PDA

View Full Version : Is the Hollywood magic gone?



Fraulein
06-12-2008, 10:46 AM
Warning! Rant laced with nine hyphens...

I'm starting to feel like celebrities are total misfits. What's with all of these arrests, angular nose and boob jobs, obsessive dieting and workout plans, pregnancy memoirs, perfume, cosmetic, and clothing lines, and should I even bring up the anti-climactic, million-dollar interviews?

It's like there's a free-for-all knock-down-drag-out-fight going on behind the curtains of what used to the glamor-filled mystique called Hollywood.

Shadow_Ferret
06-12-2008, 06:10 PM
I'm starting to feel like celebrities are total misfits.

JUST starting? Where have you been?

Hollywood stars have been total misfits since day one.

We just used to revere them more, they were our royalty and so we let them act like putzes in public and turned the other way.

Now there's a whole industry set up to film them be putzes in public and we all eat it up.

maestrowork
06-12-2008, 09:19 PM
The difference is in the past, movie stars' lives were shielded from the public. We didn't know about their drug abuse, philandering, alcoholism, homosexuality, organized crime association, relationship problems, etc. etc. They were royalties. They were mysterious. They were STARS. They had the whole studio system to manage their public images.

Now everyone gets exposed and some have to move far, far away to keep their privacy. Those who actually live in Tinseltown are desperate for attention (not necessarily fame, just attention) so they would do anything to be in front of the paparazzi and inside the tabloids or a tell-all autobiography. With everyone vying for attention, you need to do something. The lower you are on the list, the more attention you want to get. A-listers like Harrison Ford, etc. still tries very hard to protect their privacy. The old smoke and mirror game still works for some of them.

Time has changed. People don't want "mysterious." They want to know what brand of toilet paper Brad Pitt uses or how much Botox Sharon Stone has had. You can blame it on the fans, who drive the industry, which drives the paparazzi and tabloids -- it's a whole different money machine now. It's all about exposure and being in the news.

Jcomp
06-12-2008, 09:21 PM
JUST starting? Where have you been?

Hollywood stars have been total misfits since day one.

We just used to revere them more, they were our royalty and so we let them act like putzes in public and turned the other way.

Now there's a whole industry set up to film them be putzes in public and we all eat it up.

Precisely.

Fraulein
06-13-2008, 05:17 AM
The difference is in the past, movie stars' lives were shielded from the public. We didn't know about their drug abuse, philandering, alcoholism, homosexuality, organized crime association, relationship problems, etc. etc. They were royalties. They were mysterious. They were STARS. They had the whole studio system to manage their public images.

Now everyone gets exposed and some have to move far, far away to keep their privacy. Those who actually live in Tinseltown are desperate for attention (not necessarily fame, just attention) so they would do anything to be in front of the paparazzi and inside the tabloids or a tell-all autobiography. With everyone vying for attention, you need to do something. The lower you are on the list, the more attention you want to get. A-listers like Harrison Ford, etc. still tries very hard to protect their privacy. The old smoke and mirror game still works for some of them.

Time has changed. People don't want "mysterious." They want to know what brand of toilet paper Brad Pitt uses or how much Botox Sharon Stone has had. You can blame it on the fans, who drive the industry, which drives the paparazzi and tabloids -- it's a whole different money machine now. It's all about exposure and being in the news.
I totally get what you're saying. I guess the more babies and surgeries they have and the more weight they lose, the more press they'll get.


Here are a few photos that inspired me to write about this subject.

http://www.awfulplasticsurgery.com/images/lil_kim_gone_white.jpg
(http://www.awfulplasticsurgery.com/archives/003769.html)

This
http://vassilisa.files.wordpress.com/2008/03/marilyn-monroe-oversized-postcard.jpg

vs This
http://www.smh.com.au/ffximage/2007/09/14/skinny_lead_narrowweb__300x449,0.jpg

or This
http://vassilisa.files.wordpress.com/2008/03/kieraskinny.jpg
(http://vassilisa.wordpress.com/2008/03/04/in-case-youve-forgotten/)

Is this even the same person?
http://www.goodplasticsurgery.com/archives/beckham_makeover_2.jpg

http://www.goodplasticsurgery.com/archives/beckham_makeover_1.jpg
(http://www.goodplasticsurgery.com/)

Jcomp
06-13-2008, 06:21 AM
Holy heavens... Marilyn looks GREAT. Whoa!

NeuroFizz
06-13-2008, 06:49 AM
To me, what is missing is any semblance of mystique. With Marilyn, we saw the subway breeze lift her skift giving a kind-of glint of what would be considered grannie panties today. With you-know-who, we get a full crotch gash-shot as she gets out of a car.

