Hilary Duff doesn't care what critics think of her movies, and she especially doesn't care what New York Times critic Stephen Holden has to say. The actress/singer made a statement Elle against Holden's claim that she is "talent-challenged," saying that, "he doesn't really fit the demographic. So I could really care less." She has a point, doesn't she? I personally think it's pretty useless for critics to give a bad review to someone like Duff, since it won't matter to either those who expect little from her anyway or those who are fans of hers. It is different when we give a surprisingly good review to a movie like She's the Man and its star, Amanda Bynes, because that discussion is more notable.
If Duff ever crosses over into a broader range of roles, particularly if she takes on serious roles, then it might be more in Holden's interests to address her contributions at that time. But according to her, a cross-over isn't likely any time soon. She commented on the possibility, saying, "Suppose the next thing I did was this super-edgy independent movie where I was pregnant or shooting up? What would that do to my fan base?" Now, as much as I think that would be amusing to see, I applaud Duff in knowing her place. We don't need another teen star attempting to become a real actress before she's ready. Too many films are ruined because of young starlets without proper talent being cast in serious roles. I'm thinking of Dunst, Lohan, Holmes and maybe Mandy Moore most recently, but it is certainly something that has been going on for years. Anyone remember when Bertolucci had to go and cast Liv Tyler? Yeah, I've been trying to forget it, too.