Want to buy or sell something? Check the classifieds
  • The Fedora Lounge is supported in part by commission earning affiliate links sitewide. Please support us by using them. You may learn more here.

Bad repro looks

ThesFlishThngs

One Too Many
Messages
1,007
Location
Oklahoma City
Last night I revisited a thread discussing "Atonement", and KK's rather freestyle hair. The more I think about it, and read various views on this thread, I have to agree about image and appealing to the lowest common denominator, which these days is the trendiness of youth. Keira has her pencil-thin, doleful waif image to cultivate, and no matter what role she's packaged for, she still has to appeal to her fans, doesn't she? Heaven forbid her hair be properly coifed, maybe even netted, in some dowdy, frumpy, antiquated 1940s style. She might lose some of her identity.
What a shame.

Does anyone have opinions on " Bright Young Things"? I know it was not accurate to the original story, but I adore it for costuming, sets, & the depiction of that between-the-wars energy.
 

Edward

Bartender
Messages
25,081
Location
London, UK
ThesFlishThngs said:
Last night I revisited a thread discussing "Atonement", and KK's rather freestyle hair. The more I think about it, and read various views on this thread, I have to agree about image and appealing to the lowest common denominator, which these days is the trendiness of youth. Keira has her pencil-thin, doleful waif image to cultivate, and no matter what role she's packaged for, she still has to appeal to her fans, doesn't she? Heaven forbid her hair be properly coifed, maybe even netted, in some dowdy, frumpy, antiquated 1940s style. She might lose some of her identity.
What a shame.

I have no idea to whom she is supposed to appeal, tbh. I understand that her figure is how she naturally is and that she cannot therefore be personally blamed for her appearance, but it seems to me rather distasteful at best for a director to cast someone so childlike in appearance in roles where she is is the romantic (and all the rest that goes with that) female lead. [huh]

On the more general point, I do think it a shame to see some films where they have gone to quite some effort with the costume, and let it down with the hair. That sort of detail - accessories, hair, how they clothes are worn - is, in my opinion, what sets apart an accurate period cosutme from 'fancy dress'.
 

ThesFlishThngs

One Too Many
Messages
1,007
Location
Oklahoma City
I couldn't agree more, Edward. While I don't expect every minute detail to be accurate (and it's not as if I'm expert enough to tell anyway), part of the magic of a film is the ability to completely enter the world it represents. The mood is certainly dampened when obvious points of set, wardrobe, hair, etc. have been neglected. I always mutter to the Mr. "how hard could it be to at least try to get it right? If I can notice this stuff, one would think someone on the paid staff would as well."
 

Matt Deckard

Man of Action
Messages
10,045
Location
A devout capitalist in Los Angeles CA.
HadleyH said:
Is that meant to be a 1920s suit Robert Redford is wearing? Yeah right.

This from the movie The Great Gatsby" 1974

Was it too hard to copy a 1925 suit?

Yes, it was! Why? Who knows why.... [huh]




gatsby.jpg

Because Ralph Lauren was in the midst of reviving wide lapels and ties. Skinny was out so regardless of ere appropriate looks, fashion dictated what was proper on screen. We never really caught up with the brits on accuracy when it comes to vintage looks on film, yet we got better starting in the 80s.
 

Dr Doran

My Mail is Forwarded Here
Messages
3,854
Location
Los Angeles
ThesFlishThngs said:
Does anyone have opinions on " Bright Young Things"? I know it was not accurate to the original story, but I adore it for costuming, sets, & the depiction of that between-the-wars energy.

I own it and watched it once and loved it. The weird thing is, the book it was based on (by Evelyn Waugh) was dedicated to the wife of Oswald Mosley. That's kind of freaky.
 

fortworthgal

Call Me a Cab
Messages
2,646
Location
Panther City
swinggal said:
Man, watch the Glenn Miller story sometime starring Jimmy Stewart and June Allyson. It was made in 1954 about' the 30s and 40's and all the women are wearing 50s full circle dresses and have short haircuts. It's weird! Even when they are portraying the 30s the womens clothing is wrong. A lot of movies made in the 50s get 30s and 40s fashion so wrong, or don't even try get it right at all.

205929.jpg

Egads, watch *any* period movie made in the 1950s-1970s and it is quite obvious that they didn't even attempt period costuming or hairstyles. Kelly's Heroes, anyone?

GoldenEraFan said:
In A Christmas Story, Ralphie's mother looks completely out of place. The movie takes place in the late-1930's to early 1940's (even though a postwar Chevrolet is seen) but her hair looks straight out of 1983.

