Throwback - When Emma Watson revealed the reason for her acting break: "The thing I found really hard..."
, the prolific actress, has been avoiding being in front of the screen since she wrapped
Greta Gerwig
's 2019 hit, 'Little Women.' While she still stands as a fan-favourite persona, the 35-year-old once expressed her reasons for stepping away from acting.
Emma Watson's hiatus from Hollywood...
In a 2023 interview with the Financial Times, Emma expressed that she wasn't very happy with the profession. Not only did she feel caged, but Watson also felt discontent with how little she had control over something she had to sell to the audience.
'The thing I found really hard was that I had to go out and sell something that I really didn't have very much control over,' she said, before adding, 'To stand in front of a film and have every journalist be able to say, 'How does this align with your viewpoint?' It was very difficult to have to be the face and the spokesperson for things where I didn't get to be involved in the process.'
Furthermore, Emma opened up about being accountable, which caused frustration as she didn't have a voice or didn't have say. She continued about wanting to not hate herself, 'And I started to realise that I only wanted to stand in front of things where if someone was going to give me flak about it, I could say, in a way that didn't make me hate myself, 'Yes, I screwed up, it was my decision, I should have done better.''
Will Emma Watson ever return?
While the wall between acting and Emma Watson still stands, it begs the question of her return on screen. The answer would be yes; however, the 'Harry Potter' actress is happy to wait until the next project aligns with her values. The British actress said, 'I love what I do. It's finding a way to do it where I don't have to fracture myself into different faces and people. And I just don't want to switch into robot mode any more.
Does that make sense?'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
7 hours ago
- Indian Express
Syndey Sweeney's ad isn't selling ‘great jeans', but the body in them — and that's the problem
'Hey, eyes up here,' says Sydney Sweeney as the camera pans down from her face, focusing on her breasts for a moment too long. It's an advertisement for American Eagle jeans, but you wouldn't know until the punchline arrives: 'Sydney Sweeney has great jeans.' Arguably, the ad could be for anything. Brands have long sexualised women to sell everything from cars and deodorants to body lotions and even mango juice. Remember Katrina Kaif caressing a mango for 45 seconds, inhaling and biting into it, as a breathy voice whispers promises of 'pure mango pleasure'? Since the early days of commercial advertising, women have been slotted into tired, recurring tropes. They are either objectified, used as props next to a male lead, or portrayed as the ever-smiling, perfect housewife or mother. For years, the 'Lux girl' was promoted as the ideal beauty standard. Then came the 'Santoor mom,' where women were told they could raise a child, yet must look like they hadn't aged a day. Let's not even get into hair removal ads, where female confidence is portrayed as being innately tied to body hair — or rather, the absence of it. Which brings us to American Eagle's latest campaign that seems to have divided the American polity. Some argue that Sweeney's ad smacks of racism, while others have dismissed the criticism as a product of 'wokeness'. At the centre of the backlash is a teaser video where Sweeney says: 'My body's composition is determined by my genes.' She continues, 'Jeans are passed down from parents to offspring, often determining traits like hair colour, personality and even eye colour. My jeans are blue.' Another video features a poster that reads, 'Sydney Sweeney has great genes,' with the word 'genes' crossed out and replaced by 'jeans'. Critics argue that casting a blue-eyed, blonde, conventionally attractive white woman while referencing 'great genes' inadvertently echoes eugenics — the discredited pseudo-scientific belief in racial and genetic superiority. Coined in the 1880s by British scientist Francis Galton, 'eugenics' linked heredity to intelligence, morality, and social status. It gained currency in the West post-World War I, but its most chilling manifestation came under Nazi Germany, where Adolf Hitler co-opted eugenics to justify the genocide of European Jews. The Aryan ideal – tall, blonde, blue-eyed, athletic – of the Nazis became a propaganda tool used to promote a 'master race,' a theory now universally debunked. Not everyone shared the criticism. Some brushed aside the backlash, calling it an overreaction, and arguing that the genius of the ad was all about a 'simple pun'. Fox News host Katrina Campins said the ad was simply a reminder that 'hot women sell products.' And that, precisely, is the problem. Throughout the ad, the camera pans across Sweeney's body as she smiles, stares into the lens, and, in one clip, adjusts her jeans while saying, 'I bet you wanna try these jeans.' The messaging appears more targeted at the male gaze than at women shopping for denim. The subtext seems to be: buy these jeans, and maybe you will look like her. Or better still, be desired like her. In pandering to this idea of desirability, the ad joins a long tradition of marketing that reduces women to their bodies — packaging female sexuality to sell a fantasy. Social media, meanwhile, has turned Sweeney into a shorthand for an outdated ideal of womanhood. One user wrote, 'What makes Sydney Sweeney so attractive is that she invites and welcomes you to look at her sexually.' Another said, 'She reminds men of the way women acted before fourth-wave feminism. She smiles. She's an actual woman.' Advertising doesn't operate in a vacuum. It shapes, reflects, and often reinforces societal standards of desirability, particularly for women. And it's a loop. Brands reflect culture, and culture reflects advertising. Few campaigns ever attempt to break that cycle, save for the token International Women's Day