. They're obviously going to have to change her a bit....that's their fucking job, too haha. Besides, big-name magazines don't want some boring-ass chick on their cover. The point is to make the mag sell, not have people walk right by it not realizing who the boring-ass chick on the cover was.

And in regards to this whole "Emma watson a sex symbol" - is she really? I must have missed that memo. If anything, I think most people feel wrong about thinking about her like that since they literally saw her grow up from like age 9 or whatever. But after reading that article, I think she means being 18 (then) meant she automatically bumped up to sex symbol haha. HOWEVER, since then, and even during then, she's obviously tried to sex up her look because ta-da, sex sells in Hollywood. Emma's just another mindless female sheep.

Anonymous said...

^ agreed, about the hair (another sad facade of hers - is anything natural with her?), and the 'sex sells' and 'mindless sheep' bit. She is at her most irritating when the claims to be a feminist - pose for photoshoots, degrade a great female character with limited acting skills, but don't attempt to title yourself as something you are the polar opposite of. It's nice that she says these things, I mean, impressionable girls pay attention to her, but her actions contradict the words, so it ends up being more of a negative thing than positive.

Anonymous said...

She also seems to think she's the only female who knows how to play the game. I'm PRETTY sure most of [serious] female actresses know that sex sells and Hollywood is a male-driven machine. She seems to think nobody else knows this. I've said this before, but she truly underestimates a lot of people, especially her fans. It's like she lives in her own little world (which she probably does).

And hahaha she's definitely not naturally blonde. I mean, who cares, it's just hair color, but she's attempted to convince her audience she's a natural blonde for ages. Maybe blonde hair works better than brown hair with the fake good-girl image? Or so she thought.

Fred said...

"Actually this same interview she says she'd only date a close friend not a celebrity. Clearly the whole Johnny situation contradicts that as well."

Calling Johnny Simmons a celebrity is very nice of you.

Let's face it, he's a working actor in LA who gets small supporting roles. He's never had a lead part in a film and most people have never heard of him.

Simmons is not a celebrity. Seriously how many people had even heard of him before he hooked up with Watson?

Fred said...

I should have added this to the comment above.

Simmons is a working actor in LA who gets small supporting roles as a high school or college kid because he looks like he's 17.

The babyface pays his bills. More power to him. Gets him laid too.

Anonymous said...

"I would love to not date someone in the same industry as me. Otherwise it becomes what it means to everyone else," the Harry Potter actress told Vogue last spring (2011)."

NJA said...

Aaaannnddd another lame photoshoot

http://snitchseeker.com/harry-potter-news/five-new-emma-watson-2011-mariano-vivanco-photo-shoot-images-85588/

I mean what EXCATLY is the point of those photos?, they aren´t even great (But then again I don´t thing any of Emma´s photoshoots are "great")

And in the last photo, it looks like she´s about to......(use your imagination)

Fred said...

^ How does "I would love" get turned into "I would never"?

She's dating a bit-part actor. Who cares? A celebrity - Hell no.

You would not kick Emma out of your bed either.

Maybe Simmons is the smart one and using Watson to up his profile.

Mishy said...

Fred she says "I would love to not date...." thats where the contradiction is. In another interview I remember her flat out saying she would never date an actor, Can't remember which one but thats what she said. Anyways I think this girl is supper desperate to keep in the lime light she is not the only harry potter actor either, did anyone hear about Ruperts B-day party, he had it in a night club in vegas and invited photogs and people he don't know instead of celebrating with friends. If that does not smack of desperation then I don't know what does. I know this is about emma and no I am not defending her, but I thought I would point that out.

Anonymous said...

Wow interesting that ppl are putting names down now...

Anyway, even though Johnny is a small-part actor, he still has some degree of celeb status. Certainly, dating Emma upped it for sure, but he was still a product of Hollywood before her. Most actors start with small roles. Many people know him as Young Neil, too, btw. He's not THAT unknown, but you're also comparing his status to Emma's - which isn't too fair.

And weird photoshoot, tbh. It's like the theme was "self-obsessed" or "self-centered". How suiting.

Picture 1 in the black dress:
You caught me taking a dump in broad daylight, but I'll smile so you can go away.

Picture 2 in black dress: Ooooh the diarrhea! Giving me both a tummy ache and back pain! (her arm looks odd in that one, tbh. Like they photoshopped it from another image)

Picture three with mirror: It's a shame it's not possible to fuck myself. Gawd, just look at me! (self-centered joke)

Picture four with the smudge: Sorry that's just a bad picture. I don't even know what to say about it. Her lack of neck and the pulling of necklace (?) makes it look really odd. And her hair and posture makes it look like she's got some linebacker's shoulders.

Picture five: orgasm face? Or she wants to eat someone's face off. Either or.

GIRL STOP CUTTING YOUR HAIR. Seriously, if she wants it to grow in so badly, she has to stop getting it cut for stupid (pointless) photoshoots and events! Oy...

Anonymous said...

People are being kind of mean about her hair, jeez. It's the hair on HER head for fuck's sake. Who cares what she does with it or says about it.

Anonymous said...

@Fred
what's your issue with Johnny? 3 posts? Seriously? We get it, you don't think he's a celebrity.
I disagree, but I don't care enough to debate you on it.

@NJA
Those are more pics from her "naughty older brother" chasing her around the garden, lol
Looks like they went inside the house.

"It's the hair on HER head for fuck's sake. Who cares what she does with it or says about it."

You might as well say it's the clothes on HER body, it's the movie SHE'S in, it's the boy SHE'S dating etc.
She's a celeb people are gonna talk.

Anonymous said...

"You might as well say it's the clothes on HER body, it's the movie SHE'S in, it's the boy SHE'S dating etc.
She's a celeb people are gonna talk."

You're right that she's a celeb and that people are gonna talk, but that doesn't make everything that people talk about in regards to her sensible.

The movies she does are much more public business than her hair, clothes, or boyfriend are. They make efforts to publicize movies and make money, and they're team efforts through and through, so those aren't "HER" movies. For that reason, it's fine to critique and analyze them and the performances given.

Analyzing hair, more than her clothes or boyfriends, seems to be strikingly trivial to say the least.

I understand that it's illogical to assume that such a public figure wouldn't be analyzed for stuff like that. I guess I'm just getting at that it's really off-putting to see the level of analysis on ONE person sometimes.

Fred said...

Put it this way... I don't think Simmons is the stupid lap dog most of you seem to. I think he's using her - not the other way around.

She was trolling for a bf and he took advantage. He's Hollywood alright. And probably tired of playing bit parts for last 5 years. He's not just starting his career - he's been in a teenage bit part rut.

He uses Watson to up the profile which certainly has happened. He gets to use a rich girl to go all over Europe on her dime and bang a hot chick. Who cares if she's a bitch? It's just short term with a purpose in mind.

You make it sound like Watson is a player or something. You are giving her to much credit.

I'm proposing another POV - that she is the one being played.

Anonymous said...

"I understand that it's illogical to assume that such a public figure wouldn't be analyzed for stuff like that. I guess I'm just getting at that it's really off-putting to see the level of analysis on ONE person sometimes."

You ARE on a website about ONE person, though.......just saying. And you took the time to leave a comment regarding that one person. This site is about analyzing her contradictions. You think the subject of her hair is trivial - fine, but it is one of her many contradictions (which is why it's being discussed).

If you don't like how people are analyzing this one person, then go to another site. Or if you want to read stuff about this one person but don't like the fact that this website doesn't just kiss her ass, then go to one of the Watson fan sites. Nobody really forces anyone to comment here anyway.

Emma Watson is a celebrity whose life is an open book (her fault, not ours). She chooses to reveal so many personal aspects of her life in interviews and whatnot. Whatever she says is fair game to be discussed being that she is a loose-lipped celeb.

Anonymous said...

And I personally think both Emma and Johnny are using each other. I don't think this fling would have continued if it hadn't been caught early summer. You can't really just think that Emma's the victim here. She has a past of men wrapped around her finger, I don't think she's THAT stupid to be used by Johnny. I think they're both in it for their own reasons, nothing more or romantic.

Anonymous said...

Yeah, movies probably wasn't the best choice but you got my point.
For me I don't think analyzing her hair is any less trivial than analyzing her clothes or her choice of boyfriends etc. I don't particularly care about her hair but others apparently do.

And the level of analysis happens to all celebs, this site just happens to be about Emma. Hell, even the kids of celebs get analyzed. It's a bit sick, actually.

Anonymous said...

^Welcome to a society where celebrity is put upon a pedestal of both the assumption of elitism (meaning celebs are better than non-celebs) and public scrutiny (don't think I need to explain this one).

Emma gets flack for it here because she outright lies about everything. People think she's the most innocent of female celebs when she's really just like the rest of them, if not worse. Kinda sounds like you're new to the website, just look around. You may be enlightened.

Rose said...

Anonymous said: " I think they're both in it for their own reasons, nothing more or romantic."

I agree.

Anonymous said...

I think Emma was looking for a boyfriend, as Fred said. I think Johnny is taking the pleasures for his own reasons - relationship wise (sex, acceptance, status) and career wise (advancing his career further). It won't last.

I think Emma went way too fast with the relationship and saw this summer (the period after DH2 promotion until start of term) to be a gold mine of "freedom." She rushed into a relationship because she was desperate for it. Probably felt that she wouldn't have time down the road, so she looked to force something to exist...

She's going to get bitten in the ass, to be frank. She really rushed the idea of a carefree summer full of "love" and romance.

Fred said...

"She's going to get bitten in the ass, to be frank. She really rushed the idea of a carefree summer full of "love" and romance."

Agree. Simmons was smart and played up the "serious relationship" from the start because that's what would get her wrapped around his finger. She was desperate and he gave her exactly what she wanted.

He took Watson to met his parents/friends in Dallas after knowing her for only a few weeks. No problems playing the doting bf whenever it comes to his favor - MTV awards, clothes shopping in Paris.

He's smart. Watson is a overprotected kid who is nowhere near was worldly or experienced as most people here give her credit for. She's had her parents and Warner Brothers playing her guardian\protector for years.

She's immature for her age and getting played royally by Simmons. She's clueless.

This is not Emma=victim. It's about a girl getting played by a Hollywood guy. She will learn and move on. In fact she will get sympathy for it which will drive you people nuts.

Since most don't seem to like her much anyway on this site - you should be happy she will be getting an education in the real world. You make her into something she is not.

Emma Watson = Maneater??? Please. Simmons is in control of this relationship. Best way to keep that going - let her think she is.

Hi mom and dad ... meet Emma!

