Talk:Scarlett Johansson

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Scarlett Johansson article.
Article policies
Archives: 1
Good article Scarlett Johansson has been listed as one of the Arts good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can delist it, or ask for a reassessment.
December 19, 2006 Good article nominee Listed
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
Good article GA This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
This article is supported by WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed biographical guide to actors and filmmakers on Wikipedia.
Archive
Archives
  1. April 2006 - January 2007


Contents

[edit] Tom Waits tribute album

Is it true that she's going to be recording an album of Waits' songs, or is that just a rumour?--h i s s p a c e r e s e a r c h 08:56, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

True. Is it not sourced in the article? Just google it...Amo 17:40, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
Ah yeah, I see it now.--h i s s p a c e r e s e a r c h 20:38, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Says her grandmother was jewish only

The article used to cite Scarlett Johansson as jewish only implies that her grandmother was jewish not the entire maternal side of her family. Putting Irish family back in since Sloan is an Irish surname. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.69.200.113 (talk) 23:31, 3 April 2007 (UTC).

None of the articles cited imply it was only her grandmother. Besides, you'd need a reliable source that said her grandfather as Irish, not her mother's last name. Also, her grandfather was Jewish too (see the context she mentions him in this interview [1]) Mad Jack 02:11, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Early Life

In the early life section, it says she's the daughter of an architect and producer and granddaughter of a director/screenwriter, that she went to Professional Children's School, but that they had "little money". This rings of PR baloney to me (lots of actors put that sort of thing out in order to prove that theor 'connections" didn't help them in any way.) I think more elaboration or a better source is needed here. ChrisStansfield 06:27, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Although I agree with your thinking, what do you mean by better source? The "little money" claim, at least, is taken from an interview with Parade Magazine. BTW, she only began attending the Professional Children's School in 2002, after she had already starred in several films (including "Ghost World") so that explains that. Mad Jack 06:56, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
I guess by "better source," I mean something that actually reports on news, not "Parade." :) Parade is not exactly "Hard news" if you've ever read it...and the particular columnist who did the interview is a "journalist" in the same way that the back-of-an-anonymous-interviewer's-head who appears in numerous "interviews" sent out to publicize a film in a journalist. Just my opinion, of course, but like I said, it doesn't ring true. ChrisStansfield 08:41, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Descent

My mother is from Sweden and her name is Johansson; she has not Danish descent. My father's name is Sloan and he is from Ireland. In a interview with Scarlett in a magazine, tell she about her mother's background; her mother has German, Dutch, Irish, Scottish, English and Austrian descent and is from Houston in Texas. Actually, her maternal grandmother's name was Dorothy van Almrooy, and van Almrooy it's Dutch. She has no Jewish ancestry. But she can Yiddish and Hebrew; because Josh Hartnett has Jewish descent. And when she dated him so converted she to Judaism. But she has no Jewish ancestry. And her father has Norwegian, Danish and Swedish background, not only Danish descent. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 195.252.42.205 (talk) 18:08, 8 May 2007 (UTC).

LOL. If you can source that, I'll give you a million dollars. You already get points for creativity. Mad Jack 04:19, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Breasts

Why did someone delete my post about her breasts? This statement is notable and well-documented: Her sexiness is largely due to her fantastic breasts, which she often refers to as her "leading ladies." [2] 24.218.25.60 16:41, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Open your curtains, let some daylight in, and put down that magazine. - Dudesleeper · Talk 01:51, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Creepy much

LMAO Sion 04:19, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

They're double D-cup. 209.29.93.161 06:21, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
I'd love to Gitelmesomeofdat! (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 06:06, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image

is that image really the best we can upload? NorthernThunder 03:44, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

I'd say yes, otherwise it wouldn't be there. - Dudesleeper · Talk 12:06, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
Yes, but as this image is licensed CC, we can edit it to make it look better. At least take the extra people out. -- trlkly 00:20, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Atheism

People Magazine's "Chatter" column by Anne Marie Cruz (March 22, 2004 (p.126)) quotes Scarlett Johansson as saying that her parents are atheists, not Jewish. The article reads:

"Saving Miss Scarlett? Long before she won leading roles in films like Lost in Translation and Girl with a Pearl Earring, Scarlett Johansson endured her share of kooky casting agents. ‘I remember a weird audition when I was 10. I gave this great reading, but the woman stopped me and said, “Scarlett, do you accept Jesus as your savior?” ' says Johansson, 19. ‘I was like, don't know. My parents are atheists.” She said, “Oh, really? So what does that make you?” and I said, “Um, a 10-year-old?"’

Based upon this, I had always since thought that she is an atheist, and always found her quite a bit more attractive on account of that. I think that this text from the article is also consistent with the conclusion that she is an atheist:

"When asked about her religious affiliation, Johansson has answered: 'That's a very personal question. I would rather not answer.' She has, however, specified that she celebrates a "little of both" referring to Christmas and Hanukkah.[footnote] She has noted that she dislikes it when celebrities thank God or Jesus in their award acceptance speeches.")

I applaud her for her rational, intelligent mind on the subject. When she says that she and Woody Allen are "[both] Jewish", she may only be referring to the fact that her maternal grandmother is Jewish, which I understand "technically" makes her "Jewish". But I don't think it's accurate to say that the "religious affiliation" of someone who does not believe superstition is "Jewish" just because the person's mother or maternal grandmother is/was "Jewish".

kalan1123 9-1-2007 [I'm still trying to figure out signatures and tidles; sorry] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.175.240.151 (talk) 08:34, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

We aren't allowed to come to our own conclusion, see WP:NOR. --Yamla 14:28, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Well, we're not talking here about drawing "our own conclusions". She said at age 10 she told a casting person that her parents were atheists. I guess you're saying that her atheist parents nevertheless must have raised her in the Jewish faith just as Muslim parents usually raise their children in the Hindu faith and as Jewish parents usually raise their children as Jehovah's Witnesses? Let's face facts: 99.99% of people's brand of superstition -- "religious affiliation" -- is an accident of birth.

I assume that was the point of all the banter in the article and on this talk page about whether her parents were or were not Jewish and whether that's a religion or an ethnic group. Once again, though, here you have a quote from Ms. Johansson herself saying that her parents are atheists. kalan1123 9-1-2007 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.175.240.151 (talk) 18:05, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Judaism is viewed as an ethnicity _and_ a religion by the majority of scholars. It's not like being Italian, French, Nigerian, etc. It's more akin to being, e.g., a Parsi - meaning that the mere fact that you reject the religion doesn't disqualify you as a Jew - hence the commonplace U.S. and Western phenomenon of "secularized Jews." I'll repeat this again - your viewpoint is in the extreme minority. Almost all scholars would consider Ms. Johansson half-Jewish (and some fully-Jewish, as her mother is a Jew). What is with this periodic, out-of-the-blue rash of unsigned comments and modifications to this article attempting to excise all mention of the fact that she has Jewish ancestry on her mother's side? Can we put this to rest? Narsil27 23:32, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
just a comment after reading these comments. you are an idiot narsil.. with this bullshit "your viewpoint is in the extreme minority". well, obviously that means then that their viewpoint is wrong.. because the majority is always right. wanker... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.109.188.149 (talk) 05:29, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
I think you're using the term "read" rather loosely, since if you had actually read the comments on this page, you would understand that the majority/minority dichotomy I was referring to was in the realm of scholarly debate, not the "majority" of people in the the world. Here's a thought - how about you grow a pair, sign your name, and substantively contribute to Wikipedia. As it stands, the only thing that I can imagine my response inspiring in you is another round of expletives. Contribute, or act like a peasant in some other forum.Narsil27 02:44, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

I take it from your comments that you think a person can be 100% atheist and still 100% Jewish based upon the vote of "a majority of scholars" (has someone taken a poll of "scholars"? hasn't recent DNA and human genome research already "de-bunked" the idea that "Judaism is ... an ethnicity" passed along maternally? see, e.g.: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Y-chromosomal_Aaron ). OK. There are atheists of every ethnicity. But I think you mischaracterize my input. The article refers to her "religious affiliation" (not her ethnic affiliation) in mis-identifies her as Jewish. In any event, I have not modified the article; and I have not suggested it be modified in the manner you suggest. I think it's fine to mention that she has Jewish ancestry on her mother's side. But the article lacks mention of her atheism and lacks mention of, or citation to, her statements in which she says her parents were/are atheists and strongly implies that she, like her parents, is atheist (my purpose was to contribute that source, which I quoted in full above). Instead the article asserts (apparently incorrectly) that she identifies religiously as a Jew.

