EMMA WATSON RETIRING FROM ACTING AT 30!

she'll be back in a few years

Her contributions to film won’t be easily forgotten...

Oh, wait. I’m thinking of Emma Thompson. Is Emma Watson the one who was upstaged by EVERYONE ELSE in “Little Women?” (extras are included in that statement)

Buh-Bye. She's a one-note actress anyway.

Woohoo!

Phew.

We didn't notice she had ever started acting.

Terrible actress and average looking at best. With her limited range and last fuckable day approaching, she knows she’s done. She got lucky when she was a child and is now set for life.

No one is going to miss her...

I don't really think she's *that* bad of an actress, but next to Ronan & Pugh, she did seem rather wooden & one note, though the "book" Meg is the pretty but dull one, so she wasn't necessarily miscast. She got to be married to James Norton, rather than that little chicken Timmy, so there's that.

Perhaps she recognizes that a post-HP film career just isn't in the cards for her (Radcliffe stays busy in indies & theatre, but he's not really leading man material). She's got an education & some $$ - god, I'd go live on an island or sail around the world!

Radcliffe is very good, and so is Alfred Enoch, but the best young actor to come out of that franchise is Harry Melling. The guy's a chameleon. Who would've ever thought Dudley Dursley would be the breakout star of that franchise?

No. Stop. Come back.

Anybody know why she refused to do publicity for Little Women?

Good! She's a very bright girl and could do something much more worthwhile with her life.

Maybe find something she's actually good at, now that she's made her pile.

Which Emma/Emily is this? I get them mixed up.

R14 It's Hermoine Granger, Rose.

But whatever will we do without her eyebrow emoting?

How nice it must be to retire at age 30!

I never thought she was awful except in that live action Beauty and the Beast. Every note she sang was auto tuned to hell and back and her face was as robotic as her voice. No idea how to sell a song.

She wasn't someone who'd be giving us interesting performances well into her 60's or 70's, so it's no big loss.

If I had her money, I'd retire too. She, like Radcliffe, can choose whatever types of projects they want, or not.

[quote]Anybody know why she refused to do publicity for Little Women?

Because she was morally repulsed by Greta Gerwig's cishet orthodoxy of transphobic white supremacist biological essentialism.

*yawn*

I don’t find her inspiring as an actress. I know some people thought she was beautiful but she’s not exciting. Starring as beauty as well just seemed silly after Harry Potter, it seemed regressive.

Maybe when she comes back she’ll look like she finally went through puberty.

Looking at her resume she's not done that many films.

Harry Potter - not bad but the weakest of the 3 leads.

Ballet Shoes - nice enough BBC drama with Victoria Wood

My Week With Marilyn - no recollection of her being in it

The Perks Of Being A Wallflower - very good in a supporting role - Come On Eileen!

The Bling Ring - excellent as a vapid cunt

This Is The End - playing herself - no recollection of her

Noah - I think there's a scene where someone tries to kill her baby and she screams a lot. Blah

Colonia -never heard of it until now - set during the Chilean coup, sounds awful.

Regression - from the director of The Others, never bothered.

Beauty And The Beast - enjoyable enough in a film stolen by the supporting actors

The Circle - have seen it as an option on Netflix, but never bothered despite Tom Hanks being in it

Little Women - the least interesting performance of the 4 sisters

R12 She did the premiere only. Supposedly she loved the film. Flooded her 55mil+ social media with stuff from the film then thought that was enough because she was supporting anyway? Smells like bitchery/her own jealousy/acting out trying to pull rank? I have no clue. It’s something I would do out of bitchery, myself.

She's .... ok. Neither a great actress nor a terrible one.

I couldn’t stand those movies but I like her. She probably made untold millions from them so why bother continuing to work?

Good...we’ve had sufficient. What else is she qualified to do though?

She is set for life and you would think she had been phoning it in from the very beginning since she isnt much of an actor, but very much the poster girl for millenial nerds and incels (like NAtalie Portman was before her).

Besides. There are way too many Emmas and Emilys and Emilias, you gotta weed a few out. And can we get rid of some Lilys too.

Don't think that we're done with her period she may not be on screen anymore, but she'll never shut up. She'll be a medial whore forever.

She lasted longer than many people who can actually act.

Well, she's no great beauty, she's no great actress, she's not being offered great parts, and she was rich as Croesus from the Potter franchise by the time she was 18.

Her best bet is to go into politics or found yet another celebrity nonprofit and pick out a cause or two to natter on about . . . she never has to worry about money again.

Or, she'll go behind the camera and start directing.

I mean, it's not as if she suddenly realised she wants to go to law school, is it?

It's either philanthropy, politics, or directing with these people.

