Megan Fox Says Directors Wanted Her On The Casting Couch

Hollywood rag ^ | 06.05.09

[Tuketu]

"...directors have tried to bed her since she found fame"

[Revolting cat!]

Now at last I know who the whore brands are for (I had thought they were for other women, like so many things women do.) They’re for married dudes, who’ll never have to look at them again, dude!

[lainie]

There ya go.

[lainie]

Much better!

[Perdogg]

I didn’t know that.

[Lucius Cornelius Sulla]

it might hold a higher meaning than that.

This thread is not about 'higher meaning'.

[JoJo Gunn]

The dumbing down of the Freep continues.

[meyer]

This thread is not about 'higher meaning'.

I have no idea why I expected (or at least hoped for) otherwise.

[since1868]

I think what she really means is that all men suck and Im going lez.

[boatbums]

Looks like a younger version of Angelina Jolie - tatoos and all. She doesn’t have a fraction of her acting talent, though.

[Perdogg]

LOL Nothing is stopping her, this is America not Iran.

[ChildOfThe60s]

In 2 years she’ll be in the porn industry IMO

She is now, in a manner of speaking. She's just not screwing on the screen.

[tanknetter]

HUH? Are you talking the same woman that said “I would rather have an image that is wild and promiscuous than to go out of my way to be proper all of the time.”

I won't speak about her other self-centered comments, but on this one I think she needs the benefit of the doubt and the assumption that it's being taken out of context.

She's setting up an "or" situation. Either she goes out of her way to be proper all the time, *or* she gets a wild and promiscuous rep. She's not saying she's wild and promiscuous, but that she's not going to go out of her way act proper all the time and if a "rep" is the price for that then so be it. She's really speaking to how prim/proper vs. wild/promiscuous is a black/white construct and a false choice ... but if forced into it from a perception standpoint, she'd rather be herself and enjoy herself and have the bad rep.

That's a pretty good point, IMHO. I'm raising my children in a similar manner. If the choice is for them to sit in school like good little stepford children and accept force-feeding of Liberal indoctrination, for instance, or speak up and challenge (respectfully) a teacher's arguments on merit and points, I've (hopefully) instilled in them that they should do the latter. Even if it means that the teachers start seeing them as "difficult". And that I'll back them up 110% if they do.

[JSDude1]

Except she’s bi..

[SunkenCiv]

She sounds like she’s full of herself.

[long pause]

I could add a comment to that, but I don’t want to be banned.

[airborne]

From another thread - http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2266240/posts

“-To which she adds, “I would rather have an image that is wild and promiscuous than to go out of my way to be proper all of the time.”

---

So it’s OK for her to act and talk all slutty, and then later pretend like she’s all innocent and wholesome, while accusing other Hollywood scumbags of behaving just like she does.

And I’m supposed to be impressed that she’s fooled a few clueless tabloid reporters?

[StilettoRaksha]

She has a gorgeous face.

[river rat]

All her skank stamps must of confused the “directors”....
At least she is in compliance with the “truth in packaging” laws - and is appropriately “marked” to warn customers...

[junta]

And in other news about this “babe” she wants to sic the Hollywood CGI golem (transformers) on all those “nasty middle american bible beaters”, yep, real fine lady there.

[Mamzelle]

Nope, doesn’t have Jolie’s shape, and she’s a little buck-toothed. (Wouldn’t comment, but this girl’s public persona is highly unpleasant. That always hurts someone’s looks in my book.)