I have to disagree with this one. While her hair is curly and unruly - look through some period photographs of everyday people. Not all women in the 1940s wore perfectly shaped victory rolls or Rita Hayworth waves. Her hair fits what she is portraying: a frazzled, somewhat frumpy housewife of the early 1940s.
 

kymeratale

One of the Regulars
Messages
163
Location
Ottawa, Ontario
I recently did my annual viewing of "It's A Wonderful Life" and they really made no effort with the earlier scenes that are supposed to be late 20s and through the 30s. I can't post links yet, but I am thinking in particular of the scene with Violet, George and Bert and Ernie. Violet goes by in a very form-fitting knee-length dress and fluffy 40s hair. "This old thing, why I only wear it when I don't care how I look."

I notice it particularly with hair in period movies and shows made in the 70s. I watched Little House on the Prairie the other day. Amazing how a plain old hair bun still looks right out of 1975.
 

Lindabelle

One of the Regulars
Messages
119
Location
Australia
"Where Eagles Dare" It's so glaringly obvious that it was made in the 60's. Meant to be the 1940's but just look at Mary Ure's hair.:eek:
As for Derren Nesbitt's ( SS - Standartenfuher Kramer) incredibly bad dye job... Pleease!
Though I have to admit it with all it's faults I still have a soft spot for this movie. :D
 
Messages
13,466
Location
Orange County, CA
MrBern said:
this is the one that always made me laugh. Olivia Newton John's bad girl costume for the final scenes of GREASE.
2902396792_5160f1c849.jpg


I recall within a year or saw, the girls attending highschool dances stopped wearing dresses & showed up in spandex.

Its hardly period, but it sure did work up the crowds!

And she still came off as a perky Antipodean in bad girl costume! lol
 
Messages
13,466
Location
Orange County, CA
In Hogan's Heroes, Newkirk (Richard Dawson) is wearing a Korean War vintage USAF uniform with RAF insignia and Major (Sturmbannfuhrer) Hochstedder is decked out in the prewar black SS uniform which was replaced by a field gray version during the war.
 

Edward

Bartender
Messages
25,081
Location
London, UK
V.C. Brunswick said:
And she still came off as perky Antipodean in bad girl costume! lol

Wasn't that the point, though? THe moral of the story in Grease is that the way to get the one you want is to smoke, be bad, and in general be everything you're not.

And they call it a "nice family film".... [huh] :rolleyes:
 

Sam Craig

One Too Many
Messages
1,356
Location
Great Bend, Kansas
High schools get it right

All of us probably knew some poor kid in high school or college who — for free — shaved his head for the school play, and yet Hollywood continues to ignore the reality of how people looked.

World War II, the Old West, take your pick... there are plenty of original photographs to illustrate how the characters should look.

It's amazing how many incredible early photographs from before the Civil War have been reproduced on the Internet. The information is all there, and it should be put to better use.
 

Mr E Train

One Too Many
Messages
1,050
Location
Terminus
fortworthgal said:
Egads, watch *any* period movie made in the 1950s-1970s and it is quite obvious that they didn't even attempt period costuming or hairstyles. Kelly's Heroes, anyone?



I have to disagree with this one. While her hair is curly and unruly - look through some period photographs of everyday people. Not all women in the 1940s wore perfectly shaped victory rolls or Rita Hayworth waves. Her hair fits what she is portraying: a frazzled, somewhat frumpy housewife of the early 1940s.

I agree. She didn't have the hairstyle of the standard housewife and mother that was typically portrayed in the era, but she didn't seem like a standard housewife and mother, either. She was sweetly eccentric and strangely indulgent of her kids, seeming very much like a real person, not a phony portrayal of what a 40's housewife was supposed to be like. And I'm sure there were women in the 40's with hair like hers; the rest of the period detail in the movie seemed accurate, so I couldn't see them dropping the ball on a major detail like that. It wouldn't surprise me if that's what Jean Shepherd's mom actually looked like.
 

MisterCairo

I'll Lock Up
Messages
7,005
Location
Gads Hill, Ontario
Fletch said:
Folks, bad repro looks occur because they work. They save money, they keep producers happy, and in many cases, they keep the audience happy, because they see what is familiar plus a little "flavor" of a period.

We are not the British, who are an ancient civilization and can afford to be anoraks and wallies about any number of things. We are a young country that remakes everything in the image of Now. It is part of who we are, and it has done us much good, even as it limits us.

(Great big hint: The internet, the web, and the electronic bulletin board were not invented by the kind of civilization that values the past.)

Here only obsessive specialists care, and to most folks, we are party poopers - more of a pain than the bad styling.

Does anyone here really want to be a party pooper? And what can we do about it?

Why are the British "anoraks and wallies" because their film and tv producers know how to research and take the time to make period details look like period details?