Anonymous said...

^still don't quite agree with you there. You seem to really forget her past relationships and who wore the pants in them. She's not stupid when it comes to boys and I don't think you're seeing that. Credit is given where credit is due. I give Watson credit for not being stupid about relationships (even if they are just flings/nothing romantic/fuck buddy situations). She's devilishly genius with them. So again, I stand by my statement that they're both in the "relationship" for their own individual reasons, nothing more and certainly not love. They're both being each other's tool. I don't pity either one of them. I don't think they're clueless, either. This is Hollywood, remember. You already stated how that affects Johnny in this relationship, but you aren't giving Watson the credit where it is due. Emma is no better than him. They're both using each other. Got caught in a fling, might as well make the best of it for both parties, right?

Let's put it this way:

Johnny: more publicity and status.

Emma: something to fuck before moving on to the next guy when her slightly-constricted freedom at college begins.

And I don't praise Emma for going to college, especially since she dropped out when Perks and Lancome offers were given to her. Her reasons for going to college are now perceived as bullshit since she so clearly contradicted them; she needs fame, money, attention, Hollywood (these are the things she said she didn't want and that's why she went to college). So sorry, I don't praise her. Education seems to be an if-I-have-time hobby, not an actual passion as she made it out to be. Going to college also helped her image. And thousands upon thousands of people go to college. It's nothing I believe is praise-worthy for a celeb to do. Celebrities are just people, too.

And btw:
"This is not Emma=victim. It's about a girl getting played by a Hollywood guy. She will learn and move on. In fact she will get sympathy for it which will drive you people nuts."

A girl who gets played by a hollywood guy is a victim. A girl who gets played by any guy is a victim. I don't understand how you can say differently when in the following sentence you tell exactly why she's a victim.

Anonymous said...

"He's smart. Watson is an overprotected kid who is nowhere near was worldly or experienced as most people here give her credit for. She's had her parents and Warner Brothers playing her guardian\protector for years. "

THIS! I've always sensed that air of naivete. It's going to get her hurt. It's that naivete that allows us "into her life," so to speak. Once she learns not to be as naive, she's probably going to be a closed door.

and

"This is not Emma=victim. It's about a girl getting played by a Hollywood guy. She will learn and move on. In fact she will get sympathy for it which will drive you people nuts. "

This!

There will definitely be sympathy for Emma after the breakup, which will happen as the other ones did - without much fanfare, but eventually they'll be proven via evidence. I'm guessing it will happen around Christmas.

But yeah, can't express how much I agree with you on those points, Fred. Especially the first thing I quoted - she is EQUALLY naive as she is cunning and pointed.

Anonymous said...

At anon above my post - She isn't a victim because she got into the relationship. Fred pointed out that she was desperate for a relationship, so she hopped right in. Even if Johnny's playing her, she isn't the victim... the way she was looking for love is her own fault.

Anonymous said...

Eh I still don't think you really get what I'm saying, but whatever, think however you want, you're entitled to your own opinions, of course. I just think they're both morons who are feeding off of one other for their own selfish reasons.

And it's not like WB and her parents were there telling her how to act with men. They helped protect her image, sure, but I think you guys are thinking she's just some moron who will mindlessly be with any guy if he's willing. As I said, she's very clever when it comes to her relationships. But you both (or one, who really knows since both responses are by Anon) just thinks she's going to sit there and be used.

Is it really THAT difficult to wrap your heads around the possibility that they're both equally naive and selfish? Each party member is getting something out of the relationship, aren't they? I'm not saying she's a victim because she got into a relationship. I was stating that what you said after the Victim statement sounded like an opposing explanation as to why she's supposedly not a victim even though your words insinuated that she is.

They got caught being fuckbuddies. Now they're just milking this relationship for all its worth before moving on. They're both equally naive, selfish, and desperate.

Echee said...

Like the debate here. No name calling. Just differing opinions. That's what it is all about. You go to watson fan sites and they would rip you for having anything negative to say. Thanks for not being like that.

Fred said...

From Websters:
"Definition of VICTIM
1
: a living being sacrificed to a deity or in the performance of a religious rite
2
: one that is acted on and usually adversely affected by a force or agent (the schools are victims of the social system): as a (1) : one that is injured, destroyed, or sacrificed under any of various conditions (a victim of cancer) (a victim of the auto crash) (a murder victim) (2) : one that is subjected to oppression, hardship, or mistreatment (a frequent victim of political attacks) b : one that is tricked or duped (a con man's victim)"

Watson is not being mistreated, tricked or duped and does not fit the definition of being a victim.

In April she was complaining about the love she did not have/could not find, etc. In May she meets Simmons and he gives her exactly what she was bemoaning she did not have. In June he takes her home to meet the parents. He's giving her what she wants and yes he gets major advantages from doing so. He's not the dumb lap dog painted by some on this site.

Watson is not a moron. I claimed she was not as smart with guys as given credit but that does not equal her being a moron.

She has been very sheltered by her parents and yes, from Warner Brothers.

I am of the opinion she was under a "good behavior" clause as long as she was in Harry Potter (so where the other main actors).

I do not think she is being completely honest in exactly what Warner's controlled and dictated mind you. Time will tell on this one.

Cut Simmons some slack. He's winning and when it comes out that he "broke Emma's heart" it helps him shed the nice guy high school/college aged boy image. He's not so stupid.

Anonymous said...

"Cut Simmons some slack. He's winning and when it comes out that he "broke Emma's heart" it helps him shed the nice guy high school/college aged boy image. He's not so stupid."

Hmm, perhaps. I've never really met people who toy with another person's emotions THAT much though. I do think he has invested SOME feelings towards, Emma, I guess. I would be lying if I didn't agree with what you just said there, though.

He has a lot more to gain than she does (especially monetarily), and absolutely nothing to lose. His profile has gone up ever since he got with Emma for sure.

Still think she was hankering and desperate for a love story after Potter. I think she saw the end of the series as such a "moment" in her life that she wanted to make it suitably proportional to what she envisioned in her mind - getting lost in the tides of love. Ha. The quotes with her about not finding love just go to show that she wanted it badly, so she forced it in the moments she probably considered "golden" - the ones right after HP ended.

I think we'll be getting interviews for a movie AFTER Perks about her love life where she says, "After Potter ended, I wanted to release myself. I finally felt free enough to do everything I wanted, and the prospect of that was both overwhelming and overwhelmingly exciting. So I cut my hair, and I found love. I may have rushed it a bit, but I learned a lot."

I'll bet money that we'll get a quote like that!

Anonymous said...

Sorry, I skimmed after you decided to copy the definition of "victim" on here.

Firstly, I am well aware of the definition of Victim. You do not need to lay it out for me. Don't underestimate the intelligence of someone you're arguing with (especially on the internet, I must add). You'd probably be quite surprised by how much they actually know.

Secondly, I was polite enough to at least state that you have your own opinion, as I have mine. So why the snarky response by posting a definition? That was highly unnecessary.

Lastly, there are many different kinds of victims. Not everything can be found and correctly described in a dictionary. Sometimes, you have to think beyond what has been deemed as the DEFINITION of a word printed in nice small black text in a book. Use your head, your life experience, your common sense.

That being said, there are many definitions to the word victim, not just the ones that you so desperately needed to enlighten me with using the lazy art of Copy & Paste.

___________________________________

Other anon: I totally hear you with that last pretend quote. Her fans and stans will eat it up, praising her for "breaking" out of her Hermione character. I'm sure some will go far enough to say that she broke "free" from the torture that is WarnerBros, based upon Emma's own words in the various interviews (where I'm pretty sure she was supposed to be promoting DH7, not bashing it).

Fred said...

^ You are being oversensitive about the definition of victim and doing some underestimating yourself.

This has been a good debate and I was happy to take part in it. This site needs more debate like we were having. Not the kind where someone stomps off in a huff or calls people stans, etc.

I have an opinion and backed it up. There are many different types of definitions of victim and Watson with Simmons does not meet them. That was my point.

I am tired of people using the Emma as "victim" scenario just as much as the Emma is some "evil genius". Neither is true for anyone - not just Emma Watson.

If you get your feelings hurt easy - don't engage others, stay as an anon and just read. I post with a name so just don't engage me. No problem.

If you want to debate without name calling, crying and such, stick it out. There are people who are willing to do so - not near enough - but some.

Anonymous said...

"I am tired of people using the Emma as "victim" scenario just as much as the Emma is some "evil genius". Neither is true for anyone - not just Emma Watson."

I like this. Very true, I think.

Anonymous said...

"If you want to debate without name calling, crying and such, stick it out. There are people who are willing to do so - not near enough - but some."

You're adorably dimwitted and hardheaded. Thanks for the fun, but I've lost interest in debating the topic any further with someone who possesses such unbearable stubbornness and a clear lack of consideration to whom he or she is debating with.

To each their own, Gilbert, or Fred, or whomever you claim to be.

Anonymous said...

^^^^ anon above

Jeez, chill out. You got hurt just because he put a definition up."Lack of consideration..." wow. It isn't like he called you "dimwitted" or inconsiderate like you did, and calling his response "snarky." Didn't see all that snarky to me... I think it's a good thing to make sure the rhetoric is complete, and the point he made had a lot to do with the definition of "victim."

Whether you know the real definition or not doesn't matter; it was HIS post, and he was making a point that was inclusive specifically to his own opinion.

He did not even reference you in the post with the definition. All he said after it was,

"Watson is not being mistreated, tricked or duped and does not fit the definition of being a victim."

So, yeah. You don't have any reason to get all up in arms.

Fred said...

"You're adorably dimwitted and hardheaded.
To each their own, Gilbert, or Fred, or whomever you claim to be"

So much for a genuine debate without name calling etc, on this site.

Oh well.

Anonymous said...

Did ya'll ever think that maybe they just like each other and wanted to spend the summer hanging out? *shrug*
Some of you are cynical as fuck. Damn.

Anonymous said...

Anon above -

Yes, I do. But it's fun to theorize as well.

I don't think there's much that's sinister about the relationship, but I do think Emma rushed into it headlong. Seemed eager to explore new things and places to culminate the end of Potter, I guess.

Anonymous said...

Wow I think both fred and the anon have to chill out. Both were being unnecessarily rude to one another.

Moving on...

Interesting theories here. I personally think they're just milking this relationship for all it's worth before it has to be broken off. They were obviously just caught in a summer fling. Remember, the kissing photos came out AFTER it was reported they shacked up in a hotel. In regards to how much it'd affect [at least Emma's] rep, her good-girl image would be greatly tainted - and she can't lose her fanbase since that's all she's really got going for her at this point.

