Ever notice

[I'mSuzyParker]

how in the good old days, all the stars had their own looks? There was everything from slinky Carole Lombard to voluptuous Jane Russell to gamine Audrey Hepburn. Exotic Dorothy Dandridge, pale Jean Harlow. Blonds, brunettes, redheads. Everyone had their own distinctive look and nothing was right or wrong. Today everyone looks and dresses the same. Maybe I'm imagining things, but it sure seems to be that way.

 

[Laura Chase]

I disagree, I think that golden era stars fit just as much into certain (different) ideals as stars today. And, reversely, I think movie stars today just as much have an individual image. I could just mention, oh I don't know, (exotic) Penelope Cruz and (pale) Nicole Kidman, as contrasts, if you will.

The stars you are mentioning are from very different eras, which I would also say accounts for much of the difference.

 

[I'mSuzyParker]

Okay, let me clarify. Three stars from the same time period.. Jayne Mansfield, Elizabeth Taylor, Audrey Hepburn. All popular at the same time. Yet, obviously very different looks and types. While I will give you Kidman and Cruz are different in hair, etc. color.. they are both tall and thin. That's what I was referring to. Most stars today are very tall, very thin and have a similiar look to me, that's all. Not too many stars on completely different ends of the spectrum who are equally popular. Of course, I don't watch many new movies.. I just see them in fashion magazines and sometimes can't tell one from the other : )

 

[Laura Chase]

Ooh, so we are talking about body image here? You might have a point there, I'll have to think about that one and in the meanwhile listen to what you other ladies think.

 

[I'mSuzyParker]

Yeah, that sort of is what caused me to write this thread (and post it in the ladies only area). Friend of mine has a 12 year old daughter and the girl is already obsessing about being on a diet. Geez Louise.. do we really expect little girls to look like supermodels? I don't have kids, so I'm out of touch with the times, I guess.

 

[Rachael]

I am reminded of a few years back when Titanic was released. There was a commentator who congratulated the director on having used a plus sized actress for the lead. Kate Winslet, a size 10 at the time, was considered plus size.

I would agree that it is a pity so many of those held up as icons of beauty today represent an ideal that is not only unrealistic, it is unhealthy. Bring us a Kate Hepburn, who had spunk, intelligence, and sportiness. Bring us Jane Russell, who actually looked like a woman instead of a girl all trussed up in heels.

But also, may we please have Cary Grant back? I get so tired of these little boys with no sense of style or respect. When did whining become a favorable male attribute?

 

[Laura Chase]

I can't help thinking this is idealizing the past too much. There were many unrealistic, unhealthy ideals in the 1910's, 20's, 30's, 40's, 50's. There always has been, in some form or other.

 

[I'mSuzyParker]

thanks Rachel.. you articulated what I was trying to say - but came up short because I don't know a lot of the newer actors/actresses. And I totally agree with you on the handsome men versus little boy thing. Off topic rant... If I read one more article that George Clooney is the new Cary Grant I will scream. Clooney seems to be a handsome enough man, but Cary Grant Part II.. I don't think so

 

[LizzieMaine]

I would agree that it is a pity so many of those held up as icons of beauty today represent an ideal that is not only unrealistic, it is unhealthy. Bring us a Kate Hepburn, who had spunk, intelligence, and sportiness. Bring us Jane Russell, who actually looked like a woman instead of a girl all trussed up in heels.

But also, may we please have Cary Grant back? I get so tired of these little boys with no sense of style or respect. When did whining become a favorable male attribute?

I think that nails it right on the head -- the ideal pushed on people today is *perpetual adolescence,* not adulthood. And it's not just in fashion, it's every other aspect of contemporary culture. Nobody wants to grow up, let alone grow old.

 

[Laura Chase]

I think that nails it right on the head -- the ideal pushed on people today is *perpetual adolescence,* not adulthood. And it's not just in fashion, it's every other aspect of contemporary culture. Nobody wants to grow up, let alone grow old.

Well, that's one of those ideals we have today, and this especially goes for women. It's just that back in, let's say the 30's, there were some other ideals, but they were ideals nonetheless.

