Chloe Grace Moretz

[ptguardian]

If you thought Let Me In was a flop because of that. Possibly but not likely. Everything in America is about hype. Publicity department of a film plays a huge role in a films success. Not many people heard about Let Me In. A lot of really crappy movies have been successful(business wise) doesn't make them any better of a film. I think she is getting plenty of big films. It is up to her whether she continues to get them. The fact she has gained a following makes her marketable. As she increases this over a broader audience so will her big roles. Look at Dakota Fanning she has had several very big successes when she was Chloe's age and younger. Since then she has had a few not so good, but because of her following she still gets more than 8 million a film and producers come to her instead of her going to them. Chloe is getting those offers currently. We will see if they continue. One can hope. Plus she seems like a nice girl so I wish her the best.

[For An Angel]

Look at the remake of Lolita, Dominique Swain was 17 already, legal age in many US states. Lolita's age is 12 in Vladimir Nabokov's novel.

Dominique was actually 15 when she filmed the movie and Lolita was 12 only at the beginning of the novel. The story takes place over a couple of years and by the end of the novel she is around 17.

Let me in where she looks kind of cute as vampire girl but the film ending up as a flop because Americans often constructing remakes far worse than the original.

It's true that the expectation was that Let Me In was going to be bad simply because it was a remake. That would explain why so many people avoided seeing it. Those who actually saw it praised it and it still holds a 90% on Rotten Tomatoes.

[ptguardian]

Perhaps we have a few pessimists around here? Having bad expectations often gives one bad results.

I enjoyed Lolita and Let Me In, both the originals and the remakes. Doesn't matter which was better. The fact I enjoyed them is what counts.

Now back to Chloe
[Image]

[yoko]

CGM just isn't my taste. I like the girl on my avatar, but she only played in one movie, uncredited

Thanks for starting this thread, though. It was interesting to read.

[kev]

I like her.

I used to get her and Ryan Simpkins [ http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1364532/ ] mixed up. I think they are both lovely and have that little 'something' about them that makes them stand out.

Yes, they are growing out of FLM's OT'ness, but I'm hoping that they are able to handle their future lives better than some of the other child stars of the past... (Though the possibility of seeing them sans clothing is not offensive to me, I would hope that they don't get relegated to any type of pRon.. ..soft core or otherwise.. )

Thanks for this thread ptg.

kev.

[starfish21]

i was only having a wind up,i like chloe.i got a few imaginations fired up though.

[Phuzzy4242]

I like Chloe too. She seems to be more "real" in her real life than most young actresses. By that I mean she doesn't seem to have let stardom change her personality much and her family seem to be keeping her feet on the ground. Looking at YouTube videos, her twitter comments, and other sources, she appears to be just like any "normal" (as if there is such a thing ) teenager who just happens to star is some great films.

Sadly, with the way the U.S. film industry works, I'm betting once she passes the "cute girl" stage into adulthood, she'll be forced into less savory roles if she wants to continue acting. Look at Natalie Portman, Jennifer Connelly, Soleil Moon Frye, or Dakota Fanning for example. I hope that doesn't happen to Chloe too, but the odds are high.

[ptguardian]

Sadly, with the way the U.S. film industry works, I'm betting once she passes the "cute girl" stage into adulthood, she'll be forced into less savory roles if she wants to continue acting. Look at Natalie Portman, Jennifer Connelly, Soleil Moon Frye, or Dakota Fanning for example. I hope that doesn't happen to Chloe too, but the odds are high.

Examples of 'forced into savory roles'?

Except for Soleil Moon Frye the other three are doing very well for themselves. They grow up and their roles changes as result. They are still getting big roles and get very fat pay checks. Only thing that has changed is they are not kids anymore.

[Phuzzy4242]

I don't mean forced like at gunpoint or something, I mean they're offered roles that emphasize their sex appeal. For example, Soleil Moon Frye in Pumpkinhead II when she turned 18 and Mind Games when she was 20, or Jennifer Connelly in Some Girls when she turned 18 and later Hot Spot and on from there. Natalie Portman didn't get raunchy but Closer wasn't Sesame Street (though she DID do that too ). Dakota did The Runaways at 16 and is in several R-rated movies that haven't been released yet.

Granted, some of the roles these girls (now women) were given weren't unsavory, but many were. I think if they're offered better roles they'd take them instead of raunch.

[ptguardian]

I think if they're offered better roles they'd take them instead of raunch.

I doubt it. Girls are into sexy these days and it is what they consider cool and daring. It was up to the girls to say nay or yay.

Also this is a business and sexy sells. Black Swan for instance. Do you really think people saw it for the acting? Natalie Portmans lesbian and masturbation scenes are why most people saw it. Chloe may decide it is not for her seeing that she is a bit of a dork(self proclaimed).