So that's my two cents. And although this may tick you off, Fred, I do have to agree with the anon. Emma's not stupid when it comes to boys. You've obviously been suckered into her interviews if you believe she's unknowingly or willing let some dude use her just for a leg-up in Hollywood. If that's the plan, she has her own selfish reasons, too.

Anonymous said...

This is Gilbert, just got back from a trip. Did someone think I was Fred? I would never say some of the things Fred said. Not that they were that bad or anything.

Personally, I agree with a few Anon's above. I think they really like each other and are just having some fun. Does everything have to be so complicated?

I like to argue too, of course. But I am not Fred. (Fred seemed a little insulted actually when that Anon implied Fred might be Gilbert).

Ruth said...

Emma's neither a victim (as she'd like her fans to think at least some of the time), nor an evil genius. Although she is street smart and savvy and really knows how to work the system. She's methodical in her exposure (more like "over”-exposure) and strategic in how she presents herself. It is, after all, her career and I see her as a person who leaves nothing to chance and calculates her next moves, taking herself VERY seriously.

As far as Johnny, well, I doubt anyone "uses" Emma. It’s mutual use-ation if anything. Or maybe they are totally in love. I think Americans, myself included, have to remember too that most Brits are far more laid-back when it comes to sexual relationships and all. I read a quote this week in People by Helen Mirren. "In Britain there's a different attitude [toward] sexuality. Less up tight."

Perhaps it’s an attitude of being free to go all out with no strings attached, or less restrictions on what it means to be involved with someone? So that may be taken into account as far as where Emma's coming from. But she's no innocent. She's had plenty of relationships from 2 years to 2 seconds.

This is interesting. Nina Dobrev talked about her time with "Em' on the Perks set at the Emmy's red-carpet last night.

She describes one of the many Faces of Emma: http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1670934/nina-dobrev-emma-watson-emmys.jhtml

Anonymous said...

"So, what is the "Harry Potter" star like? "She's so impressive," Dobrev said. "She's such a smart, smart young woman and surprisingly normal and cool and regular."

I think that, as you said Rose, Emma is very careful with how she presents herself and how she wants to be seen. Yes, she's cool (IMO), but she's also scared of what people think.

I would think that, deep down, she really likes it when people say that "she's so impressive" or that they're "so glad she's going to college," amongst other things. It's fine to secretly enjoy being praised, but I think she is more ambitious than people think. Hell, when asked what house she'd want to be in at Hogwarts she said Slytherin, if that means anything :-P

Anonymous said...

@Ruth "As far as Johnny, well, I doubt anyone "uses" Emma. It’s mutual use-ation if anything. Or maybe they are totally in love"

Pretty good comment above. I think they are in love. There is enough evidence to drawn this conclusion. The pictures of them in the park in Pittsburgh, hugging and kissing in LA, Emma sitting on Johnny's lap. They each have met the other's parents. They have been together for 4 months. It appears to more than a fling.

"This is interesting. Nina Dobrev talked about her time with "Em' on the Perks set at the Emmy's red-carpet last night."

Going back to the original premise of this post. I would say Emma is a moody bitch sometimes, but for the most part people like her and she makes a lot of friends.

Gilbert

Anonymous said...

How do you know Gilbert? How do you know they met one another's parents? Were you there? One of your complaints is photos, proof, evidence, video, audio and whatnot. Where is this proof they met one another's parents? Photos, video and audio? Going on a walk, sitting on someones lap and kissing them in a staged photo opt means its not a fling?

Fred is gone and Gilbert has taking over from his "trip". Gilbert this is why you are hated. - Dilbert

Anonymous said...

I'm surprised she did not attend one NYCFW event

She's not in London for fashion week either. She was spotted in Italy the other day.

I wonder why? Seems like she's hiding from any questions she don't want to answer. You know they'd ask about Simmons. Then there is the bad Lancome ad she boasted of putting together.

Anonymous said...

"How do you know Gilbert? How do you know they met one another's parents? Where is this proof they met one another's parents?"

OK, good point. You nailed me there!

Still, the anecdotal evidence is fairly strong (if somewhat circumstantial)that they might possibly be in love.

Maybe they are just using each other, maybe it is just a superficial, purely physical, dispassionate summer fling.

It could be more, that's all I am saying!

"Fred is gone and Gilbert has taking over from his "trip". Gilbert this is why you are hated"

I swear I wasn't pretending to be this Fred person. I was in the White Mountains over the weekend.

Fred?? Where the heck are you? Come back and tell Dilbert you weren't Gilbert.

Anonymous said...

hmmmm
Nina Dobrev:
"She's such a smart, smart young woman and surprisingly normal and cool and regular"

Logan Lerman:
"She’s surprisingly normal! She’s a very sweet, nice person. She’s got a good head on her shoulders"

Why am I detecting some spin going on here?

Anonymous said...

Is Dilbert also Gilbert?

Echee said...

"Why am I detecting some spin going on here?"

Hollywood is like a club. They are not going to rake one another over the coals. There is this behind the scenes code of ethics not to say bad things about one another. George Craig is a prime example. He said they were only friends like emma did but that turned out to be a lie. Now he seems happy with that Vickers girl. Everyone has an image to sell. There is money to be made. No one talks down on Lohan do they? It's all websites that do that. Unless you are Megan Fox that pisses off Steven Speilberg. The naive believe it but mostly the naive are stans or at least celebrity praisers attracted to their power and prestige. Marketing, media and advertising does a number on your brain. When you are young it's even worse. You are easily manilpulated by all of it. If your one of those people that dream of being famous because of the lifestyles you see them have or even have a prespective that thinks it's all sunshine and rainbows far from your crappy life it does the same trick. It's psychological.

Celebrities love stans because they defend the bullshit.

Anonymous said...

hello eden .. you're a little devil. je je. Only you can be as contradictory:)

Anonymous said...

I just thought it was interesting that they would both use the same phrase when describing Emma. Almost like a publicist told them if someone asks them about her to make sure to mention she's surprisingly normal.
It stands out because Dan, Emma and Rupert have always been described as normal, down to earth etc. So what's so surprising about it? It just sounds like they've been coached in what to say.

Also notice how talented didn't make it into either description.

Ruth said...

Good point Echee. It could be pointed out too that Dobrev said things that are part of Emma's positive media persona-- the personna where Emma claims she's "a lot like Hermione": so smart and bookish.

Any average person off the street could have made those (Nina's) comments about Watson and most people would have nodded their heads in agreement.

I've been noticing Emma's absence from the NYCFW and now London... Hmmm. Changing personna's again is she? She used to be a staple at all those shows. Maybe she's done with the fashion thing. Now she'll find another cause/hobbie/activist stance to self promote. She needs a new schtick to tout to the media right about now...

And I can't believe I'm typing this but Gilbert may have a point about Emma "making friends". I'm sure the girl can be very charming when she wants to be. Seems she plenty manipulative...

Anonymous said...

^tbh, I'm sure she seemed like a snobby bitch. You forget that those IN hollywood do hear things. It's their own "circle of friends" so to speak. I'm sure they've heard of the real Emma Watson and her real attitude/personality/antics. Maybe meeting her they realize that she's not a snobby bitch, but instead, just a chick playing the Hollywood game, like the rest of them. That'd explain why they say she's surprisingly normal/etc....because she's always portrayed herself to be better than them and better than those who are not celebs. Tbh, if I were a celeb and I read most of Watson's interviews and whatnot, I'd be "wtf bitch" since most of her words are very degrading to celebrities, but Emma is just like them. No better, no worse. She's just a mindless as the rest of them. Playing the game to get some money. That's what it comes down to: money.

JakeX said...

"They got caught being fuckbuddies."
no, fuckbuddies dont visit each others parents. certainly not.

for me being rather neutral in this whole emma thing: this girl has millions of millions of dollars in her bank account why on earth does she spread her legs so fast for a guy? im not talking about morals, as someone pointed out british girls are mostly sluts, im talking about getting taking advantage of. not directly aimed at johnny. if i were in her shoes i would be shit scared to have sex with a guy because you dont know if he wants to knock you up to be set for life. on the other hand there are a lot of rich men who forget about their fortune when a big boobed golddigger comes there way. its up to you how fast you enter a relationship/have sex but common sense should tell you about the risks especially if you are fucking loaded.

my take on the relationship: emma has more sense than sensibility, she always had. johnny is nowhere near as educated as her, not near as famous and not nears as rich. even nowadays women want an equal men or someone to look up to, thats why so many rich women are lonely, they dont want to date "down". all that doesnt matter in the beginning but it sure will the longer it goes and the more serious it gets. summer is also the time of hook ups, winter is the time of breakups. they also have a LDR and emma will need to put in more time in oxford. all this screams that it wont last. only one thing: perks promotion and questions that will arise. even regular people stay in unhappy relationships until a certain date because they have already paid for a holiday for example. its also a lot easier for emma because she doesnthave to live with him, he is overseas. that can make it a lot easier to stretch it past perks promotion.
so my prediction would be that it lasts longer than perks promotion.

Anonymous said...

I have a theory - when it comes to adjectives, the more vague and basic the words used, the more likely it is that one of two things is true about the person being described. I'll describe them below, and I think both are applicable to Emma in different contexts, depending on whether you're talking about how she tries to present herself to the world as this perfect, intellectual, altruistic fashion queen or whether you're talking about how she probably is in person when she relaxes and stops being so 'on' regarding her career and image.

Option 1. They are actually the opposite of the words used. For 'nice' read 'sometimes chose not to be selfish', for smart read 'believes themselves to be smart and knows some big words', for normal read 'normal in the context of the extraordinary celebrity world from which the person describing them comes and therefore measures everything against."
Personally, I use the 'vague but positive' method in work to describe two very unpleasant colleagues who I have to be polite about to others. I don't want to insult or appear bitchy, but I don't want to lie too much, so I use very bland adjectives that people don't examine much.

Option 2. The bland but positive words used about them are true (see? I can give Emma the benefit of the doubt! lol), but there's nothing more interesting to say about them. Nothing wrong with being 'nice' and 'normal', but if someone is really interesting, people will go into much more detail describing them and use more emphatic words. Look at people like Radcliffe or Grint or Evanna, or plenty of non-HP people like Colin Firth or Helen Mirren (I don't think age is relevant here - you're either interesting or you're not). When people describe them, they always refer to their interesting view on the world, or they describe the WAYS in which they're intelligent, or they offer an anecdote to support the way they describe them. That rarely happens when people describe Emma unless they're besotted with her like Mario or Yates. She's always just 'nice' and has book smarts. Well, as I said, nothing wrong with that, but it doesn't match the supposed dreamy intelligent enquiring mind and arresting intense manner that article writers try to portray and that stans suck up. I'm not actually even blaming Emma for that if this is the option that fits her - it's the media/stans fault for insisting there's more to her than there is.

Anonymous said...

"it's the media/stans fault for insisting there's more to her than there is."

It's also her own fault. You can't pin everything on the sheep that follow. The leader has given the sheep reason to follow.

And I gotta agree with the anon who said this:

"Maybe meeting her they realize that she's not a snobby bitch, but instead, just a chick playing the Hollywood game, like the rest of them. That'd explain why they say she's surprisingly normal/etc....because she's always portrayed herself to be better than them and better than those who are not celebs. Tbh, if I were a celeb and I read most of Watson's interviews and whatnot, I'd be "wtf bitch" since most of her words are very degrading to celebrities, but Emma is just like them. No better, no worse. She's just a mindless as the rest of them. Playing the game to get some money."

Minus the typos (haha sry), she has always made herself seem better than any other celeb. Almost as though she's on a higher platform than them. And she's definitely acted like she's better than the "average folk" like us. It wouldn't surprise me if she was actually "chill" around the cast. Those are people in her element. But I'm sure people were surprised to see that she wasn't as snobby/bitchy as she appears to be. Like I said, she's always made the insinuation that she's better than other celebs. She's just like them, no matter how she tries to spin it.

Anonymous said...

I just wrote a long response to Jake X, shaking my head as I did so that I was having to respond to such a comment in the year 2011, but then I realised it was probably pointless and I don't have the energy for the argument that would probably ensue.

All I will say is that if I was rich, I could care less about whether I was "dating down" or not, I would just be concerned about having a connection with the man.

Anonymous said...

"It's also her own fault. You can't pin everything on the sheep that follow. The leader has given the sheep reason to follow."

I know that, and I agree, it's her fault overall. But my point was being made within the context of how OTHER people describe her, not how she describes herself. My point was that the media/stans have a choice whether or not to buy what she feeds them and they choose to do so. So, what I was blaming on the media/stans was not the initial image portrayed of her by herself, but rather their perpetuation of that initial image.

Also, the quote of another anon you used I agree with too - like I said, they live in the celeb world, so that's their 'normal' that they judge her normalness by.

Anonymous said...

In my opinion, this relationship with Johnny is essentially going to be a redux of the Jay Barrymore relationship. They'll date for a while, but then they'll break up due to distance. I have a feeling that she will internally look back on her college experiences with mixed feelings of distaste and mild appreciation.

She'll be cynical about why she even decided to go, how it limited her, and how it harmed relationships and maybe even her career(Jay/Johnny/et al), but she'll like it because she got to do something unique (college) that everyone else her age typically gets to do, plus it ultimately helps people see her in a better light.

The feeling I get with Emma is that she is indeed a perfectionist, but she pursues the impossible. Specifically, she pursues the idea of being completely normal while also maintaining the celebrity status. As I mentioned, it just isn't possible.

I remember an interview where she said that she was "pretending she wasn't famous" after her first year at Brown, and that she's "accepts it more" now (or something like that).

I don't buy that she accepts it more now, but I do think she struggles with normalcy vs. celebrity, in a mildly selfish sense.

She struggles because her desire for celebrity far outweighs that of normalcy, but there are some tantalizing perks to being "normal" that she just can't ever get without abandoning celebrity.

People treat you fairer and and more honestly if you aren't a celebrity. You won't get "stans" who love you blindly (or equally as blind, haters); people won't look at you JUST because you're famous. People will, generally, come to you and talk to you because they actually like you. Celebrities don't get people like that.

The biggest tradeoff would have to be that basically every interpersonal relationship you have (outside of family) as a celebrity is going to be suspect. You can never fully trust someone. You can't let your guard down. You can never be sure. Do they like you because you're you, or because you're famous? It's very, very probable that it's the latter option. This is the drawback to power, money, status, and fame. When you have those things, people care about those instead of YOU.

I'm not saying this to pity her. I'm just trying to dissect her mind. I think she gets extremely frustrated with celebrity, but she ends up being a bit hypocritical because she loves it more than she does the idea of normalcy. She wants what normalcy brings - honesty, truth in judgment, and people who are fair to you, but she ultimately values the immense perks of fame over all of that.

Expect to see her try and play the nonexistent "middle of the road" between normalcy and celebrity for a while longer.

Anonymous said...

"She wants what normalcy brings - honesty, truth in judgment, and people who are fair to you, but she ultimately values the immense perks of fame over all of that."

This pretty much sums up why I dislike her - our choices say so much about us. I know people use the age excuse, but she's old enough to know what is of most fundamental importance to herself as an individual. I have had moments where I've sensed real vulnerability and confusion within her, and I've sympathised (even through my dislike) and thought that there's a person in there I could quite like, but ultimately, fame doesn't change people, it just exposes who they really are and I could never truly like who she really is. A fundamentally down-to-earth person who has their priorities straight will simply remain so once famous, and someone who is shallow will be exposed as such. I think Emma could be more likeable if non-famous because she wouldn't have the privilege and praise which spins her head too much, but she would still fundamentally be someone who didn't have their priorities straight and was self-absorbed. The only difference would be that fame wouldn't have been there to tempt them out into such obvious view.

Anonymous said...

Emma loves the spotlight on her

She loves being paid attention to

She loves doing photo shoots

She loves the interviews

She loves the free stuff she gets

She loves the screaming fans

She loves the lavish lifestyle it brings

But when she doesn't......

She complains how hard her life is

She whines about scheduling and filming (It gave her millions)

She blames Warner Brothers for putting her in this bubble

She blames her fame for her dating problems

She blames her fame for why she left Brown

She lies to cover stuff up about her that goes against what she said prior

She uses the media to manipulate who she is by lying about stuff

Look.....

No one is forcing her to be famous. She picked to stay with it over her issues about it. She wants it both ways. To be applauded and praised. To be left alone and forgotten. When it suits her need for it. It feeds an ego. It washes away her self doubt. I believe she knows the game she plays. That's why she says she is self critical. She's just more shallow. More vain. Than she is honest and true.

Anonymous said...

Anon above - I'm the anon whose post was just before yours.

I was particularly struck by this part of your post. Seriously, this resonated with me:

"I have had moments where I've sensed real vulnerability and confusion within her, and I've sympathised (even through my dislike) and thought that there's a person in there I could quite like."

I've been sitting for a while here trying to type up a response to this, but nothing I ended up typing seemed wholly accurate. I've gotten close to what I've really wanted to say, but I just can't quite hit it.

Then I realized something (and I think you've realized it too, given the quote I linked and the rest of your post) - I can't quite hit it because it's empathy WITH that very conflict that confuses a lot of us.

I could sit here for a long time talking about that quote. But I'll just say this - I think that conflict of normality vs. celebrity is the source of those same conflicting emotions you or I or anyone else on this blog sometimes have. In a very, very ironic sense, that displays pretty amazing empathy towards Emma (NOT sympathy, empathy!). Think about it. We're conflicted about her probably as much as she is about herself. There is no absolute perspective to be gained on her, but there are signs.

I think that, for me, that's a lot of the reason I come back here. That innate link. We get enough signs to start analyzing who she is, but we can't get to the goal because SHE doesn't know who she is. Maybe that's why we even sometimes sympathize with her... we see that struggle in ourselves - the inability to know exactly who we are, too, is a very human struggle.

I think we all come from the same background of initially admiring her a lot, and then finding enough out ourselves to sense that something was off/that there was a conflict. Then we ended up here. That's my story, at least. I can't speak for everyone else.

But yes. I think the key to our own conflicts about Emma and her very own conflicts about herself stem from normality versus celebrity, and there are times when I honestly sympathize, even through my dislike, with that conflict.

You made a VERY important point - we sometimes sympathize. I want to say so much more, but I feel like I can't without becoming too verbose... suffice to say that I think you've hit on a hugely important point!

Anonymous said...

Hi anon above - I'm the one you quoted. Yes, you're right, it's both empathy and sympathy because I did mean that I felt slightly (SLIGHTLY! lol) sorry for her (sympathy), but then that's BECAUSE of empathy, so yes, I agree with you on that.

I don't personally come from the same place as you regarding Emma at all - to cut a long story short, my interest in her stems from being a HP film fan and being mildly interested in her by default, but never having actually liked her as either an actor or a person. I think the qualities I didn't like in her when she was a child but - in order to give a child the benefit of the doubt - assumed she might grow out of have turned out to be the qualities that define her (from what we know of her) as an adult. But I watched with interest in case she became the person I thought there was a possibility of her being for a VERY brief period in her late teens. That very brief moment of likeability I noticed then is why I say I think that if she hadn't become famous, she might indeed BE likeable (though we wouldn't know her in order to like her, of course!). But of course she would still technically be the type of person that fame has since exposed, because as I said in my last comment, fame doesn't change you, it brings out the real you.

The reason I remain affected by her in any way is that I resent the shallow and irrelevant traits people look for in role models these days and in turn I dislike her for capitilising on that. (And it's her being considered a role model that differentiates her from other 'pointless celebs' to me and I think answers the question people have asked here which is: "Why do you focus on Emma instead of another celeb?"). I dislike what she represents as much as I dislike her as a person. I can understand people coming here and thinking 'psychos!' for caring about some girl we'll never meet, but for me personally, it's part of a wider issue.

I'm digressing.

I agree that the more reasonable commenters try to keep in mind that, as you say, we're all struggling to know who we are, and she's no different. But I'm only a couple of years older than her, and I like to think that I know when I'm being selfish, blatantly hypocritical, self-absorbed and self-contradictory (I hope I'm not being any of those things right now or my argument is out the window!). 21 is young but you know enough of yourself by then to have a large amount of self-awareness. If you don't, youth can only excuse you to a certain degree. After that, innate character is to blame. That's what I believe anyway.

So, yes, I sympathise with the struggle to understand oneself, but we all have factors in our lives which make that more difficult. Hers just happens to be fame, something which she could actually have some amount of control over, unlike most of us and our unique factors. And most importantly regarding your point, yes, I do empathise, but only because that's totally necessary in order to try and make a fair argument, you know?

I have a feeling I've missed an important aspect of your overall comment, and I'm not really sure if I've addressed any of your points, so do tell me if I've misunderstood you completely!

Echee said...

