How we know Reese Witherspoon is looking stunning...

…Well from Sophie Forbes’ article of course. Thanks Mail Online. But is this relevant? I’m afraid not.  

Witherspoon looking 'stunning'. Source: Mail Online 

While it is understandable that this article was written for the sole purpose of promoting Witherspoon’s upcoming movie How Do You Know, the headline has no significant relation to the content and comes across as a little opinionated.

Granted, the subject is new, but whether Forbes is right or not about Witherspoon’s looks, it is not a place for the author to make such claim (a small but still biased claim, mind you!) and include it in her article (sorry Sophie, but not too sure if everyone will find her “beautiful in clips from the movie” even if she is looking good).

The rest of the article is nothing too unusual, covering novel and (slightly) more relevant information such as the encounter between Witherspoon’s children with Robert Pattinson and two of her other upcoming movies.

Perhaps it would have been more interesting to know whether the movie will be a success or a flop – similarly to how The Guardian covered it (however that story is a blog post and not a news story, essentially welcoming opinion).

And maybe it would have been more relevant if the story actually focused on the movie for more than four sentences.

Or even better…if it dug up controversial information surrounding the movie – something as ridiculous and untrue as the actress living out the storyline of her movie and having to choose between her real beau Jim Toth and say Jack Nicholson or the movie’s director James L. Brooks.

Anyway, this article is more pointless than informative. It creates little impact.

Yes, Witherspoon may be a famous and prominent figure in Hollywood but even her status can’t drive this story. If only Forbes had used Pattenson’s name in the headline, it would have created more traffic.

Nonetheless, the use of links, images and the movie’s official trailer allows the audience to engage with this short and sweet article, making it more entertaining. The story is also somewhat current with Witherspoon having previously appeared in the news regarding her relationship with Toth around the time the article was written.

Emma Thompson to go lightly on Audrey Hepburn?

Emma Thompson. Source: Splash Photos

Audrey Hepburn's perpetual transcendent image has been defied in one of Peter Bradshaw's blog posts in which he appears to be, to a certain extent, in concurrence with Emma Thompson's 'twee' description of the late actress. 

Controversial? Possibly, as indicated by readers’ comments. 

For avid, loyal Hepburn fans, this may be regarded as the utmost insult, and as Bradshaw would say: "...akin to sacrilege..." For the majority of readers, Hepburn was remembered as “beautiful…timeless and effortlessly elegant” (MotorcyleDiarist 2010).

This story from the Guardian would certainly attract many British readers, puzzled over what the connection between two of their most respectable actresses could be. It may seem peculiar to them that someone of Thompson’s class would have the audacity to criticise the screen icon and “classic beauty” (in Coleman 2010). Additionally, the fact that Thompson has completed a screenplay for the projected remake of My Fair Lady may add further insult to injury to Hepburn’s image.

The iconic image from Breakfast at Tiffany’s of Hepburn as Holly Golightly – who is cleverly referenced in the headline – is sure to captivate readers. Timeless, it reminds generations of the Audrey Hepburn many fell in love with. The impact is instant for those who have ‘grown’ with her. For those who haven’t, they would either be just as charmed or, in some cases, equally disinterested in her.

Audrey Hepburn in Breakfast at Tiffany's. Source: The Sydney Morning Herald

Bradshaw wastes no time in disclosing the key details of the story in the first few paragraphs. And while he appears a little bias by siding with Thompson, he does effectively present us with a generally fair account, providing links to other articles whose author is, for or against Thompson’s perception of Hepburn. This allows us to form our own opinion on the issue, despite knowing the author’s. 

While Bradshaw’s slight bias may be thought of as a drawback, it is worth noting that the nature of a blog does entitle him to share his perspective. An actual news article would not have allowed him to do so.