Acting is pleased with her decision.

She'll be back. She could have a PhD in Mathematics and still come back. They always come back.

[quote]If I had her money, I'd retire too

I'd be surprised if she has lifetime fuck you money at 30 R19.

I wonder if they had back end deals for the Harry Potter movies. Only way she would have that kind of money.

[quote]Besides. There are way too many Emmas and Emilys and Emilias, you gotta weed a few out. And can we get rid of some Lilys too.

Emma Thompson, Emily Watson, Emma Stone, Emily Bishop, Emelia Clarke, Emily Blunt, Emma Roberts, Emily Mortimer, Emma Samms, Emily Bronte, Emelia Fox, Emmy Rossum, Emma Chambers, Emmanuelle Béart, Embeth Davitz, Emma Bunton, Uma Thurman

Far too many.

Great. Now we just need Timothee Chalamet to retire from acting.

Bye Felicia!

You're forgetting Rupert Grint, R10. Now THAT'S what I call a star.

A bit early but I get it.

There's one guy who in a couple of Harry Potter films who has effectively retired from acting - he's now famous for being a staunch Corbyn supporter and abusing Jews on Twitter.

R35 you can't be serious? The HP trio are all set for life.

[quote]he's now famous for being a staunch Corbyn supporter and abusing Jews on Twitter.

Owen Jones was in the Harry Potter films?

I remember she was really bad in that perks of being a wallflower movie.

[quote]I'd be surprised if she has lifetime fuck you money at 30

I don't know how much she made on the Potter franchise but apparently she grossed $14 million in 2017. I think she'll be okay.

Her fan must be devastated.

Who was that, R41?

Well R42 ... this is what I found googling:

[quote]One of the three main cast members in the Harry Potter movie franchise, Watson took home big bucks. She earned $60 million playing Hermione in eight films

So $60M. With British income taxes, she probably took home half that. $30M. Then agent's 10%, business manager's 10% so that's $12M gone.

$18M.

Then consider she has been doing this since she was 10, so I don't think it is unreasonable to think she (or her parents) spent $500,000 a year on living expenses for those 20 years she has been acting. Another $10M.

So we are down to $8M. A fortune to be sure, and plenty for the average person to live on for life, but not what I would consider lifetime fuck you money.

^that’s not how money works

She’s a terrible actor and smart enough to admit it. I’m sure she’ll become some kind of goodwill ambassador.

Totally miscast in Beauty and the Beast.

Harry Potter is an excellent pension scheme.

r48, if she had $18 M, that would conservatively yield $540K/year. If she spent $500K a year she'd have slightly more than $18 M today.

I think she should know that she’s a horrible actress.

Good for her. I would take the money and run too. Hollywood is a toilet.

Looking at her bio, she graduated from Brown with an Eng Lit degree, plus did a year at Oxford. so presumably has the brains to pursue something other than acting.

Here's the prized fiance who made her do it. Looks like a fuggo piece of Eurotrash.

What purpose does this announcement serve? Seems very much like a "you can't fire me, I quit" situation.

[quote]Who was that, [R41]?

Sean Biggerstaff. He played the Quidditch captain.

He hasn't had any acting roles for several years now and spends all his time on Twitter posting political shit.

Thanks, R58.

That's a shame (he was cute), but you're right: he does seem insufferable on Twitter.

Sometimes retirement is the best option.

She'll return to the inevitable Harry Potter reboot/sequel in five years.

I thought she was great in Little Women.

R45 what is that hairstyle?

No, r37! Then his fans will stage a mass suicide...oh, wait...

Rumor was she was offered the lead in La La Land but turned it down because they wouldn't do the pre-production rehearsals in London. Bet she regrets that now.

During the filming of the HP franchise, the kids in the cast were given seminars on handling and investing their money. It was very important to Chris Columbus that none of the children in the cast end up a cautionary tale. That's another reason Michael Jackson, despite repeated requests, was allowed nowhere near the set of the films.

She completely ruined Beauty and the Beast. Talk about "phoning it in."

That's interesting R65. I hope that's true.

I remember seeing an interview with the three of them, and Radcliffe and Grint talked about how someone on the set took them to a wrestling match (like WWF?), and the good time they had. They really do seem to have been managed/looked after well, which not a lot of child actors can claim.

She always has a smirk on her face. Not attractive.

There was a blind item on one of the gossip pages that said she didn’t want to do romantic leads opposite actors of color. She’d be part of the ensemble or if they were in a supporting role. But no kissy faces with black actors.

If it's a blind item on a gossip page, then, for sure, it's TRUE!

Of course it is r70...and...it’s...DATALOUNGE, chile.

Boring cunt. nothing special. can't act for shit

[...]