It’s going to be a bit more complicated for her to stop being famous. Not personally but more along the lines of her always going to be connected to Potter. She did not help this by signing a huge modeling contract with Burberry and now Lancôme. If she really wanted normalcy and anonymity she would have never became the face of Burberry. If she wanted to stay at brown she would have never left for Perks and Lancôme.

She has her chance to let Potter play out but in the mitts of that time she courted herself with Channel and began doing her plethora of magazines interviews and photo shoots both during Potter movie promotion and not. All while saying how she wanted to go be Emma the person for a bit but she never really did. She was Emma Watson the famous person at Brown because of the interviews she did talking about her education and her experiences there. She did not allow herself to have the privacy, anonymity and normalcy she said she desired. She never left the spotlight.

From her official site to when she got facebook and twitter last year she was never quite in any capacity publically. Potter exposure is one thing because it’s what she does but all the other things she has done are by her doing. She has widened her fan base and demographic by getting into the huge world of modeling which includes designing for People Tree and collaborating with Alberta Ferreti and celebrity product endorsements with Lacnome. All this talk from her that she doesn't like fame or attention and has no need for money is rubbish. She can’t get enough of it but she finds times to complain about it. Reminds me of a smoker that can’t quit. They know what it is doing to them but they are addicted.

We will never know what it is like to be famous but like the anon said above. No one is forcing her to continue.

Anonymous said...

Wow I kinda feel badly that my post won't be as well written as a few of the above Anons have written theirs.

But I will say this: I never doubted for a second that Emma didn't know what she wanted. She's always loved everything that being famous gives her. To me, it always sounded fake or "try-hard" whenever she was like, "I wanna be ~normal" and whatnot - and this was even before I came to this website/blog (so don't let that sway you).

And biggest example that supports why that "I want to be normal" claim is BS: She dropped outta Brown right when Lancome and Perks came around knocking on her door (or rather, I suppose Mariano got her the Lancome gig and Perks producers needed a "big name" to get funding). She doesn't want to be outta the spotlight after HP. I honestly truly think that she only went to college to one, up her good-girl/relate-able chick image and two, because she wasn't sure if she was going to get anything post-Potter. It's difficult for any actor/actress who has played a single part for a very long time to be seen as an actor/actress who can be many people. That's just how it is. So perhaps at first I was like, hey that's kinda cool, about her going to college, but she showed her true colours when she bailed out for fame.

So sorry, I really doubt that she ever wondered what she wanted past movie 3 when she was hesitant about continuing Potter. I think at THAT time was the only time she wasn't sure if she wanted normalcy or to be famous. She chose to be famous. She loves the lifestyle, everything that that one anon listed. She's just one of those celebs who wants her cake and eat it, too, and that just doesn't really happen.

And I agree with the one anon, nobody forced her to be famous. Famous people can easy gain normalcy if they leave the spotlight/Hollywood/etc. But she's never gone that route. Her choice.

Anonymous said...

"I have a feeling I've missed an important aspect of your overall comment, and I'm not really sure if I've addressed any of your points, so do tell me if I've misunderstood you completely!"

Nope, you haven't misunderstood me at all.

I actually appreciate the lengthy response too, and I'm glad to get some personal insight into why and how you view Emma the way that you do. It's fun to see what others think, especially when they're being less guarded and more honest.

I'd give a longer response but I've been procrastinating on studying for a loooong time now. I'll just reiterate that I think you've made some great points about Emma in both of your posts, so thanks for the food for thought!

Anonymous said...

"She was Emma Watson the famous person at Brown because of the interviews she did talking about her education and her experiences there. She did not allow herself to have the privacy, anonymity and normalcy she said she desired. She never left the spotlight."

Exactly. When it comes down to (literally) pen and paper, with a contract sitting in front of her, she's going to end up signing it. Even if she struggles philosophically with human issues of what it means to be normal and not normal, she is very much choosing her own path (and she has been) ever since signing on for Potter again for 5-7, and really the first contract she ever signed for Potter to begin with!

But I do think that one anon has a very interesting point. I don't think she held out on HP 5-7 explicitly for the money. I think she held out because she didn't know what to do. It isn't about her feeling victimized, it's about her being scared and unsure of what she wanted to be... I felt as if, when confronted with that new contract, she felt she wasn't able to stave off or delay on "picking a road," so to speak.

But the reality is that she picked her road long ago. Maybe she feels as if she never did pick a road? She frequently talks about how they sort of found her by chance, and she got the part by chance, which is sort of true. Maybe she felt as if it was an opportunity no girl could deny, something so exciting and fairy-tale like that it overwhelmed both her parents and her young mind. She got caught up in it.

I think her signing on for 5-7 was a pivotal moment. Huge, really. She signed sealed and delivered her position in life from that point on, and any nonsense about "wanting to be normal" at this point is just that - nonsense. Echee pointed that out well.

Anonymous said...

"Wow I kinda feel badly that my post won't be as well written as a few of the above Anons have written theirs."

This is Gilbert, I agree with the above assertation!

Wow, the writing has been really good tonight! I wish I could say something intelligent but I may have compromised my integrity ad infinitum.

I am hesitant to say anything at all at the moment.

The last several comments were top notch (including Echee's last two).

Just for the record, I am not Dilbert.

After one of Echee's comments...

"hello eden .. you're a little devil. je je. Only you can be as contradictory:)"

This was not me. I think there is still some very sagacious, discerning, recondite, insidious and specious person commenting on this Blog from maybe Potter Shots or somewhere. They pretend to me sometimes. If this is true they are very good and I don't think I have the skills to verbally challenge them.

@Ruth "And I can't believe I'm typing this but Gilbert may have a point about Emma "making friends"

Why would you say this like that! I have been good lately. I like some of what you say. Someone is making me look bad. They pretend to me or write like me. Anyway, just to reiterate, several of the the comments tonight were extremely well written. I wish I had written at least one of them.

Gilbert

Echee said...

Updated some news on my emma at the gq event from a few days ago.

Has to do with one direction singer harry styles.

Anonymous said...

Interesting update with Harry Styles. That's very odd... what's even weirder is the lack of Johnny Simmons with Emma. I understand hiding him, but this seems like they've broken up already or something..? And the author made a valid point about being the youngest cougar on record, lol.

Sort of funny how she finds people being really into her celebrity weird, but she beelines for a celeb herself.

Anonymous said...

one more thing - I'll treat it with a grain of salt given that it's the daily star (tabloids always embellish) but some of it has to be true. I think the quote from "a close from of the band" is suspect though.

Anonymous said...

Haha I kinda doubt people are going to go back an comment on that post again, so I'll copy and paste my response to the CQ thing here:

"Haha well at least there is other confirmation that Emma's main course of action that night was to meet this 17-year-old (and yet she couldn't pause to do some sort of interview about the perfume ad she just premiered...even though she was to give the award to the dude who directed it that night, as well....anyway!). That should hopefully make people hush up about the "The author of the article was just pissed Emma didn't say anything to her/him, so she's just making up some One Directions lie." Now it's been confirmed by now two sources (if not more).

And maybe it's just me, but if the person I was in a relationship with was so like, dead-certain to meet someone who he or she clearly has a crush on, it wouldn't make me feel too good. Kinda ouch, much? I mean, there's jealousy, and then there's "hey wtf do you forget I'm here?" sorta feelings. Just saying.

As a chick, if I had a serious bf, I wouldn't go chasing down after some other guy, even if he WAS in a ~band. I dunno. It's sort of a respect sort of thing I think."

Some ppl have been saying that the British have a different sort of approach when it comes to relationships and sex and whatnot, but Johnny is American. I wonder if he's chill with this supposed difference in culture?

Also wanted to say that wow ppl's comments tonight have been impressive! I've wanted to respond but I don't think people want to see so many walls of text :P kudos, though.

Anonymous said...

"I think Emma could be more likeable if non-famous because she wouldn't have the privilege and praise which spins her head too much, but she would still fundamentally be someone who didn't have their priorities straight and was self-absorbed."

This is where you lost me. She would be more likeable if non-famous but she'd still be self-absorbed and not have her priorities straight? I'm not following.

I think this is you again:
"That very brief moment of likeability I noticed then is why I say I think that if she hadn't become famous, she might indeed BE likeable (though we wouldn't know her in order to like her, of course!). But of course she would still technically be the type of person that fame has since exposed, because as I said in my last comment, fame doesn't change you, it brings out the real you."

Again I'm not quite understanding. The unlikeable qualities that fame has exposed would still be there if she wasn't famous so I guess I'm not getting why she would be more likeable if she wasn't famous. Sorry, maybe I'm just thick.

"I think her signing on for 5-7 was a pivotal moment. Huge, really. She signed sealed and delivered her position in life from that point on, and any nonsense about "wanting to be normal" at this point is just that - nonsense."

I don't really think it was signing for 5-7 I think as Echee pointed out it was her actions since then. She easily could've done the films, promoted them as required but otherwise disappear. As I stated in another thread, once you're famous you can't be un-famous but you can be more or less visible and she and her team have chosen to be more visible.

Now what I'm finding interesting is her not attending NY or apparently London fashion week. The question of course is why? She's not in school yet, she's not filming anything there's really no reason for her not to be there. Especially with a fragrance that just came out. Plus she has a lot of friends in the fashion industry, wouldn't she want to support them?

I'm kind of wondering just how big an influence doing Perks has had. All of the fashion stuff was done prior to Perks. The magazines, the photoshoots, the fragrance ad all done before Perks. Unless I'm forgetting something the only public appearance since the end of HP promotion was the GQ award for Mario. And interestingly enough, last night he was being honored again and it seems she skipped that one.
I'm also wondering if her recent disappearing act is a result of the spanking they got over the commercial. And this website: http://1000fragrances.blogspot.com/2011/09/tresor-midnight-rose-lancome-new.html really hates the fragrance itself.

As to the dailystar thing about One Direction, sounds like the band's publicist read that other report and is going for a bit of publicity. The "recent showbiz party" was two weeks ago.

Sorry to add to the wall of text, lol

Anonymous said...

Spot on analysis anon above.

"This is where you lost me. She would be more likeable if non-famous but she'd still be self-absorbed and not have her priorities straight? I'm not following."

I was confused by that other anon's statement as well.

I think she's out of the spotlight because there really isn't much going on for her at the moment. I don't think we'll be getting too much for a while here, except for Oxford shots and such.

Echee said...

I put that uopdate in the wrong post. Its in my emma goes diva at the gq awards show.

Anonymous said...

