Showing posts with label Scarlett Johansson. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Scarlett Johansson. Show all posts
Monday, September 7, 2015
Natalie Portman is Wrong, Scarlett Johansson Right on Boycotts of Israel
Well, I used to have Ms. Portman down as a hot neocon, but she's become too much of an Obama-cultist these last few years.
Not so with Scarlett Johansson. She's been a voice of moral clarity on Israel.
See the report at Truth Revolt.
Not so with Scarlett Johansson. She's been a voice of moral clarity on Israel.
See the report at Truth Revolt.
Thursday, March 20, 2014
Leftists Slam Film Critic Anthony Lane for 'Creepy' Profile of Scarlett Johansson
At LAT, "Anthony Lane criticized for 'creepy' Scarlett Johansson profile":
Look, she's a smokin' hot movie star. But for idiot leftist feminists, to notice ScarJo's a smokin' hot movie star is "objectification" and all "uncle creepy" sexism.
Seriously. You can't win with idiot progressives. They're terrible people who've bled the lusty fun out of life --- and believe me when I say I know about this first hand, the f-kers.
(Thankfully, the New York Post isn't so obsessed with political correctness, at that top Twitter link.)
Pregnancy looks pretty good on Scarlett Johansson. http://t.co/nYmYqi3PNs pic.twitter.com/5KaIya9fxr
— Maggie Coughlan (@MaggieCoughlan) March 20, 2014
New Yorker film critic Anthony Lane is catching heat for his recent profile of Scarlett Johansson, which detractors say fawns over the actress without bothering to comprehend her.And here's Lane's profile, "HER AGAIN: The unstoppable Scarlett Johansson."
Johansson has two films coming out on the same day (April 4): "Captain America: The Winter Soldier" and "Under the Skin," and has recently been linked to separate controversies involving SodaStream and Woody Allen.
As critics of Lane's profile point out, he devotes much of it to cataloging Johansson's allure, describing "the honey of her voice" and declaring that she "looks tellingly radiant in the flesh" or seems to be "made from champagne." And yet, these critics say, the profile tells readers very little about Johansson as an actress or an individual.
Slate's Katy Waldman, for example, criticizes Lane's "inappropriate-uncle creepiness" in the profile.
The problem with the piece, Waldman writes, "is not [just] that it salivates over ScarJo, but that it refuses to treat her as a human subject, with qualities of mind. (If this is because Lane didn't have much time with Johansson, maybe the magazine shouldn't have run the piece.) When Lane isn't characterizing Johansson as strangely blank and opinionless, he’s trafficking in the dream of the remote, unknowable Woman — a flat projection of male desire."
She adds, "The worst part, however, is that Lane wants it both ways: He pants over ScarJo as the generic representative of a certain erotic fantasy and then has the chutzpah to critique her, slyly, for lacking substance."
Esther Breger of the New Republic similarly writes, "Lane's piece, the worst profile I can remember reading in The New Yorker, can be reduced to one basic takeaway: Anthony Lane thinks Scarlett Johansson is radiant, and wants to tell you all about it."
Breger, whose post is titled "Anthony Lane's Scarlett Johansson Profile Turns The New Yorker into a Men's Magazine," also writes, "Try to imagine The New Yorker running this about Matthew McConaughey, or Michael Fassbender. Sadly, this kind of fawning isn't unusual, as far as profiles of attractive actresses go … but I prefer my glossy-mag sexism sans highbrow pretensions."
Kay Steiger of Talking Points Memo doesn't mince words either, calling Lane's profile "gross." It's also indicative of another issue, she says: the dearth of female editors at major magazines.
Look, she's a smokin' hot movie star. But for idiot leftist feminists, to notice ScarJo's a smokin' hot movie star is "objectification" and all "uncle creepy" sexism.
Seriously. You can't win with idiot progressives. They're terrible people who've bled the lusty fun out of life --- and believe me when I say I know about this first hand, the f-kers.
(Thankfully, the New York Post isn't so obsessed with political correctness, at that top Twitter link.)
Tuesday, March 4, 2014
ScarJo Pregnant!
Hey, I'm very happy for her --- even more so in light of her stand against the BDS Israel-haters.
At E!, "Scarlett Johansson Pregnant! Actress Expecting First Child With Fiancé Romain Dauriac."
PREVIOUSLY: "The Israel Project Celebrates Scarlett Johansson" (and here as well).
At E!, "Scarlett Johansson Pregnant! Actress Expecting First Child With Fiancé Romain Dauriac."
PREVIOUSLY: "The Israel Project Celebrates Scarlett Johansson" (and here as well).
Labels:
Celebrities,
Family,
Interest Groups,
Israel,
Moral Clarity,
Scarlett Johansson
Sunday, March 2, 2014
The Israel Project Celebrates Scarlett Johansson
At the New York Times, "Countering Israel Boycotts, With Glamour."
And at the Israel Project, "Tell Scarlett Thank You!"
Scarlett Johansson will not speak at Aipac meeting, but she will be there in spirit http://t.co/j7v1Z49JXN pic.twitter.com/A6ZZO2YaGh
— The Caucus (@thecaucus) February 28, 2014
And at the Israel Project, "Tell Scarlett Thank You!"
Labels:
Celebrities,
Interest Groups,
Israel,
Moral Clarity,
Scarlett Johansson
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)