Jump to content

Rachel McAdams on taking breaks from acting and rejecting major roles


Recommended Posts

  • ATRL Moderator
Posted

A legend with RANGE :wanda:We stan 

  • Replies 53
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Taylor fanboy

    4

  • Bey'Knight

    3

  • duybeeGAshantiGA

    2

  • JustHoran

    2

Posted

The range she showed from 2004-2005 was astounding:

-Mean Girls (villain in a teen comedy)

-The Notebook (female lead in a romantic drama)

-Wedding Crashers (main love interest in a rom-com)

-Red Eye (lead in a contained thriller)

-The Family Stone (ensemble in a dramedy)

 

Im glad she did what she needed to do for her own sanity, but imagine if she had taken one or two of those roles in 2006 :jonny: 

 

Posted

Am I the only one who finds her boring? 

Posted (edited)

Someone should do a crossover of Morning Glory and Devil Wears Prada, where Rachel is now the Head of the News Division, and Anne is now a news anchor. :WAP:

Edited by Taylor fanboy
Posted

I just lover her so much!

 

If anything, her PR team and/or agency has failed her bigtime.

 

She was supposed to be a SUPERSTAR. :jonnycat:

Posted
13 minutes ago, GraceRandolph said:

Am I the only one who finds her boring? 

Yes, you are the only one and no one asked.

Posted

What a queen :heart2:

 

She deserves to be even bigger than she is, but she has so many iconic roles and is so respected. I'm glad it was her choice and she lives a nice peaceful life.

Posted

I really love this interview and photoshoot!

Posted

She’s an icon :clap3:I miss her tho

Posted

She was OUTSTANDING in Spotlight, I highly recommend you watch that movie if you haven't already.

Posted
4 hours ago, Taylor fanboy said:

I just lover her so much!

 

If anything, her PR team and/or agency has failed her bigtime.

 

She was supposed to be a SUPERSTAR. :jonnycat:

I don’t see how they failed her since it’s clear that a life separate from the celebrity world was what Rachel wanted. If Rachel wanted to be a gigantic superstar, I’m pretty sure her team would’ve made it happen. But that wasn’t what she wanted. 
 

Either way, Rachel stays winning because everyone WILL remember her for the majority of her films. Almost every role she’s taken all have been iconic.

Posted
5 hours ago, Shelter said:

She was offered The Devil Wears Prada 3 times. Would've been perfect for her. 

Regina george vs miranda priestly oh wow

 

Posted

She should’ve done devil wears Prada 


that movie and mean girls I can watch over and over again and not get bored 

Posted

Turning down The Devil Wears Prada opposite Meryl was a mistake. Especially since she been in so many duds since. When you're at the height of your career getting the very best roles around you should take them while you can.

Posted

I need a Game Night 2 

Posted
14 hours ago, RockStarShit101 said:

I assume it was anne's role, right? 

My poor fav, she wasn’t even second choice but she slayed anyway and that’s what history’ll remember. 

Posted
12 hours ago, Taylor fanboy said:

I just lover her so much!

 

If anything, her PR team and/or agency has failed her bigtime.

 

She was supposed to be a SUPERSTAR. :jonnycat:

How are you missing the point? She didn’t want to be a SUPERSTAR. Not everyone clamours for overzealous fan mania like Taylor. 

Posted
7 hours ago, Crank_It_Up said:

I don’t see how they failed her since it’s clear that a life separate from the celebrity world was what Rachel wanted. If Rachel wanted to be a gigantic superstar, I’m pretty sure her team would’ve made it happen. But that wasn’t what she wanted. 
 

Either way, Rachel stays winning because everyone WILL remember her for the majority of her films. Almost every role she’s taken all have been iconic.

 

2 minutes ago, Bey'Knight said:

How are you missing the point? She didn’t want to be a SUPERSTAR. Not everyone clamours for overzealous fan mania like Taylor. 

You can be a SUPERSTAR even without overworking yourself. See Beyoncé for example.

Posted

Mother :wanda:

Posted
23 minutes ago, Taylor fanboy said:

 

You can be a SUPERSTAR even without overworking yourself. See Beyoncé for example.

But that’s not what she wanted.

 

I adore Rachel so much and I have always loved her films and her acting. She’s superb, and I agree with pne comment here, her performance in Spotlight was one of the best I’ve seen from her.

 

She’s also very beautiful and she’s not aging! :eek:

Posted
12 hours ago, Taylor fanboy said:

I just lover her so much!

 

If anything, her PR team and/or agency has failed her bigtime.

 

She was supposed to be a SUPERSTAR. :jonnycat:

How?? She literally just admitted in the interview that she was the one turning down big roles, meaning if she wanted to be bigger, she could have :rip:

Posted

:clap3: 

Posted (edited)

She says she’s super fine and living a great life and people here saying she failed and made mistakes…… lol this woman already booked classics, an oscar nom and has built her name. she very clearly wanted more privacy and she aint alone. if you check Anne H. and other talented ladies from their era (Emily Blunt, Natalie Portman, Keira Knightley, Emma Stone) they all had this in common! It was tough being uber-famous in the 2000s and they said nope (while somehow still booking franchises and acclaimed movies, some bombs too lol)

Edited by liquiddiamonds
Posted
7 hours ago, Taylor fanboy said:

 

You can be a SUPERSTAR even without overworking yourself. See Beyoncé for example.

Beyoncé can only pull off her current approach because of the legwork she’d done in the noughties. 

Posted

I mean, The Devil Wears Prada is an iconic classic but it was based on a panned book. At the time maybe she couldn't have known it would be what it became. Definitely a mistake but you have to look at it from her pov back then.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.