@anon: this one direction is article is no "other source" its the same source, its just published by a different magazin. this also happens so much in real journalism today. sources arent checked its just copy+paste. you dont look good if you see this as two sources. its obvious BS. look at the reports we got after the JS fling, they were all copy+paste reports. you need to learn a lot in your life anon and how the media works.

and do you really think she went through a crowd of people to get near a 17 year old? come on...its so ironic that in a blog where you get told that you shouldnt believe everyting you read you do exactly that...like your dad telling you "dont touch the fire" "ouch dad, my hand hurts, i touched the fire."

Anonymous said...

"I think Emma could be more likeable if non-famous because she wouldn't have the privilege and praise which spins her head too much, but she would still fundamentally be someone who didn't have their priorities straight and was self-absorbed."

This is where you lost me. She would be more likeable if non-famous but she'd still be self-absorbed and not have her priorities straight? I'm not following."

There were two anons wondering what I meant - yeah, I found it hard to phrase properly. Basically what I meant was that the unpleasant aspects of Emma's character have been made VISIBLE to us by fame. In other words, fame has drawn those qualities out so that we can see them. But if she hadn't been famous, then obviously fame wouldn't have drawn them out and therefore they wouldn't be visible, or they'd at least be less visible. Therefore, she would be more likeable as a result. But those qualities would still be there in her as a part of who she fundamentally is. They would still exist as part of her character, it's just that you wouldn't see them as obviously as we do because fame found her and did it's job.
Does that explain what I meant clearly? Say so if not and I'll try again, lol :)

Anonymous said...

My 2 cents as to why Emma didn't go to the fashion stuff:

She was in NY supposedly because of Les Miserables or however you spell it. Apparently the casting calls were that week. But for a girl who recently said she wants to become a fashion designer and was reported taking a fashion design class at Brown, it's interesting that she wouldn't show up. She generally always eats those opportunities up. Schmooze around and get contacts. That's just the game.

So I just find it interesting that the possibility of her not going could perhaps be because she's embarrassed of the Lancome ad. I said in a prior post that she's probably eating her words right about now - especially after having made it sound like she did everything for the actual ad. I also said she's probably not going to stand proudly by it if it gets negative reviews, and look! She didn't even promote the ad at the CQ Men's award when she was asked to give the director of the Lancome ad an award. That's being a horribly selfish ambassadress.

And although I'm not the anon who wrote about the 17 year old thing, I could believe it. She has a thing for boys in bands. Age probably doesn't really matter. So I could believe it.

Anonymous said...

"But if she hadn't been famous, then obviously fame wouldn't have drawn them out and therefore they wouldn't be visible, or they'd at least be less visible. Therefore, she would be more likeable as a result. But those qualities would still be there in her as a part of who she fundamentally is."

I understand your point, but how can you just assume so bluntly that she'd still have those qualities if she weren't famous?

I don't think anyone knows what they'd *really* be like if they were famous. For her, she doesn't know what she'd be like if she wasn't famous because she was famous from the age of 10 and on.

I don't think it's fair to assume she'd have the "same (negative) qualities (or even positive ones)" as a normal, everyday person that she does as a famous person. They're two completely different lifestyles. Even if I think she's full of contradictions, I think that it's a far leap of faith to say she'd essentially be the same person deep down.

The assumption of an alternate reality is just too huge of a huge leap to make - speculation is fine, but you seem to find that it's obvious she'd be the same (just scaled down, since she wouldn't be famous). That just never happened, so to say so factually what she would or wouldn't be is difficult, if not impossible, to do.

Anonymous said...

^ made sense to me, but I got it well enough the first time - thanks for elucidating that, and for your original comment

Anonymous said...

"The assumption of an alternate reality is just too huge of a huge leap to make ..."

Not as huge as you might think. If you consider the Multiverse interpretation of quantum mechanics where all possible outcomes of an event occur, each in its own parallel universe, then there is an alternate reality where Emma was not picked as Hermione.

In 10 years there should be enough computing power to run simulations to determine exactly what Emma would be like if she was never in Harry Potter.

In 100 years we should be able to transcend the Space Time Continuum and visit parallel universes. (Maybe by travelling through a black hole). Then someone could find the universe where Emma wasn't picked to be Hermione and travel back in time to observe her.

I bet she would be a fairly normal girl. She wouldn't be interviewed hundreds of times and asked the same questions over and over. Therefore, I conclude she would be less deceptive and contradictory.

Anonymous said...

could you please cut the crap or shall we discuss how emmas life would look like if she traveled back in time and killed hitler?

Anonymous said...

"I bet she would be a fairly normal girl. She wouldn't be interviewed hundreds of times and asked the same questions over and over. Therefore, I conclude she would be less deceptive and contradictory."

No, she would appear to be less deceptive and contradictory because she would be less visible to the general public. It's not being interviewed that makes her deceptive and contradictory. The interviews simply reveal her to be so to those of us who don't know her.
When asked the same questions over and over, give the same honest answer over and over. Not deceptive, not contradictory, no need for time travel.

Anonymous said...

"could you please cut the crap or shall we discuss how emmas life would look like if she traveled back in time and killed hitler?"

HAHAHAHAH!!! This literally made me laugh!

Yeah, it's kind of funny to see this:

"In 10 years there should be enough computing power to run simulations to determine exactly what Emma would be like if she was never in Harry Potter."

I know you didn't intend it to be meant this way (and I didn't interpret it this way either), but that almost makes it seem like in 10 years we'll have that technology SPECIFICALLY to see what Emma would be like.

Lmao, I just think it's hilarious how we're getting into time travel and quantum mechanics when we're talking about Emma freaking Watson. Not saying that to be mean, I just find it legitimately funny.

Mike said...

"So, when I arrive at the Gatwick train station is this young woman asks me if I need a hand with one of my rather obviously heavy suitcases. "Yes, please," I reply, thinking that this voice sounded awfully familiar

So I look up, and sure enough, the woman who is helping me bring my suitcase down the escalator is ... EMMA WATSON. "



why dont you post this, Echee?

Anonymous said...

I don't think you can rightfully say that she'd be the same person if she weren't in Potter. Celebrities, especially those raised as celebrities from a young age, learn how to play the game of Hollywood. Hollywood is all about crafting false images, making yourself seem better than others, etc. It's competition there, too, not just for us "normal" people. I think Emma learned to be a deceiving little snot right from the start. Is it possible she'd be as contradictory and deceptive if she weren't in Potter, absolutely, but I feel as though being in Hollywood helped make her that way. She's no better than any other celebrity when it comes to that kind of stuff, even though she makes herself out that way.

As I said, of course there's the possibility that she would have been a lying bitch regardless of being in Potter. I mean, she IS from a wealthy family and being that her parents are divorced, I'm sure she would get everything she ever wanted, regardless (not so much in terms of like, Face of Burberry, Lancome ad, etc but more like Ivy League college, expensive clothes, etc.) I think she'd be spoiled anyway.

And response to Mike: haha that sounds kinda fake, no offense. Where's your source?

Haha was the time traveling comment really needed? Even Gilbert's comments aren't THAT far-fetched :P

Anonymous said...

"why dont you post this, Echee?"

Why don't you provide a link? Some context? Something, anything other than some random italicized text.

The doctor said I needed a new kidney. "You can have one of mine", I heard a voice say. It sounded familiar. I looked up and sure enough it was....EMMA WATSON.

Anonymous said...

That’s with Emma Watson, right? How was it working with her?
Logan Lerman: It was great. She’s a brilliant young actress and a great person. We had a great time working together, with everyone on the cast. It was a very special experience.

Did you talk to Emma about being a young famous actor and how she deals with it?
LL: Yeah. And she is an incredibly bright and talented person and handles it very well. I remember walking into a bookstore with her and that was interesting! It was the most intense place to go for somebody who portrayed one of the most iconic characters in literature. I have never experienced anything on that level. So I have seen it for another person, but I have never had anything like that. I was fascinated by it.


why dont you post this, Echee? [2]

Anonymous said...

"I feel as though being in Hollywood helped make her that way."

She's not in Hollywood. That's one of the things that people tend to overlook when they exclaim how remarkable it is how "normal" Emma, Dan and Rupert turned out. They've grown up under the protective umbrella of a major franchise. In England. They haven't been out there on their own fighting for roles and trying to make it in "Hollywood"

"I don't think you can rightfully say that she'd be the same person if she weren't in Potter"

This I agree with. She started young enough that being in Potter had to have had some influence in how she turned out. And yet oddly enough I have a feeling Dan would still be the same even if he hadn't been Harry. Strange.

Anonymous said...

"No, she would appear to be less deceptive and contradictory because she would be less visible to the general public. It's not being interviewed that makes her deceptive and contradictory..."

There is some truth to this, but I think it is an oversimplification. There definitely was some image cultivation while Emma was still Hermione. It is not as easy as you think for a celebrity, especially one that is role model, to be 100 percent truthful when discussing their life.

Emma has already changed significantly just since Potter ended. If she was never famous in the first place, she would never be in the same situations where she needed to be politically correct to protect her image, because she wouldn't have an image!

I think she would be a slightly above average but fairly typical English girl if she was not in Harry Potter. She would be moody and bitchy sometimes like most people, but would probably have numerous friends who genuinely like her for herself.

I doubt she would be more deceptive and contradictory than the average person.

Christ, I lie all the time to our customers. I can't tell them the real reason why their internet or networks don't work properly. I need to protect the company image. It is sort of the same thing.

Anonymous said...

"why dont you post this, Echee? [2]"

Why don't you start your own blog and post it?
What did you expect him to say? She's stupid and smells bad?

Anonymous said...

In response to Mike and that anon with the positive quotes about Emma:

I'm going to be honest. People here who post "positive" stories tend to get chided or driven back by the majority here, claiming that the poster "ignores the facts" and that their "sources" are probably spun and biased. I've always found this to be the most peculiar aspect of this site.

But then we get "quotes" from ONTD about how someone met Emma and she was oh-so-horrible, and you're chided for thinking that those quotes are bullshit. If you disagree on a topic Echee posts, you're essentially damned right off the bat by some (not all, but you usually get put down to say the least).

Why is there a double standard there? Why is it ok for people to accept all the negative stories and discount all of the positive ones, as if only those are absolutely right and all of the good ones are obviously inherently wrong?

I just find it ironic that some people here talk about how "stans and fans" blindly accept only the positive stories, but then they do the same thing on the opposite side of the spectrum with negative stories.

Before I get blasted away, let me offer up this defense: No, I'm not defending Emma. I like this blog because it serves as a useful tool in me, personally, deciding what I think is true or not. It gives me a supplemental perspective to the ones that already exist, and I make my decision from there.

