To not get what the fuss is about Angelina Jolie

[SuperTooToo]

Apart from the fact that she sounds like those cartoon ballerinas .

Never seen her in a film, 'cos the films she makes don't really appeal to me. Same with her husband, Mr Pitt I believe.

She's attractive, but in a normal sort of way.

She now says she doesn't want to be an actress anymore.

And is also sniffy about London "mansion tax", lol.

I'm just not getting the non-news about an averagely attractive actress truth be told.

I'm sure she's a fine person and good luck to her, but why she is on the news as if she was some latterday Mother Theresa, is beyond me.

LaQueen According to current conventions the overwhelming majority of people have a very similar definition of what constitutes 'beauty'. In fact this definition is so specific that a few years back scientistsscientists were able to devise a mathematical formula and turn that into a 'visual grid' that could be transposed over a person's face to see how beautiful they were

I agree, but you will also get people who don't give entirely honest answers when asked what or who they consider beautiful; because they give an answer based on their own agenda - usually, in the case of some middle aged man, the type of woman's looks they think they would have a chance with, (the classic girl next door type) or with women, someone who makes them feel better about their own appearance. So they will rate highly things like character, wrinkles, "life experience", etc..

So for those reasons, I tend to prefer the conventional beauties and don't find for instance Juliet Binoche that beautiful, or Eva Longoria (nose seems to touch her top lip, looks out of proportion). Christy Turlington always looks a bit pointy and beaky and thin of nose and modellesque to be truly beautiful to me. And one woman who is lauded for his supposed immense beauty and I just can't see it, although I'm sure she has character and is a lovely person, is Darcy Bussell. The end part of her nose seems to be missing and all you can see is thread veins.

Angelina Jolie seems to have a much more proportionate face to me than any of them and much better bone structure. I do think she has had her nose made thinner though.

I'd be terrified for my face to get the Chandler analysis!

Actually, like a pp said, I think that her seeming to be quite serious is why some people have a "problem" with her. I suspect she's just shy.
And, blimey, just read chandler's list of who is not beautiful - typing 'bhurka' into Amazon now

Its ok Squoosh, I don't really go around analysing people's faces. Its more of a response to the "what women are supposed to look like" type of posts you tend to see on FB etc and the OP's one, where very beautiful people get criticised pointlessly. I find it a bit fake.

But talking of facial analysis, I do think you can tell a sleazy man just from looking at his face - his skin, his eyes, his expression, etc..

Isn't it amazing that in the whole Jen-Brad-Angelina triangle we are always encouraged by the media to be for or against one of the women when it's clearly Brad who was the common useless denominator in the equation? Why were there no anti-Brad campaigns?

The problem with Angelina is I look at her and see a starved/unhealthy body.

I do too, Nancy. I heard that all her dresses have hip pads in them.

She looks terrible, an absolutely skeletal body and a face full of filler!

She's an actress - because she is a celebrity she is asked to do stuff for charity, which she does - it doesn't make her a saint.

She annoys me far more than the likes of the Kardashians because people do attribute goddess like character to her, she is as attention seeking as any other sleb.

I think Maleficent and Girl Interrupted are brilliant films.

I do sometimes find her humanitarian work sticks in the craw somewhat because she has always been part of probably the top 0.0001% of people in the world in terms of wealth and I wonder how much she really understands of suffering.

She also seems to be a 'lady bountiful' type who expects people to tell her how wonderful she is because of the good works she does. It's all incredibly public and she doesn't really seem to endorse the work of others who are doing really hard work on the ground. She always seems to want the focus on her.

I know that Princess Diana wasn't an angel etc, etc, etc. But when she did her work she always very much focused on bringing publicity to the works of others and garnering support for them. For example Mother Teresa's work with Lepers, Terence Higgins, the Red Cross's landmine work, Headway, Centre Point. Elton John works tirelessly for his AIDS charities but the focus is very much on the issues and raising money rather than him.