Just turned 30, huh? The article mentioned a man. I'll bet she wants to start breeding.

Publicist says she's not retiring, just on sabbatical. She's worked since she was a child. Burnout and needing a long break at 30 is to be expected on that timeline.

Because she can.

That Harry Potter money!

It’s ridiculous that she gets roles because of the Harry Potter following.

Emma Watson retiring? The birth — and debunking — of an internet conspiracy theory.

Jason Weinberg, who is Watson's manager at Untitled Entertainment, told Entertainment Weekly it's UNTRUE, saying, "Emma's social media accounts are dormant but her career isn't." (When contacted by Yahoo, Weinberg pointed to his statement in EW.)

Burn out? She made gazillions being a shitty actor. Then she had the audacity to shit on the woman who gave her all that opportunity. No she needs a "break"? Puleeze.

She's a Brown University graduate!

[I don't know what that represents other than it's Ivy and selective.]

R80, Brown is very much a star fucker institution. Like Georgetown and others.

I only know Emma Stone and Emma Thompson. I've never even heard of an Emily Watson.

Actors hate doing publicity runs and will avoid it if they possibly can. They're long, they're tiring, and people ask rude and intrusive questions. if I were as wealthy as she is i would stop doing it too.

She's a very smart woman, and writes well--I can see her doing that professionally since she never has to worry again about money. Daniel seems to have found his niche as mostly a supporting comic actor and seems quite happy doing his projects, and Rupert Grint is being a supporting actor too now. Watson is so beautiful that she's harder to cast in supporting roles, and I think she is the weakest actor among the three.

[...]

I must say I was surprised that she agreed to take on the Meg role in Little Women as it is easily the least interesting of the four sisters in the book and in all of the film/tv adaptations; from the get-go meant she was going to be in shadow of Saoirse Ronan, and I would have thought that she wouldn't have wanted to take a supporting role to a younger leading lady, when it seemed that she was still being considered for female leads in major productions. It just didn't seem like a smart career move.

Her accent in Perks of a Wallflower was one of the worst I’ve heard. They should have just made the character British.

None of the 3 mains from the Harry Potter films are very good. Ron Weasley is decent in Servant, and his American accent gives him a very deep voice which is sexy, but he’s very troll looking.

[quote]from the get-go meant she was going to be in shadow of Saoirse Ronan

Watching Ronan mug her way through LW was painful; I can see the appeal of it: LW gets remade every 20 years or so & to be part of something LW book/movie lore is a big deal, but with the exception of Pugh & Ronan, I don't think that move did any of the actors any favors. Laura Dern, for example, is very good - and angry Laura Dern is awesome - but long suffering Marmee, angry that her husband ruined the family fortune & left her penniless with 4 daughters - is not so interesting. While it wasn't necessarily the best production, thought Emily Watson as the careworn Marmee was better.

I think part of the problem was the cutting between time periods; Meg evolves from a vapid young woman to a woman that's willing to marry a poor man for love. I think the switching between time periods made it harder to appreciate the evolution of the characters (except for Pugh, who was very much front & center)

[...]

I think those of you crying about her being a shifty actor are being a bit over dramatic.

She's beautiful, intelligent, and aside from her shivving JK Rowling over the trans stuff, she's done quite well.

She will take a break, have a few kids, then return in glorious splendor as a lead actor in a Netflix historical series that wins lots of awards.

She will be back - she'll miss the adulation and perks.

And she's just not going to work - it's not like she's going to be working in Accounts Receivable like a normal person.

The update from her manager is she is not retiring.

The guy is a Californian, R57.

Leo Robiton is his name. He once worked for a company that dealt in legal cannabis.

None of the main HP trio ever need to work again. They made absurd money and all seem to have sensible parents who saved/invested for them. I think Tom Felton went a little nuts with his earnings but he's not broke

[quote]r9 she did seem rather wooden & one note, though the "book" Meg is the pretty but dull one, so she wasn't necessarily miscast.

Meg is such a fucking snoozefest in the book. She clearly isn’t a character Alcott feels any identification with at all.

No one wants to be stuck playing her. Jo is rebellious, Amy is comically pretentious, Beth is tragic... but Meg has nothing to do other than become a “good wife.” So you’re right, it’s not a very dynamic role.

good for her. She's got at least $50 million in the bank and has worked since childhood. She's been making movies forever and will continue to be offered roles though her agent as well as informally through other actors/producers/directors she's worked with.

She will probably earn more off Harry Potter movies / merchandise in the next few years than most of us will earn in our lifetimes.

There was a strange story about her walking off the set of THIS IS THE END when Channing Tatum showed up in bondage gear--it was like she thought it was too weird and just left and didn't come back. But hey, if she didn't get it, she didn't get it. The movie is great tho

[quote]Watson is so beautiful that she's harder to cast in supporting roles

You're joking, right?

R94 I don’t feel that way about Meg. She’s the oldest so we must respect her and that she is so conventional is touching in a way.

R93 imo Felton was one of the few young actors in the HP franchises, joined perhaps by Matthew Lewis, possessing some reasonable degree of basic acting ability (both were semi-successful child actors before HP, I believe?) Every other kid/teen in those films either played themselves, stayed on one very irritating note, or phoned it in (in particular, the Trio by the last movie), but those two boys did at least show a bit of range and dynamic in their performances. In fairness, though, they did have a bit more to do than the other supporting cast members...

I’ve seen Tom in a few other screen projects, and he is quite capable in a dramatic part. He also seems to take the job a little bit more seriously and ambitiously than most of his former young HP castmates, though it would still be a stretch to call him a serious thesp, and I’d still hesitate to put him on stage.

He did go a bit mad with his HP earnings. It also seemed as if he was quite depressed for a while, over lack of work and possibly his health/looks slightly declining (naturally, with age). It must be difficult to cope with sometimes when millions see you as this eternally-pretty rich bitchy teenage twink with a tragic side, and you’re actually a fairly homely thirty-something middle-class boy who wouldn’t hurt a fly.

Afaik he lives in LA now, enjoying some warm delicious sun damage. He still seems rather close with his onscreen HP father, Jason Isaacs; they speak often over Zoom and by phone. Until I saw them interact over conference call and also in-person at conventions, I didn’t think Felton had a homosexual bone in his body, but seeing him flirt with Isaacs I’m not so sure. The official line from the HP set has always been that Felton & Watson had crushes on each other, but...eh, I don’t see it.

Who?....well, all the best...

R98 You queens are amazing. Most people in their 20s aren’t upset about aging/declining looks. That’s probably YOU as you find a grey in your James Charles 40yo cunt hairdo.

[R97] I don’t feel that way about Meg [in Little Women]

That’s because [italic]you’re a whore.

[Quote] There was a strange story about her walking off the set of THIS IS THE END when Channing Tatum showed up in bondage gear--it was like she thought it was too weird and just left and didn't come back.

I thought it was because she was uncomfortable??

Thank Fucking God.

She was the WORST kind of insufferable. She can not act, is only famous for being a pretty white woman who was in something huge when she was a child, and yet she spent the better half of her adult career pushing politics and talking about how hard she has it as a woman.

She's retiring because now that the #MeToo dust has settled and white women's problems are no longer the topic du jour she will fade away. She has no real talent as an actress and is only famous because she was Hermione Granger a million years ago.

Good riddance.

Good riddance. Vile no-talent cunt.

She's such a hyper social justice warrior. She must be so exhausting to be around.

r105 you'd know

[...]

How soon before "she" transitions to Emmit Watson, Strong TransMan of Color?

It’s never too soon r108

What did she find so interesting about Meg? In the 90s Little Women, nobody remembers Meg but Claire Danes, Kirsten Dunst and Winona played the other girls.

She’s probably made a lot of money from promoting brands. She was the face of a few fashion labels and makeup companies for years.

I read an interview with JK Rowling years ago about how important it was to her that the films be made in England because the sets there treat child actors as children first, instead of thinking of the bottom line. She seemed very protective over the trio. Didn’t keep them from fucking her over though.

Interesting.

What is so annoying about Watson, is that she’s filthy rich,and yet so boring and dowdy and normy, like a woman you’d bump into around a provincial town who works the counter at Waterstones or Costa Coffee and lives in shared housing.

Emma doesn’t seem to know how to use, enjoy, or weaponise her wealth to really make a mark on the world. She’s neither a saint/martyr/modern heroic philanthropist nor an entitled demon who wants to eat the world. She’s just a dull average middle-of-the-road upper-middle class girl who happened to luck into gazillions. She has no remarkable features or talents of which roc speak, that stand her from a crowd. She doesn’t even have the grace or manners of an heiress, or someone born to have money.

That’s why she doesn’t appeal to gay people, who adore a vain lavish starlet who throws her wealth around like a mace.

With the tiniest twist of fate, Emma Watson could easily be an anonymous woman slogging away at an office making apprentice wage, and yet she’d behave and think in exactly the same way she does now, minus the expensive clothes & cosmetics and the personal chef/nutritionist/trainer. There’s no There, there. Her only hope is to become gradually more eccentric and outré with middle-age, perhaps finding herself opening a theatre a la Winslet.

Imagine if one of us had her kind of bank. The world wouldn’t know what hit it. It’d be like the second coming of Alexis.