Echee said...

why dont I post this echee?

You know I heard emma saved a bunch of kittens from drowning the other day. True story. The lady is the big red shoe told me as I skipped my way to grandma's house.

Anonymous said...

"You know I heard emma saved a bunch of kittens from drowning the other day. True story. The lady is the big red shoe told me as I skipped my way to grandma's house."

But you'll take what the old lady over in the big green shoe told you and post that, right? The stuff that's not-so-positive?

Just because it's grittier and nastier doesn't mean it's the truth. The truth is the truth, and both Mike's story and the ONTD stories you linked are equally as suspect and unlikely. I don't get why you'd just randomly accept the negative ones.

Anonymous said...

"I doubt she would be more deceptive and contradictory than the average person. "

How about the average celebrity? I can't really think of any other celebrity where I've read one interview where they said one thing and then read another interview where they said something completely different. Sure they all lie and they all have an image they are trying to project and it may be that I pay more attention to what she says, but I can't really think of a celeb who says more daft things and contradicts themselves more than she does.

"Why is there a double standard there? Why is it ok for people to accept all the negative stories and discount all of the positive ones, as if only those are absolutely right and all of the good ones are obviously inherently wrong"

For the same reason fan sites are just the opposite?

"I just find it ironic that some people here talk about how "stans and fans" blindly accept only the positive stories, but then they do the same thing on the opposite side of the spectrum with negative stories."

Really? First of all, not all of us here blindly accept anything. Positive or negative. And second of all you should keep in mind where you're at. Fan sites are going to be mostly positive with a few dissenters, this site is going to be just the opposite. Now in my experience there is more discussion and less blind acceptance here than on any fan site. But it does lean towards accepting the negative first. Just the way it is. There's always pottershots if you need to balance it out.

Anonymous said...

^Great response, above anon. I was going to write something similar.

I also want to point out that people were only ASKING Mike for the source! Nobody was saying THAT'S BULLSHIT! We're wondering where that story is. I don't think that's too much to ask. If this was in fact true, then kudos to Emma for helping someone she doesn't know. But without a source, that could just be anything. At least with the ONTD people who have had encounters with Emma (or other cast members), they write their experience, they are the source. If someone doesn't want to believe them, then don't. But nobody is getting all up in arms about Mike's post. He just never have a source so therefore, it could just be bullshit, hence some of the jokes that followed. With a source, then it'd be "well, then that's a positive encounter with Watson." There will be both negative and positive encounters with celebs. I don't get why people don't see that.

And I have to agree. I haven't heard of any other celeb as contradictory as her. Just saying.

Anonymous said...

^and I have to agree. I haven't heard of any other celeb as contradictory as her. Just saying...

on what issue do you think she is the most contradictory? dating? school?

Anonymous said...

^^^ Haha was the time traveling comment really needed? Even Gilbert's comments aren't THAT far-fetched :P

that probably was gilbert. i am still going to kick that guys ass one of these days.

Anonymous said...

"At least with the ONTD people who have had encounters with Emma (or other cast members), they write their experience, they are the source. If someone doesn't want to believe them, then don't. But nobody is getting all up in arms about Mike's post. He just never have a source."

The ONTD posted encounters are literally no different than Mike's initial source. His post with Logan Lerman is the most reasonbly sound piece of evidence provided out of the ONTD/X person Mike linked stuff, but no one mentions it.

The opinion of the majority follows that of its leader. This is a common aphorism that's been passed down via stories about sheep (not that you're sheep...) and other things.

Echee posted, in response to Mike:

"why dont I post this echee?

You know I heard emma saved a bunch of kittens from drowning the other day. True story. The lady is the big red shoe told me as I skipped my way to grandma's house."

Echee was being sarcastic. Sarcasm implies that you're incredulous and non-believing of the person's point/attitude/whatever it is (in this case, it's Mike's point).

He used an analogy to the big red shoe and skipping around to relay his own point that he thinks he's the type of person who skirts the grittier topics, while only accepting the positive stories surrounding Emma.... Therfore.....

"I also want to point out that people were only ASKING Mike for the source! Nobody was saying THAT'S BULLSHIT!"

In effect, Echee WAS calling out his story as bullshit.

"without a source, that could just be anything."

Exactly. Mike's first story and the ONTD posts are similar in that they "could just be anything."

Look at it this way: What if I bade my time, waited until tomorrow, and then posted as a "new user" to this site, stating that I've "met Emma?" I bet I could lie and give a very (fake) detailed story about it. I could also spin it positively.

It just amazes me how anyone can sit there and treat these evidence-less stories (positive OR negative) with ANY credibility. The irony I described had to do with the fact that people on BOTH sides vehemently suspect the opposite side's stories while only accepting the ones that pander to their world view - for fans, they accept the unsubstantiated positive stories and never the unsubstantiated negative ones. For this site, it tends to be the exact opposite.

That's what I found ironic - that some people here merely tend to be the opposite side of the same coin.

Anonymous said...

this is like the theist vs atheist. both are the same, dont realize and hate each other.

the crazy fans believe every positive story and the crazy haters believe everything negative. you just dont realize you are alike.

a story where emma helps an old lady is as credible as emma telling a little girl to fuck off. but you choose to believe the negative stuff. you are not deceived by emma but by your hatred and by echee who doesnt post things like this because it wouldnt help his agenda.

Anonymous said...

source is from facebook it was posted on pottershots. the site echee had several accounts while always telling everyone that they dont have a life. (until he got caught being a creep) THATS irony.

Anonymous said...

"The ONTD posted encounters are literally no different than Mike's initial source"

Mike had no source, that was the issue. Also some of the ONTD stories were first hand accounts Mike's wasn't and unless Logan Lerman is posting here as Anonymous, neither was the second.

"His post with Logan Lerman is the most reasonbly sound piece of evidence provided out of the ONTD/X person Mike linked stuff, but no one mentions it."

Wow, you are a publicists dream.

"In effect, Echee WAS calling out his story as bullshit."

Again, do you know what site you're on? Why does this surprise you?

"Mike's first story and the ONTD posts are similar in that they "could just be anything."

Once again, Mike had no source. The ONTD source was the person making the post. Had Mike posted that HE was at Gatwick and Emma helped him with his bags, then they'd be similar.

"It just amazes me how anyone can sit there and treat these evidence-less stories (positive OR negative) with ANY credibility. "

They are all "evidence-less" to some degree. The old saying is don't believe everything you read, not don't believe anything you read. You have to decide how much evidence, if any, you need to accept the position or story being told.

"The irony I described had to do with the fact that people on BOTH sides vehemently suspect the opposite side's stories while only accepting the ones that pander to their world view - for fans, they accept the unsubstantiated positive stories and never the unsubstantiated negative ones. For this site, it tends to be the exact opposite. "

Exactly. The irony is that you expected any different.

"a story where emma helps an old lady is as credible as emma telling a little girl to fuck off"

Not necessarily. Mike's story was copied and pasted from ??? The ONTD story I'm thinking about was witnessed by the poster and it was her niece.

"you are not deceived by emma but by your hatred and by echee who doesnt post things like this because it wouldnt help his agenda"

Personally I don't hate Emma. And thank you for acknowledging Echee has an agenda. There are posters here who don't seem to get that.

"source is from facebook it was posted on pottershots."

Well there ya go. Did they also post the story of Emma telling the little girl to fuck off? I'm guessing not. I'm also guessing you're not over there giving them crap about it.

Anonymous said...

"I understand your point, but how can you just assume so bluntly that she'd still have those qualities if she weren't famous?"

Excuse the caps I use in my reply - they're in place of italics, I'm not shouting. Also this is a hugely edited version of my original answer, so no doubt my point won't get across, but I'll try. Most of the things you said I was saying/doing were actually the opposite of what I meant, so I feel a need to reply. Answer starts here in response to the quote above:

But this is the exact element of my point that you're misunderstanding - you're applying my theory to PERSONALITY when it's only applicable to CHARACTER. Personality is variable and malleable, character is stable and innate therefore unchangeable. The character traits exist regardless of whether they're reflected in the personality or not. Therefore, even if another reality caused her personality to be drawn from her more pleasant character traits making her a more pleasant person to observe/know, the unpleasant traits we KNOW she has would still exist within her psyche, even if unused and unseen. She would always have the POTENTIAL for them to be reflected in her personality if her situation changed to one, like for instance fame which draws on negative innate traits.
You can apply that to everyone in the world - no one can know all of someone's innate traits, so personalities can be deceptive, or at least not a comprehensive representation of their FUNDAMENTAL character.
Emma in this reality might have very nice innate traits, which aren't really reflected in her current personality so we don't see them, but us not seeing them doesn't change the fact that they exist. Situations/lifestyles don't CREATE character qualities, they just reflect them in the personality.
I'll try to use an analogy to round up my opinion - water has the same fundamental components regardless of what form you see it in - solid, gas or liquid. The form you see it on depends on its situation/environment. The fundamental components are character, the changeable states are personality, the environment is what draws on the fundamental components in order to shape the personality. - does that make it more simple? I hope so. My brain hurts.

Anonymous said...

"In effect, Echee WAS calling out his story as bullshit."

"Again, do you know what site you're on? Why does this surprise you?"

It doesn't. I wasn't trying to prove that to you.

I was just pointing out the fact that there is a hypothetical coin, it seems, with relation to Emma. As with any coin, it has two sides. One is heads (call that solely positive thought), and the other is tails (call that solely negative thought). I was merely saying that those who delve TOO deeply towards either extreme are clouded and will have extreme biases on that particular topic.

I don't think this blog is bad. Not at all, it's quite the opposite. I don't visit Pottershots because it and other fan sites are far more of a circlejerk than this site is. As you mentioned before, there is some good debating to be had here, and I'd honestly rather deal with skeptics than zealous believers any day!

I maintain my point that Mike's story and ONTD posts are severely lacking in evidence. As you had said before, stuff like that is to be interpreted individually by the viewer. I personally don't buy any of it, because as I said before, I could sit here and provide you with the "proof" that Mike's post lacked by simply waiting a few days, returning here, and posting a "time when I met Emma," spun to favor my own views of her.

Those sorts of things draw attention. If anything, we should be lauding this blog for NOT (as far as I know) using that attention whoring tactic yet, while sites like ONTD, Pottershots, and other myriad fan sites often do.

As I said, I'd rather talk to a skeptic than a zealous believer any day of the week. Despite being the other side of the same coin, a skeptic tends to be much more open to debate and analysis, even if they'll end up at a result that they already intended to reach.

realusagichan said...

What's with the "alternate reality" person? What does that have anything to do with the current plane of existence that we are on? I thought I was crazy for putting so much analysis onto things that Ms. Watson does or say.

Echee said...

"source is from facebook it was posted on pottershots. the site echee had several accounts while always telling everyone that they dont have a life."

Several accounts. No I had two. well now one. =). But the one I have now was set up before this blog. I never posted with it.

Echee said...

As fo this evidence. I placed the diva links on this post with the photos and video of emma's attitude to show you the ONTD story is possible.

There is your evidence.

Anonymous said...

"realusagichan said...

What's with the "alternate reality" person? What does that have anything to do with the current plane of existence that we are on? I thought I was crazy for putting so much analysis onto things that Ms. Watson does or say."

Not sure if you meant me or not, but it's part of a conversation from earlier in the comments. I'm not talking about alternate realities at all, it's just part of the way we ended up trying to make our points. We were talking about whether fame makes her act as she does or if it's innate. I was saying I believed it's innate because fame shows you for who you are.

Anonymous said...

@Echee ... If you did say something on Pottershots with that account even if it was very pro Emma, they would be immediately suspicious. They seem a little uptight and mistrustful over there these days.

Anonymous said...

Delores Umbridge is running Pottershots now

THEY WILL HAVE ORDER

They went private a few weeks ago because someone was spamming the emma watson boards. It disrupted the whole flow of the caht forum. They find out shit about her. Like personal stuff. There are people that know her that posts stuff. They have this whole exclusive section of personal emails. If echee got his hands on them it would destroy her.

Anonymous said...

"chat forum"

Anonymous said...

"realusagichan said...

What's with the "alternate reality" person?

Anon Reply: " I'm not talking about alternate realities at all, it's just part of the way we ended up trying to make our points."

I am the Anon that mentioned Quantum Theory. I was not making that up. Many physicists believe it is true. That all possibilities exist and there are an infinite number of parallel universes. Ask Stephen Hawking.

There are parallel universes where Germany won World War II, where the Roman Empire never fell and where Emma was not picked to be Hermione.

If, hypothetically, we could visit the universe where Emma was not "The Harry Potter Girl" I think we would find out she would be a fairly normal person and probably no more deceptive and contradictory than anyone else. That was my only point.

Suggested Reading : The Coming of the Quantum Cats.

Echee said...

I would not use that stuff on Pottershots. Unless the source was really credible. Like names and actual people. If I did happen to use it I would put a disclaimer about it. I wuld love to read it though.

Good reads. I feel like Im in a logic slash psychology slash sociology class.When are you guys going to talk about pavlovs dog Interesting take on things. =)

Anonymous said...

Pavlov's dog versus Schrödinger's cat. Coming soon to an Imax theater.

Anonymous said...

THANK YOU ANON WHO POSTED THIS:

"Mike had no source, that was the issue. Also some of the ONTD stories were first hand accounts Mike's wasn't and unless Logan Lerman is posting here as Anonymous, neither was the second."

Seriously, Mike had no source. Or is my laptop not showing text that's visible to a few? Seriously. People exploded over this as though Mike had put a source. The thing is that he didn't. If he had, then okay, that's a positive story about watson. There will be negative and positive.

Really, is it my eyes? Forth time I checked and I do not see a single source under Mike's comment. People are getting pissy at nothing.

Anonymous said...

"Personality is variable and malleable, character is stable and innate therefore unchangeable."

This is a pretty good quote. Personality is like weight and character is like mass. If you go to the moon your weight is one sixth, but your mass is exactly the same.

Mass is a universal constant. The content of one's character should be just as constant.

Anonymous said...

"They went private a few weeks ago because someone was spamming the emma watson boards. It disrupted the whole flow of the caht forum. They find out shit about her. Like personal stuff. There are people that know her that posts stuff. They have this whole exclusive section of personal emails. If echee got his hands on them it would destroy her."

I won't lie and say that I'd be disinterested in reading said "personal emails," but I definitely think that if you get your hands on them, Echee, you shouldn't post them. It isn't ethical. There probably would also be legal ramifications if you were to do so.

"There are people that know her that posts stuff."

Interesting if this is true for a number of reasons. I won't post why as I'm supposed to be studying, but suffice to say that I can see why celebrities tend to be suspicious of those around them. Fame seems like a tempting, well-made, but double edged sword.

Anonymous said...

yes these people invade her private space. where do you think echee gets his infos from. half of this blog is off of pottershots.

Anonymous said...

"There are people that know her that posts stuff"
thats not true they are stans, they dont know her in private. all real private info was hacked and not told by emma herself.

echee even creeped those stans outwhen he asked really personal details, like boyfriends when she was 12.

PS: echee, you have more than one account as of now :-)

Echee said...

Pottershots has them. Its more on them then me. Im using the source. Its their fault if they have them. I just responded to all this in my newer post. As of now after you read that I am done discussing it.

Anonymous said...

^ repetitive

Anonymous said...

^anon above again, I meant the anon above echee was repetitive, heh, bad timing I suppose

Anonymous said...

This is Gilbert. I have no idea what the last several Anon's are talking about above, so I can't think of anything to say.

Interesting, though, there are 184 or so comments on a post about Emma being a secret Bitch. I wish I could think of something to say to propel the comments to 200.

I've got nothing, though, as usual lately!

I saw this from RealU ... "What does that have anything to do with the current Plane of existence that we are on?"

Good question ... I think ...

... therefore I am.

To be or not to be that is the question. Whether 'tis nobler in the mind ...

To know ultraviolet, infrared and xrays, beauty to find in so many ways. Two notes of the cord that's our forescope....

Forgive us now for what we've done. It started out as a bit of fun.

Hey little plane (of existence) wait for me, I once was blind but now I see, have you left a seat for me?

Hey little Plane , we are all jumping on, the Plane that goes to the Kingdom, were happy now, we're having fun and the Plane ain't even left the station!

Gil Bates

So much for 200 comments.

Anonymous said...

Echee, you change your opionions even faster than emma.

"I would not use that stuff on Pottershots"

"Pottershots has them. Its more on them then me. Im using the source"

maybe i should start a blog "meettherealechee"

Anonymous said...

^lmao nice try, anon. Way to only choose to copy and paste one part of Echee's post:

"I would not use that stuff on Pottershots. Unless the source was really credible. Like names and actual people. If I did happen to use it I would put a disclaimer about it. I wuld love to read it though."

Keyword is Unless. And Echee was basically saying right there he/she would not use the personal leaked stuff.

""Pottershots has them. Its more on them then me. Im using the source""

Yeah Pottershots has a shitload of stuff that's fair game for this blog, esp since a lotta Pottershots stuff gets uploaded on other sites. They supply the fodder. Why are you getting so up-in-arms? Seems like you're just LOOKING for trouble, sheesh.

Anonymous said...

You suck Gilbert! And you are not that smart, either.... Rene Descartes, Shakespeare (or maybe Roger Bacon), Moody Blues, and Nick Cave (song from Deathly H. Part 1 where Dan asked Emma to dance). Take that! .. pathetic loser guy!

Echee said...

Gilbert you have issues. I'm pretty sure that above anon is you playing games. Its just so random.

Rose said...

Anonymous said: "You suck Gilbert! And you are not that smart, either.... Rene Descartes, Shakespeare (or maybe Roger Bacon), Moody Blues, and Nick Cave (song from Deathly H. Part 1 where Dan asked Emma to dance). Take that! .. pathetic loser guy!

It's Francis Bacon, not Roger Bacon.

Anonymous said...

Rose is pretty sharp sometimes and I would never say Roger Bacon wrote some of Shakespeare's plays, he lived like 300 years earlier or something. I would have said Sir Francis Bacon.

I think this proves it wasn't me playing games.

Gilbert

Although I should point out a Theory that my twin sister Gretchen has had for years. (we are fraternal or paternal twins or whatever you call it).

She maintains that I have three distinct personalities. She refers to them as A B and C. She claims that my A personality is aware of itself and the B and C personalities. B is aware of itself and C but does not know that A exists. C is only aware of itself and has no idea that A and B exist.
I suppose it is possible that I am in my "C" state right now and either my B or A personalities was playing games. I really don't think any of my personalities (if they do exist) would say Roger Bacon, though. I don't make mistakes like that.

Anonymous said...

Damn we are still not going reach 200 comments!

Gilbert

Anonymous said...

Ok, so you can see Emma's bitchy face on some pictures... so what?!
Maybe she was tired, cold or in pain... you know, I suffer from dysmenorrhea myself and believe me, you don't want to go near me at times when I'm in pain because of that! I consider myself a nice well-mannered person, generally speaking, but since I'm also a human being I can pull a face when I'm not feeling well or when annoyed by someone's behaviour. We don't know a thing about the people around her when these photos were taken, maybe someone was shouting obscenities at her... who knows?
I mean, you don't have anything at all in order to support your theory that she's a real bitch with people, you can't judge someone just by looking at her/his face in bunch of photos!

jamesbondguy said...

Just for the Record, that Anon above was not me. I think I will hide back here for awhile though. I think several people want to kick my ass. I will bring this post to 200 comments by myself.

Echee said...

Gilbert you have severe issues. And I'm the one with a blog dedicated to one celebrity saying that. But at least I make it factual. Its just all a game to you. I don't know why but you have this dennis the menace affect on me. Your just annoying. I just know what you are doing with what your motives are and the games you play.

jamesbondguy said...

I don't think my comments were that bad the other night. Someone said it must not be fun being Emma's boyfriend because of Emma's comments in magazines. I was just trying to say that Johnny probably did have fun being Emma's boyfriend and didn't care that much about what was in the media. They talk to each other and share their feelings. Johnny doesn't go online to find things Emma said about dating to find out how she feels about him. I doubt he takes anything she said in interviews personally, like Emma was taking about him.

And that little piece of fan fiction with Emma and Johnny talking about Prince Charming was the first time I had done that in months. I don't think it is as bad as other people in that thread talking about "dicks in their mouths" or "shoving brushes up their vaginas". That little piece of dialogue was relevant to what I was saying.

And I am not Ruth. Christ, I thought it was a pretty obvious joke when I said I had multiple personalities and spewed out all those names. Some people thought I was serious. I know you don't think I am Eden or any of the people from Potter Shots. And I am not most of the other people you thought I was.

One more comment for 200 ...

jamesbondguy said...

Why would someone think you are ykickamoocow? There are other weird people on your Blog beside me, my friend.

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 202   Newer› Newest»