Discover Habbo's history
Treat yourself with a Secret Santa gift.... of a random Wiki page for you to start exploring Habbo's history!
Happy holidays!
Celebrate with us at Habbox on the hotel, on our Forum and right here!
Join Habbox!
One of us! One of us! Click here to see the roles you could take as part of the Habbox community!


Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 27 of 27
  1. #21
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Essex
    Posts
    23,585
    Tokens
    9,258

    Latest Awards:

    Default

    Daniel Radcliffe annoys me to no end. He's got a very limited range of emotions. He can't do sadness, disgust, anger, fear, rage, surprise or anticipation. He's like looking at an empty shell, void of emotion. Like an android that can run around a stage butt naked but is virtually dead behind the eyes. As for Harry Potter, well, Emily Watkins and Rupert Grint were far better actors, but not perfect.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    19,678
    Tokens
    11,479

    Latest Awards:

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cocaine View Post
    he's a perfect example of a typecast and plays the same character in most, if not every film
    So? I don't see how being typecast or playing the same characters makes him the worst actor ever. Sean Connery is and will always be James Bond to many. Oh no, typecast. Bad actor? Not one bit, because he was brilliant as Bond. Owen Wilson is only really good at certain roles and doesn't have much range. Bad actor? Not at all, because he perfects those certain roles. Diversity ≠ good actor, but to each their own, I guess.

    Also, two words for you - King Kong. Jack Black obviously has talent.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    3,223
    Tokens
    2,022

    Latest Awards:

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GommeInc View Post
    Daniel Radcliffe annoys me to no end. He's got a very limited range of emotions. He can't do sadness, disgust, anger, fear, rage, surprise or anticipation. He's like looking at an empty shell, void of emotion. Like an android that can run around a stage butt naked but is virtually dead behind the eyes. As for Harry Potter, well, Emily Watkins and Rupert Grint were far better actors, but not perfect.
    Daniel Radcliffe has dyspraxia which limits his speech and movement. So, that's why.
    *Emily Watson
    Emily Watkins's a chef

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    12,044
    Tokens
    8,448

    Latest Awards:

    Default

    definitely agree with [@]@GommeInc[/@] on daniel radcliffe. whether he has a dyspraxia or not (and if so, why hire him, he can't do the job required), his acting is limited. there are several parts in harry potter where he is out-acted by his cast mates. particularly rupert grint (who is an excellent actor, the tv movie driving lessons he did with julie walters is fantastic). i also find will smith and jack black very very very boring.

    female, hilary duff has always really annoyed me, even a a child. she doesn't get much work anymore though, so hahahah. i hate angelina jolie: she's not a bad actress as such, she just has really bad styleised acting.

    (as an actor myself i hate everyone who is more successful than me, so everyone.)

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    7,511
    Tokens
    1,300
    Habbo
    Cromwell

    Latest Awards:

    Default

    Jack Black, I just dont like his acting

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    19,678
    Tokens
    11,479

    Latest Awards:

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GirlNextDoor15 View Post
    *Emily Watson
    Emily Watkins's a chef
    Emma Watson*

    Emily Watson is an entirely different actress altogether.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    2,956
    Tokens
    7,870

    Latest Awards:

    Default


Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •