Lindsay Lohan turns down Transformers

Lindsay Lohan doesn’t want to be in the new Transformers movie because she doesn’t want to be typecast as a “hot chick in short shorts.” The actress was rumored to be in the running to replace Megan Fox in the third film in the action series, but the role ended up going to Victoria’s Secret model Rosie Huntington-Whiteley. Lindsay now claims she would never agree to appear in the film franchise because she wants people to appreciate her acting skills and not her body. She wrote on her Twitter page in response to a fan, who asked why she hadn’t accepted the role: “it’s just not my kinda movie – but it’s also a type cast situation – hot chick in short shorts, daisy duke situation, right???”

Share this article:

Comments & Discussion

  1. Ch4os • June 4, 2010 @ 11:00 AM

    Thank you GOD!!!!!! she would probly distry Transformers 3. Shes so horible at acting, plus she kinda skanky lookin.

  2. Sarah M • June 4, 2010 @ 11:04 AM

    oh my how she could possible talk like that. she thinks she is the best!! you never have nice body, and your acting is crap!! don’t dream!!!!!!!

  3. Thibz • June 4, 2010 @ 11:43 AM

    how xan a 23 year old look so weathered…..

  4. anonymous2 • June 4, 2010 @ 11:50 AM

    in the running in her dreams

  5. Ally • June 4, 2010 @ 11:55 AM

    Come on you guys, lay off bashing Lindsay. She is a good actress, I mean have you even seen her in Georgia Rule? She was great in it. And she is coming out with new movies soon, so that can be her big movie career comeback. But seriously, she doesn’t deserve people always insulting her, yeah she has made bad choices with drugs and alcohol, but she’ll get off them. She will be playing Linda Lovelace, a porn star from the 70s in a movie Inferno. And remember Mark Wahlberg? and how he made a career comeback with his role as the porn star Dirk Diggler in Boogie Nights back in 1997? And how much it made him a respected and very successful actor? So yeah this could be Lindsays way back on top

  6. duke • June 4, 2010 @ 12:19 PM

    response to 23 year old looking so weathered:

    looks like she hits the tanning bed too often!!

  7. Cody • June 4, 2010 @ 12:58 PM

    Wait Lindsay doesn’t want to be type casted as the “hot girl in short shorts”? LMFAO that’s funny… She actually thinks she’s hot… Um, newsflash Lindsay, you actually HAVE to be hot in order to be typecasted as the “hot girl in short shorts”…

  8. J.B. • June 4, 2010 @ 1:20 PM

    How can Lindsay destroy a franchise that the writers of Transformers 2 already did? They spent so much time and effort perfecting the first one because they wanted to do it properly, and they threw it all out the window when they made the sequel into a teen pop-romance movie. The title of the movie is “Transformers”. FOCUS ON THE BLOODY ROBOTS! Anyways, as horribly misguided as L.L. has been over the past while, I am definitely a believer in making comebacks: Just look at Robert Downey Jr. and Mickey Rourke. Maybe she needs a big project like this to distract her from her usual routine, but it’s up to Michael Bay and the writers to focus on redeeming themselves, and making the 3rd movie about the Robots.

  9. nadine • June 4, 2010 @ 2:54 PM

    i cant belive she is turning it down. she will never get a better role…all you have to do is look cute and scared…best job for her, not many lines.

  10. 879807897 • June 4, 2010 @ 2:54 PM

    okay, A. when was she ever hot? B. I agree with J.B. the movie’s supposed to be about robots, not girls who guys can sit and drule over. and C. For once in your life MAKE A SCRIPT THAT’S GOOD!!!! ;p

  11. mandee • June 4, 2010 @ 3:12 PM

    Ally on June 4, 2010 11:55 AM you and i can defend this girl until our fingers fall off, those that hate her and are jealous of her are going to continue to trash talk her just because they have nothing better to do. what these people forget is that a lot of people that ARENT celebs also suffer these exact problems and NO ONE insults them or makes their lives public or treats them this way.

    i like lindsays acting.

    nadine on June 4, 2010 2:54 PM lmfao !

  12. Michelle • June 4, 2010 @ 3:17 PM

    I dnt think she would have been the right choice for this kind of movie. At least this is one more movie tht wont be ruined by bad acting.

  13. sam • June 4, 2010 @ 5:18 PM

    only thing worse than megan fox, lindsey lohan 🙂

  14. Thibz • June 5, 2010 @ 6:28 AM

    Seriously tanning beds make people look twice their age and for what….it never looks right.

  15. Woody • June 5, 2010 @ 11:39 AM

    These are great posts. But really, L.L. claims she was even seriously considered? Ok, when she was younger (up until Mean Girls) I think she was talented. Now she is more like a Paris Hilton, famous for being famous, if this was to be her ‘comeback’ movie I think she made the right choice to turn it down. Also Daisy Duke type casting?? If she didn’t parade around with the Paris’ and skimpy clothes with no undies in real life then her credibility for that statement might be validated. Meghan Fox was just perfect for the movie and it made Fox a rising star, but that was meant for her. So, if Lyndsay is really trying to change her image and be a ‘real’ actress and not just ride the coat tails on an already established summer blockbuster-type movie, then way to use your noodle Lindsay and stick with that pearl of wisdom and don’t blow your comeback.

    FYI:Whoever said look at Wahlberg’s Boogie Nights as a comeback, you are silly. His star was still rising in 1997. He never made anything that wasn’t crap until Max Payne just last year.

  16. cindy • June 5, 2010 @ 9:45 PM

    I am extremely happy she is not in the movie. My god, she is the worst choice.

  17. 8675309 • June 7, 2010 @ 2:00 AM

    Don’t go to the movies anymore! It rots your mind! I haven’t found any particular appeal to any movies coming out so far. You’d think they’d run out of ideas but nooo… it seems they keep mixin’ and messin’ up the movies together. Boycott movies until something changes! How would you know something has changed? Rent it, there is no point seeing a movie in theatres anymore. Idiots on the screen and in the seats. Brrrr! Even in parking where they scratch your car. Movies suck!!!! You just wanna ARRRRRRRGH! I like Lindsay in those Disney films.

  18. J.B. • June 7, 2010 @ 3:22 AM

    @ 8675309 :: It depends entirely on what you intend to accomplish with going to the theatre. If you’re going with the intention to be entertained, you will be. If you’re going just for the sake of going, there’s a 50/50 chance that you’ll enjoy the movie. However, if you go looking to find fault with every movie you watch, you will NEVER see a movie you like. Though, there are movies like “Transformers” that have such a HUGE fan-base that spans the past 25 years, and the viewers (myself included) will most likely be difficult to please. I’m sure if nobody had any clue what the “Transformers” were, and they went in to be entertained, they probably loved it.

  19. 879807897 • June 7, 2010 @ 2:16 PM

    well there goes my name, “8675309” is too similar; or at least for people to notice. 🙁

  20. mandee • June 7, 2010 @ 3:17 PM

    yep, thats so lame, sorry 🙁

Join The Conversation:

Similar Articles

Trending Articles

Current Poll

  • Which is your favorite horror film to watch for Halloween?

    View Results

    Loading ... Loading ...

You Might Also Like

Close Menu