Superhero Girl Friends

@Fishmomma (11503)
United States
March 31, 2013 9:02am CST
We all know that The Amazing Spiderman has a girlfriend Gwen Stacey played by Emma Stone. I liked the movie, but sure was surprised to learn she was in the movie 29 minutes. I think that was long enough, but sure am questioning Green Lantern. Blake Lively was in the movie 15 minutes. It makes me wonder why was Blake in the movie? Its not the shortest as that is Dark Knight, as Maggie Gyllenhaal was on screen 11 minutes. Other actresses on the short list Gwyneth Paltrow, Natalie Portman, Kirsten Dunst and Katie Holmes with 14 minutes, 22 minutes and 16 minutes. What do you think learning the actresses aren't in the movies very long? Are they seen enough? Are they overpaid?
1 person likes this
4 responses
@AmbiePam (49502)
• United States
1 Apr 13
Yeah, I saw that in Entertainment Weekly. I don't know if the joke is on the people making the movies though. They may not be on screen for very long, but they are paid a bundle. Maybe being overpaid makes up for being under shown in the movies. That being said, I have only seen one Spiderman movie and none of the others. Although I do intend someday to see Thor.
@Fishmomma (11503)
• United States
2 Apr 13
I was surprised to admit Thor was good, as my husband paid for us to see it. He said that no amount of money was to much and even paid for all the food and drinks consumed watching it. I couldn't believe the number of minutes and decided others should know this information. These people should pay back part of their earnings to make watching a movie more affordable.
@stealthy (8188)
• United States
31 Mar 13
For the most part the girl friends are just a side part of the movie and the superhero and the action are the main parts of the movie. So I understand why they would not be in the movies for a long period of time. And actually the 29 minutes for Emma Stone seems plenty long enough to me. For some the big name may have contributed to shorter times because of the money they would get but still the girl friend is just a side feature in these films. As far as overpaid goes, I think many of the so called super stars or big name actors(just like many sports figures) are overpaid. For some actors they have gotten where they are more on looks than on acting ability. I could name a long list but there would probably be disagreements from other people.
@Fishmomma (11503)
• United States
2 Apr 13
I agree about the long list of overpaid actors and sports people. I'm positive many of them really aren't "stars" just make a lot of money and don't have to work as hard for it. Some are born into the right family and past generations worked hard for their money. I'll admit 29 minutes was enough for me, as rather watch Sharon Stone. Emma just one of the family examples. Thanks for posting.
@grvdubey11 (1882)
• India
31 Mar 13
Well they have to put some characters in the movies which are important part of lives of superheroes in comics or graphic novels.In comics though there are many series so writer has lot of space to accommodate female characters you mentioned.But in movie the have 130-150 minutes ,so main focus is on Superhero,main villain and of-course the action scenes,best wishes.
@Fishmomma (11503)
• United States
1 Apr 13
I understand its a short amount of time that a movie is running and we all want to see the superhero. My concern is exactly how much people earn for amount of time they actually worked. We all pay when we watch a movie and these costs are higher when people are overpaid. Thanks for posting.
• Indonesia
31 Mar 13
I think the problem is either because of the script already wrote to be like that or maybe just brcause those actresses have a high pay rate. Or maybe they just don't care how long they will appear on that film, as long they are eing paid, and be on the screen.
@Fishmomma (11503)
• United States
1 Apr 13
My issue is their high pay and being on the screen a short time. I think we all would like a job that we earn lots of money for a short amount of time. Thanks for posting.