Katie Holmes is too posh to play Joey Potter

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I always thought this, and I always thought Leighton meester seemed like she didn’t have the right air to play Blair Waldorf. This was before I knew their backgrounds. Once I did, it all made sense. Especially since neither is a great actress.

Katie at least looked sort of like a high schooler. Leighton looked and came off like some 30 year old who was rode hard and put away wet.

[Anonymous]

Joey was absolutely adorable but Katie is effortlessly elegant which I wonder if someone like Joey would be. Her mannerisms, how she talks and carries herself etc

[Anonymous]

[twitter]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I disagree. The one bit of casting I DO find weird about this show, though, is that I think Joey and Pacey look like siblings and it's gross because they're supposed to be love interests.

It's not gross because they are not siblings. I was often confused as the "sister" of my boyfriends when I was a teen. People are often drawn to people who resemble them in some way.

Neither one is also that unusual looking if you compare them to kids at a mostly white New England school. There were a lot of kids at my suburban high school who could have passed for their siblings.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I always thought this, and I always thought Leighton meester seemed like she didn’t have the right air to play Blair Waldorf. This was before I knew their backgrounds. Once I did, it all made sense. Especially since neither is a great actress.

Katie at least looked sort of like a high schooler. Leighton looked and came off like some 30 year old who was rode hard and put away wet.

She looked young; I don't know what you're talking about. Ger style was older, but not her actual look.

[Anonymous]

I agree in the sense that she looked like she was wearing new clothes from the Gap or J Crew instead of Walmart or the thrift shop. And her hair and makeup was always nicely done. But that’s TV, they don’t want to show actual working class life or poverty because it’s not pretty.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Elegance is something people are born with, it is inate. It has nothing to do with background and money.

Many of the world's most elegant super models came from modest or impoverished backgrounds.

Your theory is bunk.

Idk, Dakota Johnson for instance always seems posh to me: looks, way she holds herself, way she talks. She cannot play poor or normal wealth at all. With models you do not get a full picture of the person and their speech.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Elegance is something people are born with, it is inate. It has nothing to do with background and money.

Many of the world's most elegant super models came from modest or impoverished backgrounds.

Your theory is bunk.

Idk, Dakota Johnson for instance always seems posh to me: looks, way she holds herself, way she talks. She cannot play poor or normal wealth at all. With models you do not get a full picture of the person and their speech.

Dakota Johnson doesn't have poise. She sits with a slump. She is much more naturally trailer park than mansion house.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I always thought this, and I always thought Leighton meester seemed like she didn’t have the right air to play Blair Waldorf. This was before I knew their backgrounds. Once I did, it all made sense. Especially since neither is a great actress.

Katie at least looked sort of like a high schooler. Leighton looked and came off like some 30 year old who was rode hard and put away wet.

lol bait

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I agree in the sense that she looked like she was wearing new clothes from the Gap or J Crew instead of Walmart or the thrift shop. And her hair and makeup was always nicely done. But that’s TV, they don’t want to show actual working class life or poverty because it’s not pretty.

Well, Dawson’s Creek at one point had a deal with American Eagle so all the main characters had to wear whatever was the newest AE clothing.

[Anonymous]

The issue is more in the production than the actor. At the time every WB show seemed to have some J Crew, Gap, Nuetrogena ad campaign going. Joey’s hair looked like crap in the last two seasons because she was hocking hair dye and fried it from all the coloring.

I thought Joey was styled well the first few seasons but then around season 4 branding seemed to take over.

[Anonymous]

J Crew was the official clothing brand for the first couple seasons, then American Eagle took over. So wardrobe was limited to head to toe in these brands, which means at least clothing wise nobody really looked richer or poorer than anyone else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Elegance is something people are born with, it is inate. It has nothing to do with background and money.

Many of the world's most elegant super models came from modest or impoverished backgrounds.

Your theory is bunk.

Idk, Dakota Johnson for instance always seems posh to me: looks, way she holds herself, way she talks. She cannot play poor or normal wealth at all. With models you do not get a full picture of the person and their speech.

Well, the issue is Dakota can't play much of anything because she can't act, period. She has also leaned into a very cool and aloof persona in recent years. Ten years ago, she seemed very normal in films like How to be Single. Nothing about her gives off a quality of seeming so elegant that it'd be crazy to imagine her as a person who grew up poor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I always thought this, and I always thought Leighton meester seemed like she didn’t have the right air to play Blair Waldorf. This was before I knew their backgrounds. Once I did, it all made sense. Especially since neither is a great actress.

Katie at least looked sort of like a high schooler. Leighton looked and came off like some 30 year old who was rode hard and put away wet.

Who do you think should have played Blair instead? I’m waiting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Elegance is something people are born with, it is inate. It has nothing to do with background and money.

Many of the world's most elegant super models came from modest or impoverished backgrounds.

Your theory is bunk.

Idk, Dakota Johnson for instance always seems posh to me: looks, way she holds herself, way she talks. She cannot play poor or normal wealth at all. With models you do not get a full picture of the person and their speech.

Dakota Johnson doesn't have poise. She sits with a slump. She is much more naturally trailer park than mansion house.

Dakota Johnson is a weird example because while obviously she grew up very rich, her upbringing wasn't like "to the manor born." She mostly grew up on her dad's ranch in Colorado, riding horses and then visiting her parents on movie sets. It's a weird, nontraditional upbringing even among wealthy kids, which is why she has such a weird personality. It's not trailer park, it's not mansion house. It's weird Hollywood nepo baby bubble, but not even like the classic LA or NYC nepo kids where they have a specific type.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The issue is more in the production than the actor. At the time every WB show seemed to have some J Crew, Gap, Nuetrogena ad campaign going. Joey’s hair looked like crap in the last two seasons because she was hocking hair dye and fried it from all the coloring.

I thought Joey was styled well the first few seasons but then around season 4 branding seemed to take over.

I never watched Dawson's Creek but a lot of TV shows ruin class issues in the writing because TV production is allergic to actual lower and middle class people.

For example, the book Big Little Lies takes place in Australia and has some really nuanced friction between characters based on class. On the TV show, they portray every single character as disgustingly rich with a multimillion dollar house right on the water and a designer wardrobe and highlights that clearly require an $800 salon visit every month, plus there's one lower class single mom who lives in a condo and everyone feels sorry for her. In the book it's way more complicated than that. There are a couple extremely wealthy families but most other families are more middle or UMC class. The single mom is an outlier because she's new, very young, and a single mom, but many of the other moms relate to her strongly because they are not so far removed from her situation financially. There are these interesting dynamics between one of the main characters and her ex husband that are rooted in their respective finances, and the book is really thoughtful about how these are portrayed.

But on the show, they obviously wanted to offer up a bunch of coastal real estate porn and make all these famous actresses look as rich and perfect as possible, and they totally flatten out all this nuance to the point where it's completely pointless. The story is just a soap opera of idle rich people behaving badly instead of a more complex dance of people with various power dynamics and insecurities tied to their relative socioeconomic positions and histories.

TV ruins things a lot.