And your country is 234 years old and was, as I recall my history, founded by the anoraks and wallies in question. How long will it take your film producers to actually use your inventions like the internet and web and bulletin board to research complex details like hairstyles and clothing patterns?

Better to be a party pooper than plain ol' lazy!
 

David Conwill

Call Me a Cab
Messages
2,854
Location
Bennington, VT 05201
Lindabelle said:
"Where Eagles Dare" It's so glaringly obvious that it was made in the 60's. Meant to be the 1940's but just look at Mary Ure's hair.:eek:

That, Kelly's Heroes, and The Longest Day were staples of my youth. It took me years to figure out why the clothes in my history books looked so much better. It's a testament to the other qualities of those films that I continue to enjoy them today.

-Dave
 

lolly_loisides

One Too Many
Messages
1,845
Location
The Blue Mountains, Australia
Doran said:
I own it and watched it once and loved it. The weird thing is, the book it was based on (by Evelyn Waugh) was dedicated to the wife of Oswald Mosley. That's kind of freaky.

Not really, Diana Mitford was friends with Evelyn Waugh long before she ever met Oswald Mosley. Vile Bodies was published in 1930, I don't think she met Mosley until 1932, also at that time Mosely was still a member of the Labour Party.
 

Ugarte

A-List Customer
Messages
360
Location
Eastern New Mexico
David Conwill said:
That, Kelly's Heroes, and The Longest Day were staples of my youth. It took me years to figure out why the clothes in my history books looked so much better. It's a testament to the other qualities of those films that I continue to enjoy them today.

-Dave

All you experts with your fine eyes for detail need to knock it off with your negative waves. I mean, I feel your pain. I'll grant that all these movies would provide a better experience for some of us if the people who made them actually bothered to get each and every one of the 1,740,390,205,000 or so details involved in any given motion picture strictly correct, but they are after all just movies.

Decisions get decided, compromises are struck, and mistakes happen. The end product is an abstract of reality rather than reality itself. In the end, it's an effort to tell a story. It might be more effective if we are transported through the verisimilitude provided by hyper critical attention to long gone and half-forgotten details. But how much can we really ask of a story? Gestalt psychology tells us that even as we move through our own lives, we unconsciously boilerplate in details that are not immediately important to our functioning, and our recollections are colored by this process. What, then, is the harm in a not-quite-right haircut or shoes that only pass scrutiny of the casual observer?

Yes, identifying some (to us) obviously and glaringly incorrect detail can threaten to just ruin the experience for some of us. Be that detail clothes, hair, vehicles, that snow-capped mountain on the outskirts of Roswell, New Mexico that some would have us believe exists (I'm looking at you HBO). Sometimes, I have to keep telling myself that it's only a movie and just go on. Otherwise, my life would be an endless stream of, "Hey, that wasn't in the book!"

Of course, this is merely one man's opinion.

Mark
.
 

Chas

One Too Many
Messages
1,715
Location
Melbourne, Australia
"Tora Tora Tora" rates highly in my book for the storytelling and special effects, but like most 60s/70s war movies, they completely dropped any pretense of aiming for period-correct hair or clothing. There is a night club scene where the women are in 60's bouffant hairdos and polyester sack dresses...:whistling
 

Atomic Age

Practically Family
Messages
701
Location
Phoenix, Arizona
Sam Craig said:
All of us probably knew some poor kid in high school or college who — for free — shaved his head for the school play, and yet Hollywood continues to ignore the reality of how people looked.

World War II, the Old West, take your pick... there are plenty of original photographs to illustrate how the characters should look.

It's amazing how many incredible early photographs from before the Civil War have been reproduced on the Internet. The information is all there, and it should be put to better use.

To be fair, an actor in Hollywood makes his or her living based on the way they look. Back in the 50's and 60's, an actor might make 6 or 7 films a year, and doing a period hair cut could seriously effect their ability to make a living. So its not to surprising that you see contemporary styles in period films of that era. Its really only been in recent years that actors go out of their way to change their appearance for a film. But these days an actor may only do 2 films a year, and its not such a big deal.

Also in those days producers often felt that audiences would think the movie was old fashioned even if they were a period film. To some extent I think they were right. Remember these were the days before home video when you can watch a film from the 30's followed by something from the 70's. The only time people saw an "old" movie was on the rare re-release. In fact films from the early days of sound were almost NEVER re released after the mid 1940's and were practically forgotten. Silent films were non-existent. As a result, I don't think audiences were quite so aware of the advance of styles over the years. Just as they were not quite so sophisticated about special effects.



Doug
 

Forum statistics

Threads
109,256
Messages
3,077,416
Members
54,183
Latest member
UrbanGraveDave
Top