 

[I'mSuzyParker]

fftopic:

I'm going to stir the pot a little more - because this is the sharpest bunch of gals I've ever seen.. I don't think the "ideals" are just for women any more. in fact, I think women (possibly rightfully so) are becoming as shallow as their male counterparts in some ways. I read another article that was fascinating. Apparently, a lot of MEN these days feel insecure when they see images of the perfect guys in magazines, etc. Any comments on that ladies?

 

[Rachael]

I can't help thinking this is idealizing the past too much. There were many unrealistic, unhealthy ideals in the 1910's, 20's, 30's, 40's, 50's. There always has been, in some form or other.

that is totally correct. The things women have done to themselves throughout history are amazing. I am continually flabergasted at the corsets, chest bindings, foot bindings, et al that were once in widespread use. The tiny waists of the 50's did not happen naturally, and those tight girdles did not do anyone's health any good. Of course not everyone in any era goes to the extremes we see in pictorals and there are always women who tone down or ignore the fashion "must-do" trend of the day.

We have not yet come to a time when beauty is seen in all shapes, sizes, and colors, although I hold out hope that one day we may yet get there. But the current focus on thin to the point of visible clavicles and rampant surgical alterations is unnerving to me, especially as the mother of a young teen daughter.

The luxury of today, I think, is the ability to regard or disregard the mainstream. With all of the interconnections and media outlets, we are more than able to pick and choose our movie stars, authors, and fashion mavens from whichever era we prefer. If we look hard enough and network enough (like we do here on the FL) we are even able to find new icons and films to enjoy. But it sure would be nice to watch television with my daughter without putting it on mute and explaining that all shapes are beautiful and she does not need to watch her weight nor dye her hair.

 

[I'mSuzyParker]

The oddity of it is this.. a lot of models are naturally tall and skinny.. they have just hit some genetic powerball and they don't have to watch what they eat, they only exercise to stay toned, etc. But, they also make up about 5% of the population, if that .. Then you have a majority of Hollywood jumping on the bandwagon - it seems beyond ridiculous to me to expect children to believe that they need to conform with 5% of the population to be "ideal". That's all

 

[KittyT]

I can't help thinking this is idealizing the past too much. There were many unrealistic, unhealthy ideals in the 1910's, 20's, 30's, 40's, 50's. There always has been, in some form or other.

:eusa_clap

I also think that, while there were several actresses with contrasting body types back then, for the most part, they still fit into a couple of very narrow categories that incorporated most of Hollywood - either they were quite slim and svelte, or they were curvy yet still slim by today's standards. Everyone uses Marilyn Monroe as an example, saying "oh she was bigger, she wore a size 12". That's a vintage size 12, roughly a modern size 6. Compared to modern actresses, this may be a little larger but it is still not large by any stretch of the imagination.

 

[I'mSuzyParker]

:eusa_clap

Everyone uses Marilyn Monroe as an example, saying "oh she was bigger, she wore a size 12". That's a vintage size 12, roughly a modern size 6.

The size descrepency is a fact. The vintage clothes I own are all size 8s, yet if I buy something current I don't go past a size two and I'm 34-24-35. So, go figure?

 

[KittyT]

I don't think the "ideals" are just for women any more. in fact, I think women (possibly rightfully so) are becoming as shallow as their male counterparts in some ways.

I don't really think it has that much to do with being "shallow". In every era, our society has general standards and the fact of the matter is that most people ascribe to those standards in some way, a phenomenon that I think can be attributed to the fact that deep down, everyone just wants to be liked by others and fit in. I think you can certainly call the standards themselves shallow, but not necessarily those who ascribe to them.

I read another article that was fascinating. Apparently, a lot of MEN these days feel insecure when they see images of the perfect guys in magazines, etc. Any comments on that ladies?

Yes, I think this is absolutely true. Most women don't realize that men also feel a huge amount of pressure, not only as far as their physical appearance (although men do not have the same molds to fit into to gain success in Hollywood - just look at Danny DeVito and Jack Black) but also in terms of their economic prowess. Actually the latter may have always been the case - men have always been judged by their bread-winning potential and that tends to strongly feed into their sense of self-worth, or lack thereof.