Again, I don't know if I'm weird, but if a fully dressed woman bends over and shows a little bra or a little panty, it can be more erotic than seeing a less encumbered woman in a string bikini simply because with the former, I'm seeing something I'm not supposed to see, and I'm only seeing a little of it. That's the kind of mystique I'm talking about. It's the brief glimse of a partial something that gets the imagination involved. There is no imagination involved when the other you-know-who boffs her boyfriend in front of a camera and has it piped to the world.

This gets back to what Ray said--teasing glimpses (photos and information) rather than full disclosure (and exposure).

Bravo
06-13-2008, 06:52 AM
Holy heavens... Marilyn looks GREAT. Whoa!

all the plastic a suga daddy can buy.

Fraulein
06-13-2008, 07:31 AM
all the plastic a suga daddy can buy.I agree that Marilyn wasn't 100% natural. However, when celebrities like Jennifer Love Hewitt and Tyra Banks have to defend themselves for looking "average", it makes me wonder how much further this body-distorting trend will go.

http://www.theliberalblogger.com/images/jennifer-love-hewitt-fat-1.jpg
(http://www.theliberalblogger.com/231/jennifer-love-hewitt-fat-beach-pictures/)

StoryG27
06-13-2008, 07:41 AM
I have no idea what that pic does for the guys, but it thrills me. OMG, the gorgeous JLH is normal. Yea for her! Damn anyone who feels she should apologize for that.

Bourgeois Nerd
06-13-2008, 08:52 AM
What happened to Lil Kim? She used to look good now she looks freakish, just like Courtney Love did after she radically altered her face and her distinctive look. You should still be able to recognize a famous musician, actor instead of wondering, "That person sort of looks like [fill in the blank]."

As for Maestrowork's comment about the mystery behind Old Hollywood, well....
you have obviously not read the Hollywood Babylon books. Fabulous debunking of those 'glamorous' stars of yesteryear. Sometimes to the point of grossness. I don't want to see someone's corpse after they burned to death in a house fire. Or the pile of puke next to the body after a drug overdose.

mario_c
06-13-2008, 09:11 AM
That's why I hate Scarlett Johannsen now. She was labeled the Most Beautiful on Earth or whatever (no arguments here) and she subsequently had plastic surgery on her face. That is plain wrong. They need to round up these fake doctors and cast them into the Pacific ocean.
And her cheekbones are sharp now. Her head is shaped wrong. That is the irony, is that they ruin a natural perfection. But what do I know, I'm an unsigned screenwriter with no girlfriend.They have to carry me to a doctor on a stretcher nowadays anyway...

coneflower2001
06-13-2008, 09:32 AM
I say ask any man and they will tell you....a real woman, with curves it sexual. If an actor has to draw attention to themselves...something is wrong with their skills...they shouldn't have to go to those lengths. The public isn't stupid. A true artist wants to look average...it speaks volumes to the public. I've said it before and I'll say it again...Christian Bale is the best Actor in Hollywood right now...he is who he is...there is no need to draw attention or be fake.

Marilyn is timeless....she may have colored her hair, changed her name, and acted the sexy dumb blonde...but dammit she was good at it. I don't think some of the woman in Hollywood have that today...most of them don't. JLH...she is awesome. Anyone want to dispute that?

Most of the ones I see running around in the tabloids...seeking attention are the spoiled, unskilled actors that need to keep reminding us they are there. I truly don't care what kind of TP Brad is using...it's all @**t in the end.

I believe, in my opinion...it's the young crowd that are drawn to this kind of behavior. The average Joe just doesn't care.

Bravo
06-13-2008, 10:10 AM
A true artist wants to look average...it speaks volumes to the public. I've said it before and I'll say it again...Christian Bale is the best Actor in Hollywood right now...he is who he is...there is no need to draw attention or be fake.


yeah but christian bale cant really look average, so i think you'll have to come up with a better example than that.

Bourgeois Nerd
06-13-2008, 10:15 AM
yeah but christian bale cant really look average, so i think you'll have to come up with a better example than that.

Philip Seymour Hoffman

maestrowork
06-13-2008, 10:33 AM
Jack Black. Will Ferrel. Seth Rogen. I think comedy stars have it better. If you're a the glamorous ones like Halle Berry or Charlize Theron, then you do have an image to keep -- and by and large, I think they do.