Turning to your ad hominem, "extreme minority"? see, e.g., http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who_is_a_Jew Galileo was once in the "extreme minority" asserting that the earth was a sphere. What is true is not generally determined by majority vote. "Periodic"? "out-of-the-blue"? Should I have first given some advance notice that I was going to post something on this page so it would not have been "out of the blue"? Was there a deadline or schedule for submissions so that my contribution would not have been "periodic"? "What is with this", you ask? I thought "what is with this" was the simple accretion of knowledge and information, which is inherently "periodic" and sporadic. And when I figure out how to "sign" these posts (I guess you have me there) I'll go back and insert signatures and tidles. But you don't need my signature to go and look up People Magazine's March 22, 2004 issue and turn to page 126, so please don't try to denigrate my input by complaining it's "out-of-the-blue", "periodic" and that I have not "signed" my post. If you don't want the information, please just ignore it.

By the way, are you aware that the your own signature hypertext refers to a page which reads, "Wikipedia does not have a user page with this exact title. In general, this page should be created and edited by User:Narsil27."? -- kalan1123 9-6-2007 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.175.240.151 (talk) 16:30, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

I hope for your sake that you're not likening your thinnly-veiled attempt to restart the "religious practice only" debate regarding Judaism to Galileo's assertion that the Earth was a sphere. Especially in the context of a pop culture bio page. In any event, I think the very article you site (i.e., http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who_is_a_Jew) would lend credence to my claim that few people would charaterize as Jews only those who practiced Judaism. With respect to your cite to the Y-chromosome Adam page, I also invite you to look at the article on "Askenazi Jews," which discusses genetics and Judaism (including, e.g., Tay-Sachs screening, etc.). In any event, I think you misconstrued my meaning. I wasn't trying to get into a genetics debate, but I was merely pointing out that, according to Jewish law, a child born of a Jewish mother is a Jew even if they do not practice Judaism. It was a religio-historical, not scientific comment.
You're right about my page, by the way. I'll get on that. I was under the impression that other users could see my contributions, but I guess only I can. Sorry. Narsil27 18:10, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

I think you are way, way off topic. Jewish law has nothing to do with Ms. Johansson's *religious affiliation*. Neither does genetics. That "few people would charaterize [sic] as Jews only those who practiced Judaism", even if such were substantiated, is irrelevant. A person's religious belief, on the one hand, and their ethnicity on the other hand, are two different things. Blurring them and equating them only muddles the discussion and only makes the article confusing and imprecise. The reader should not have to know *anything* about Jewish law or any of the other stuff to which you refer in order to simply read this article about Ms. Johansson and have a clear and accurate understanding of what her religious affiliation and her ethnicity and heritage are. Religio-ethnic-politics should not enter into it. -- kalan1123 9-6-2007 [I know; I know; unsigned once again; mea culpa; mea culpa] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.175.240.151 (talk) 23:02, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm not saying that readers should know anything about religious law or genetics - that is why the article itself doesn't discuss either of those topics. I was merely clarifying my previous comments to you.
Look, the basic jist of my comments is that the fact that her mother came from a Jewish family and her father is Danish are both clearly relevant to her bio. Does the article even mention that she practices any religion? If not, I don't see why your comments re: atheism wouldn't be relevant. Put them in. Just don't take out the fact that her mother's background is Jewish.Narsil27 13:34, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
Anything added to the article should be backed by a reliable source that states what you're adding. Mad Jack 17:33, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Height

How tall is Scarlett? 209.29.93.161 06:21, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Tom Waits Tribute Release Date?

The article says that it is Oct7 2007, that date has passe —Preceding unsigned comment added by Not Worth Waiting For (talk • contribs) 14:06, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Languages spoken

Is she a monoglot? Or does she speak e.g. Danish and or Polish? Some might find this interesting. (Maybe Danes in particular) Mulder1982 23:40, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

It seems possible that she picked up some Danish from her father. As for Polish, almost certainly not; Polish Jews spoke Yiddish and many did not speak Polish at all. All Hallow's Wraith 00:53, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Plastic surgery?

What does the current Us say about her possible plastic surgery? I thought she seemed more interesting "before" if true. --Scottandrewhutchins (talk) 20:59, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Critical consensus

I added this to balance and make the readers be aware of the other sides, the forecasts: amid a "critical consensus, stretching from comments on Gawker to the pages of the New York Times."nymag.com, The Genius of Scarlett Johanssonwashingtonpost.com, Scarlett Johansson Is Almost Nowhere On 'Anywhere' --Florentino floro (talk) 10:28, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Age

Is she really 23 because when she was in Home Alone 3 she was about 16 but it would of made her 11/12 at the time because that was filmed in 1997?