Emilia Clarke

chicbones

Grand Dame
Joined
Oct 5, 2015
Posts
1,331
Karma
2,959
Location
London
I'm not impressed at all. She's just so bland to me. I think her face only looks interesting with the platinum blonde on the show. Otherwise, blah, basic looking woman.
You would think that with so many beautiful women on the catwalks whose job is to take care of themselves, esquire would be able to find a "sexiest woman of the year" more suited to the title. Or would that be promoting unrealistic beauty standards and eating disorders?:blahblah:
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

Skinny_Mini_Me

Worker Bee
Joined
May 13, 2012
Posts
639
Karma
370
Location
Scandinavia
You would think that with so many beautiful women on the catwalks whose job is to take care of themselves, esquire would be able to find a "sexiest woman of the year" more suited to the title. Or would that be promoting unrealistic beauty standards and eating disorders?:blahblah:
I once saw a skinny woman and I totally got an eating disorder from it, guys. So thank god they show real women on TV, so I can get rid of my ED. Pass the cookies!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 users

Poppy Bounder

Rising Star
Joined
Apr 9, 2012
Posts
538
Karma
516
Location
Crimson-Auto, Ingerland
You would think that with so many beautiful women on the catwalks whose job is to take care of themselves, esquire would be able to find a "sexiest woman of the year" more suited to the title.
Speaking as the Parent of a Dragon it's refreshing for someone within our community to be acknowledged by a mainstream publication. Reptism remains a widespread societal issue, and Emilia's dubious nomination is hopefully representative of a shift towards more enlightened attitudes. Or heavier ones, depending on your point of view.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 6 users

lightasair

Rising Star
Joined
Mar 25, 2012
Posts
934
Karma
405
Location
Lost in fiction
She's good at what she does. I wish she'd lift a weight or two or ten every now and then. She surely won't be skinny because she's naturally thick (A little bone mass here and little organ mass there), and I'm nor sure skinny would even look great on her. But she could look fit. She should look fit because both DragonMom and Sarah Connor are warriors. I'm getting flashbacks of JLaw when she was a tubs for the roles of Katniss and Mystique. Seriously ladies, look the part. It is an important part of playing the part. /vent
 
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: 2 users

chicbones

Grand Dame
Joined
Oct 5, 2015
Posts
1,331
Karma
2,959
Location
London
I agree 100%, just like a model's body is supposed to fit sample sizes, an actor/actress' body is supposed to fit their character.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users

Natalie

Grand Dame
Joined
Aug 5, 2013
Posts
1,427
Karma
1,863
Age
26
Location
United States
I agree 100%, just like a model's body is supposed to fit sample sizes, an actor/actress' body is supposed to fit their character.
So here's a solution: start writing better looking characters!

Fer real tho. I was reading Gail Carriger's series The Parasol Protectorate and I had to stop at the third book because the author couldn't refrain from talking about how fat her character is- from the wiki, "It is stated on many occasions that she is rather tall, being not much shorter than her husband, and that she is plus-sized, with a large chest." I don't need to know that shit. Let me keep dreaming of a thin, waif-like protagonist, shit.

[/RANT]
 

FrançoiseEllyn

Grand Dame
Joined
May 25, 2015
Posts
1,780
Karma
2,906
Location
Salt Lake City
So here's a solution: start writing better looking characters!

Fer real tho. I was reading Gail Carriger's series The Parasol Protectorate and I had to stop at the third book because the author couldn't refrain from talking about how fat her character is- from the wiki, "It is stated on many occasions that she is rather tall, being not much shorter than her husband, and that she is plus-sized, with a large chest." I don't need to know that shit. Let me keep dreaming of a thin, waif-like protagonist, shit.

[/RANT]
Well what use would writing be with no description? Yeah, writers should definitely not write better looking characters for a slew of reasons. As much as I would have loved to see a gorgeously handsome Hagrid or Dumbledore, it's entirely unrealistic and frankly, boring as hell. Also, you can only write a 13 or 14 year old's appearance to look a certain way before it gets too Lolita-ish.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 users

Natalie

Grand Dame
Joined
Aug 5, 2013
Posts
1,427
Karma
1,863
Age
26
Location
United States
Well what use would writing be with no description? Yeah, writers should definitely not write better looking characters for a slew of reasons. As much as I would have loved to see a gorgeously handsome Hagrid or Dumbledore, it's entirely unrealistic and frankly, boring as hell. Also, you can only write a 13 or 14 year old's appearance to look a certain way before it gets too Lolita-ish.
I wasn't referring to GoT, Danny's written descriptions are perfectly fine by me, Martin doesn't usually go out of his way to bring up how exceptionally large or small she is- I take issue when writers make it a point to constantly talk about their characters appearance. Yes, we get it, three books in and the protagonist is Italian with big tits and kind of fat, you don't have to fucking tell us every goddamn page.

Off topic rant, I know, but I had to put down The Parasol Protectorate because of that. And no, of course not all characters should be written as super handsome or beautiful, that's not at all what I said.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: 1 user

heylolyta

Rookie
Joined
Feb 9, 2014
Posts
79
Karma
65
Age
26
Location
CA
I don't think she lost too much. I love her, but this isn't happening. The face is the result of makeup. The waist appears thin due to the angle (she's doing a semi-rotation with her body). The arms, the outer curves of the thighs and bum are better indicators.
I agree, I saw the movie and she does not look like this AT ALL.
 

christinechina

Rising Star
Joined
Jun 20, 2017
Posts
311
Karma
667
Location
usa
I wasn't referring to GoT, Danny's written descriptions are perfectly fine by me, Martin doesn't usually go out of his way to bring up how exceptionally large or small she is- I take issue when writers make it a point to constantly talk about their characters appearance. Yes, we get it, three books in and the protagonist is Italian with big tits and kind of fat, you don't have to fucking tell us every goddamn page.

Off topic rant, I know, but I had to put down The Parasol Protectorate because of that. And no, of course not all characters should be written as super handsome or beautiful, that's not at all what I said.
Okay I know this is a really old post but I am obsessed with Gail Carriger's work and kind of want to weigh in on the subject.

Honestly, I found the fact that Alexia wasn't conventionally pretty (by the fictional society's standards) to be so refreshing. I could sort of relate to her-when your face isn't anything special, you kind of just have to suck it up and deal with it (though there's always make-up nowadays ;)). And although I myself aspire to be skinny-skinny, I am 100% for body positivity, as long as it promotes healthy lifestyles/weights and includes everyone (fat, skinny, in between, whatever). So Alexia being more "curvaceous" was actually more of a plus to me.

In regards to how Carriger constantly mentions her appearance, I actually think it's intentional. Victorian society was very focused on outer appearances, especially in terms of how they regarded women, and I think the repeated descriptions of Alexia were meant to highlight that. It felt more like satiric irony to me. I don't know-I could be totally wrong, but that's just my two cents :D

Alright, back on topic :D

I honestly don't like Emilia Clarke's outer appearance as Dany, but as long as the acting is good I'm all for it. Dany is described as being rather slender in the books, and Emilia Clarke, well...isn't. Again, I'm all for body positivity, but I also like accurate representation.

I can't argue with her acting, though. From what I've seen, it's awesome! And I guess that's what really matters at the end of the day...how well an actor/actress acts.

What a gorgeous face though :luv:







EDIT: And I agree that she would look 10 times better if she toned up. She'd look so much more badass :D
 

vie

Super Star
Joined
Feb 8, 2016
Posts
859
Karma
1,767
Okay I know this is a really old post but I am obsessed with Gail Carriger's work and kind of want to weigh in on the subject.

Honestly, I found the fact that Alexia wasn't conventionally pretty (by the fictional society's standards) to be so refreshing. I could sort of relate to her-when your face isn't anything special, you kind of just have to suck it up and deal with it (though there's always make-up nowadays ;)). And although I myself aspire to be skinny-skinny, I am 100% for body positivity, as long as it promotes healthy lifestyles/weights and includes everyone (fat, skinny, in between, whatever). So Alexia being more "curvaceous" was actually more of a plus to me.

In regards to how Carriger constantly mentions her appearance, I actually think it's intentional. Victorian society was very focused on outer appearances, especially in terms of how they regarded women, and I think the repeated descriptions of Alexia were meant to highlight that. It felt more like satiric irony to me. I don't know-I could be totally wrong, but that's just my two cents :D

Alright, back on topic :D

I honestly don't like Emilia Clarke's outer appearance as Dany, but as long as the acting is good I'm all for it. Dany is described as being rather slender in the books, and Emilia Clarke, well...isn't. Again, I'm all for body positivity, but I also like accurate representation.

I can't argue with her acting, though. From what I've seen, it's awesome! And I guess that's what really matters at the end of the day...how well an actor/actress acts.

What a gorgeous face though :luv:







EDIT: And I agree that she would look 10 times better if she toned up. She'd look so much more badass :D
I agree with everything you're saying, it's just the first half is a reply to a discussion from TWO YEARS ago, and the rest of your comment has been reiterated since page 1.
 

vanitas

Grand Dame
Joined
Jan 26, 2015
Posts
977
Karma
2,632
I agree 100%, just like a model's body is supposed to fit sample sizes, an actor/actress' body is supposed to fit their character.
Neither she nor Iain Glen fit their book descriptions which is why I spend most of their scenes thinking either 'her arms look fat' or 'why the hell isn't she into Ser Jorah, he's really attractive?'
 
  • Agree
Reactions: 1 user

Rhianna

Rising Star
Joined
Apr 7, 2012
Posts
923
Karma
838
I think she falls into the 'waste of face' category - her face is nearly beautiful

 
  • Agree
Reactions: 2 users

Velore

Rookie
Joined
Oct 7, 2017
Posts
27
Karma
51
Location
Italy
I know this thread hasn’t been updated in months now but:

https://www.google.it/amp/www.daily...Thrones-Emilia-Clarke-gets-enviable-body.html

This is the link to an interview/article about Emilia’s workout regime during the filming of GOT with the celebrity trainer Duigan:
“Australian personal trainer, James Duigan has trained her over the years and recently revealed some of the key tips he has for those looking to sculpt a lean yet healthy physique. Emilia Clarke, who plays the Queen of Dragons in Game of Thrones, follows a regime to stay in shape and maintain her stamina during hours of intense filming sessions.”

As many of you I was 100% sure that didn’t work out at all, James Duigan is quite known and I’m sure he is a pro at his job but... I wonder how it’s possible to be on such a strict regimen and still manage to look that soft and chubby. Wow.