I couldn't name someone that Jolie is associated with except the UN, and the UN are known for a somewhat slavish devotion to rich celebrities.

I just get the feeling that a lot of what she does is about her and the image she wants to present of herself rather than a genuine desire to do good. It seems forced and staged and there seems to be little warmth or passion in her actions.

I don't think she is beautiful I know she is attractive technically speaking but I don't think she is beautiful. And no number of other people saying she is so will convince me otherwise.

I lump her in the Tom Cruise school of actors. Can usually act. May well be very nice people. Give me the willies.

Brad Pitt is horribly unattractive though. I don't get people fawning over his looks at all (and I have seen him up close and in real life - looks even more unwashed if anything though he did smell nicer than I expected )

She's an actress - because she is a celebrity she is asked to do stuff for charity, which she does - it doesn't make her a saint.
The saint part is true, but it's bollocks to think all actors do equal amounts for charity.

Tallaline finally someone with stricter criteria than me!

Hardly stricter criteria! Just agreement on who you don't find attractive.

Well kim kardashian auctioned some clothes for charity and only donated 10% of the proceeds, pocketing the rest. Angelina gives a third of her income to charity and donated all the money she was paid for wedding and baby pics which was in the millions of dollar. I've never seen her post a single selfie let alone publish a book full of them. So in comparison to the Kardashians, yes she is a saint!

Another one who doesn't get Angelina.

It's not that I think she good or bad but I can't understand all the attention especially over her looks. She obviously isn't ugly but she always looks a bit thin, hard and unhappy to my mind.

"I dont agree findo grin but im not male"

Neither am I!

I think it's possible for a face to be "perfect" but still not found beautiful by everyone. It's a matter of personal taste. Personality and charisma shine through and make someone gorgeous - add to that some beautiful features and it doesn't matter that they don't completely fit the symmetry paradigm.

Re your comment chandler

with women, someone who makes them feel better about their own appearance. So they will rate highly things like character, wrinkles, "life experience", etc..

With respect, I find your idea that I might find Juliette Binoche more attractive than Angelina because it makes me feel better about the way I look (I wish I looked like Juliette ), to be slightly patronising. Symmetry really isn't everything. (Plus Angelina's face is beginning to take on a slightly plastic over plumped lip look.)

First paragraph doesn't really make sense, should have inserted in a face which is not completely symmetrical at the beginning of the second sentence.

I "get" Angelina Jolie's appeal.

In terms of her looks, I think much of the attention comes from the fact she is unusual looking. Whoever said she is cookie cutter pretty is hilarious. She isn't pretty and might not be beautiful in the Classic sense but has amazing bone structure and is very striking.

Her charity work seems to be a genuine passion and has been since before she adopted her eldest child.

Her acting career has been perhaps hit and miss but no actor has a perfect record.

What I don't get is why people so frequently need to start threads about "not getting" her.

Actually no Texting', I'll agree with you on most of that. Juliet Binoche in The English Patient was very pretty, but to me she lacks the amazing bone structure Angelina Jolie has, and her look was more dependent on good skin, colouring, etc..

I just get fed up with certain quite ordinary looking women being pressed upon us as great beauties, when you see far more beautiful people in your average town centre. I mean, I get that they are in the public eye, but I do get tired of hearing repeatedly (from their PR teams?) about the stunning beauties that are apparently Lauren Silverman (Simon Cowell's current) or Darcy Bussel.

I'm not saying they are unattractive, just not so gorgeous that every time you write about them you need to hear tributes to their supposed great beauty!

OK, rant over!

She's a woman's woman. Women seem to think she's attractive. Most blokes don't. I'm a bloke by the way.

That's not my experience CurioSir! Most men I know drool over her, possibly as an effect of her Lara Croft role. Most women are more meh and don't see her as a woman' woman, thanks to the shagging married men thing.

I've never, ever seen her as a woman's woman. She admits to having no female friends and she's never been particularly sisterly. Look at poor Jen A.