post. A 2024 report by the UK's Advertising Standards Authority found that 45 per cent of respondents were concerned about 'idealised body images of women' in ads, and 44 per cent were worried about the 'objectification of women and girls'. Meanwhile, Creative X, a brand content firm, found that although brands are spending more to portray women in non-stereotypical roles, they still overwhelmingly appear in family settings rather than professional ones. And women with darker skin tones make up less than 30 per cent of female representation in ads. Of course, there have been exceptions. One thinks of the Nirma ad that replaced women cheerfully scrubbing clothes with four women helping push an ambulance out of the mud while the men looked on. The Hemas, Rekhas, Jayas and Sushmas shifted from domesticity to strength. Then, there's Mohey's 'Kanyamaan' campaign, which critiqued the idea of daughters as paraaya dhan (another's property). These examples stand out precisely because they are rare. And let's be clear: the problem isn't Sweeney's sex appeal. A 27-year-old woman celebrating her sexuality can be liberating. The issue is when that sexuality is carefully curated, commodified, and used to reinforce the same narrow beauty standards that advertising has peddled and profited from for decades. When a campaign leans on innuendo and wordplay, all the while a conventionally attractive woman flirts with the language of genetics, it isn't just trying to be clever. It's reiterating, subtly, but persistently, who gets to be seen as desirable. And when that happens, the ad isn't selling 'great jeans', but the body that wears them. Sonal Gupta is a senior sub-editor on the news desk. She writes feature stories and explainers on a wide range of topics from art and culture to international affairs. She also curates the Morning Expresso, a daily briefing of top stories of the day, which won gold in the 'best newsletter' category at the WAN-IFRA South Asian Digital Media Awards 2023. She also edits our newly-launched pop culture section, Fresh Take. ... Read More
India Today
7 hours ago
- India Today
Exclusive: Sofia Carson, Corey Mylchreest on Bollywood, chemistry, love language
Sofia Carson and Corey Mylchreest's latest romantic drama, 'My Oxford Year', explores love, ambition, and grief against the backdrop of academia. Directed with quiet emotional intensity, the film is based on Julia Whelan's bestselling novel. In an exclusive interaction with India Today, the duo spoke about the possibilities of exploring Bollywood.'My Oxford Year' features Carson as Anna, a driven American Rhodes scholar, and Mylchreest as Jamie, a witty and emotionally complex British man she falls for. While talking to us, Carson made it clear that Bollywood holds a strong appeal for be in a Bollywood film? Yes, I would be so honoured. That would be so cool,' she said. 'I'm such a fan of Bollywood and that entire world,' she added. The actor, who is also a singer, said she'd love to explore the music and dance-heavy storytelling the Indian industry is known for. 'I can sing, and Corey can dance as well,' she added, teasingly referencing him performing 'Yellow' in the movie.'Bollywood is waiting for us,' she the onscreen chemistry between the leads in the show has been widely praised, however, the actors were quick to deflect credit jokingly.'We actually quite dislike each other. That's why it's the best work as actors till date,' Mylchreest said, tongue firmly in cheek. 'We're actually green-screened in together in the same room,'Carson, laughing, added, 'We actually cannot be in the same room.''My Oxford Year' leans into emotional storytelling through restrained performances and a poetic love language between the characters. When asked about their personal love languages off-screen, both actors reflected thoughtfully.'For me, physical touch is a big one. Also, quality time and maybe acts of service—doing things for the person you care about,' Carson in contrast, said with mock seriousness: 'Just gifts. Three times. Gift, gift, gifts. Give me gifts, and I will give you gifts.'The film is currently streaming on Netflix and marks the two stars sharing screen space for the first time together.- EndsMust Watch
New Indian Express
8 hours ago
- New Indian Express
Beloved children's author Allan Ahlberg dies at 87
This undated photo supplied by Penguin Random House shows British author Allan Ahlberg, who has died at the age of 87. This undated photo supplied by Penguin Random House shows British author Allan Ahlberg, who has died at the age of 87. (Penguin Random House via AP) LONDON: British writer Allan Ahlberg, author of more than 150 children's books including classics like 'Eat Peach Pear Plum' and 'The Jolly Postman,' has died, his publisher said Friday. He was 87. Penguin Random House said Ahlberg died on Tuesday. It did not give a cause of death. Ahlberg's books introduced generations of young children to reading through simple rhymes, sharp observation and gentle humor. Many were co-created with his illustrator wife Janet Ahlberg, who died in 1994. 'Peepo!' (1981) gave a baby's-eye-view of the world and was interactive in a delightfully analogue way, with peep-holes in the pages to spy the next scenes. 'The Jolly Postman' (1986) was even more inventive, incorporating postcards and letters in envelopes for children to engage with while they followed a letter-carrier delivering mail to fairy tale characters. Penguin Random House said it 'pushed at the boundaries of what it is possible for a book to be.' Ahlberg also wrote books of jokes, including 'The Ha Ha Bonk Book,' and poetry for primary school-age children, including 'Please Mrs. Butler' and 'Heard it in the Playground.' Born in 1938 and raised by adoptive parents in a working-class home in OIdbury, central England, Ahlberg worked as a 'postman, plumber's mate and grave digger,' according to his publisher, before becoming a teacher. He met Janet at teacher training college and the couple's first book, 'Here are the Brick Street Boys,' was published in 1975.