I think of more importance is the changing definition that our society has of "masculinity" in general (which may be one of the reasons there was so much hoopla over the whole metrosexual phenomenon). There is a book out there somewhere that is supposed to be very good but that I haven't read. I'll try to dig up the info on it.

 

[I'mSuzyParker]

Kitty, you make great points. Another trend I notice.. a lot of my friends who have careers themselves (making nice money) want to date the younger, pretty boy types versus the regular Joe or the "secure" guy. I think what has changed (and maybe it's good that women are playing by the same rules now)...50 years ago, men were of a "certain" age before they were truly successful. A big reason why a lot of beautiful young women dated/married men their fathers' age. Now, men are more "secure" at a younger age, thereby elminating that factor. On top of that, women have careers and are quite capable of being "secure" without a man, so they are more interested in common ground, interests and physical attractiveness in men. Not sure if I agree with that. Personally, I always liked men my own age who were intelligent, funny and attractive over "security" but that's what I'm hearing...

 

[Amy Jeanne]

All the actresses of the 20s and 30s that I adore so much all do have very different "looks" and personalities (onscreen and off!) That's only because I've studied the crap outta them and have watched as many of their movies as humanly possible.

All the stars of today look the same to me because I have no idea who they are and I don't have any interest in knowing. That's usually the case for me. To the untrained eye, I'm sure those marcelled, slinky 1930s stars all look the same!

And, yes, I totally idealise 20s and 30s stars, I love them, they saved my life when I hit rock bottom, and I'll have it no other way!!!

 

[Odalisque]

Another trend I notice.. a lot of my friends who have careers themselves (making nice money) want to date the younger, pretty boy types versus the regular Joe or the "secure" guy.

I think this might be influenced by how we now approach aging. I would say the outlook on aging hasn't changed much over the decades. There was and is the similar idea that no one wants to look old. But people in the golden era had to age gracefully (or ungracefully) but age nonetheless. Whereas nowadays, we are able to stop aging cosmetically with a plethora of options not available to the previous generations ie. Botox, hair transplants, anti-aging surgery. So, dating from the younger generation is not only a possibility for women now but also another way to appear young and hip. Personally, I can think of nothing sadder then a women who feels she must rebel so much against nature and her own skin. I look forward to wrinkles and gray hair. God forbid I be 25 forever!

 

[Red Diabla]

I think this might be influenced by how we now approach aging. I would say the outlook on aging hasn't changed much over the decades. There was and is the similar idea that no one wants to look old. But people in the golden era had to age gracefully (or ungracefully) but age nonetheless. Whereas nowadays, we are able to stop aging cosmetically with a plethora of options not available to the previous generations ie. Botox, hair transplants, anti-aging surgery. So, dating from the younger generation is not only a possibility for women now but also another way to appear young and hip. Personally, I can think of nothing sadder then a women who feels she must rebel so much against nature and her own skin. I look forward to wrinkles and gray hair. God forbid I be 25 forever!

HAHAHAHAHHAA. I just turned 40, and my body is in pretty good shape. But I gotta admit, I've been tempted to look into something like botox because of the heavy-duty frown lines I have between my eyes and brow. The main reason I won't do it isn't because I think I should embrace my age(I don't act it anyway), but I know that once someone starts down the plastic surgery road, they have to maintain it, and I frankly don't have the time or patience to do that.

So I'm aging disgracefully.

Back to the topic at hand...

I dunno, I've done plenty of reading on old Hollywood, and there was a reason why it was called a "system". The way actors and actresses first start in Hollywood is usually different than when they hit the peak of their careers. There was some plastic surgery "back in the day", and it was used on the famous folk. Off the top of my head there's the famous story about Rita Hayworth having to get electrolysis to raise her hairline so that she looked more "anglo" and less Mexican.

But I do think that there was a time before WWII where actresses were able to have a wider range of acting roles, which showed off more aspects of their personality so that would make them less cookie-cutter to us than current actresses. And maybe the OP is picking up on that.

RD