I think right now the problem is we (as in the general public) pay too much attention to the B and C lists who are trying to vry for attention. The Britney Spears and Linsay Lohans and Paris Hiltons. Because they're the one getting on the news. The crazy Tom Cruise. The ditsy Sharon Stone.

But we forget that every generation has their own sleaze and glamor. For every Cary Grant and James Stewart there were Za Za Gabor and Jane Mansfield. So in that sense, Hollywood is the pretty much the same -- just louder and bigger, and we have the paparazzi to blame for that.


ETA: also, time has changed. Back then Hollywood was the holy grail. The epitome of glamor, fame and fortune. The world's most beautiful people were all there. Now, any Joe Blow and Jane Doe can be on TV. There's the Internet, YouTube, etc. etc. and everyone wants their 15 minutes. It really does dilute the "glory" of show biz. I put some of the blame on reality TV and the amount of crappy movies coming out every year. Movies become less "magical" and more about bigger and louder special effects and explosions. When do we actually marvel at a star's performance, as in "he's so BIGGER than LIFE" or awe-inspiring? A few came to mind in the past few years (Russell Crowe in Gladiator, for example, or Heath Ledger in Brokeback Mountain or Will Smith in Ali) but they're still far and between.

maestrowork
06-13-2008, 10:36 AM
Speaking of Jane Mansfield... this picture is funny. What was Sophia Loren looking? :D

http://reflectionsonplayboy.com/uploaded_images/Sophia-Loren-and-Jayne-Mansfield-769666.jpg

Joycecwilliams
06-13-2008, 11:32 AM
The difference is in the past, movie stars' lives were shielded from the public. We didn't know about their drug abuse, philandering, alcoholism, homosexuality, organized crime association, relationship problems, etc. etc. They were royalties. They were mysterious. They were STARS. They had the whole studio system to manage their public images.

Now everyone gets exposed and some have to move far, far away to keep their privacy. Those who actually live in Tinseltown are desperate for attention (not necessarily fame, just attention) so they would do anything to be in front of the paparazzi and inside the tabloids or a tell-all autobiography. With everyone vying for attention, you need to do something. The lower you are on the list, the more attention you want to get. A-listers like Harrison Ford, etc. still tries very hard to protect their privacy. The old smoke and mirror game still works for some of them.

Time has changed. People don't want "mysterious." They want to know what brand of toilet paper Brad Pitt uses or how much Botox Sharon Stone has had. You can blame it on the fans, who drive the industry, which drives the paparazzi and tabloids -- it's a whole different money machine now. It's all about exposure and being in the news.


Very true, but I love the glamour of "Old Hollywood."

Joycecwilliams
06-13-2008, 11:35 AM
I think Sophia is wondering.. Why don't those things fall out?? :)

BenPanced
06-13-2008, 06:01 PM
I think Sophia is wondering.. Why don't those things fall out?? :)
Or maybe, "Please don't let those things fall out!"

Fame really means nothing these days. I don't mean in a Zen fashion, but anybody with a camcorder, a Myspace page, and a Youtube account can build up a legion of fans; done properly, you'll have your own TV show (Tila Tequila) for no other reason. It's instantaneous. There's no build-up, no machine to create suspense over The New Name. In the legendary studio system, you built your way up through bit parts, finally getting a line in a B-picture, working that to the Small But Important Best Friend role, finally a starring part in a B-picture similar to the walk-on you had three years ago, and eventually up to having your name above the movie title on the lobby cards. You had to know the business to work it; Lord help you if you tried to fight the system, though. Each studio had their favored gossip columnist to help control the publicity but the wrong word from anybody, you got labeled Box Office Poison and eventually faded to do summer stock or worse -- television.

Shadow_Ferret
06-13-2008, 06:36 PM
all the plastic a suga daddy can buy.
Why must we trample down all our celebrities so?

She had rhinoplasty. Everything else is speculation.

Here she is as a teenager. Not sure she's all the much more "enhanced" in the later picture above.

http://marilynmonroepages.com/images/mmswim.jpg

Bravo
06-13-2008, 06:42 PM
she had more than rhino. here's a before pic:

http://www.celebrityplasticpics.com/img/monro_before_rhinoplasty1.jpg

but i'm not bringing this up to trample on her, i actually am pretty ambivalent of plastic surgery (the major exception being those damn fish lips some celebs get).

i just think this idea that in the past there were all these natural, classy, and healthy beauties is silly. marilyn monroe did what it took to get to the top and that meant both getting plastic surgery and sleeping with the right people.

things really havent changed much since that time period.

Fraulein
06-13-2008, 08:16 PM
What happened to Lil Kim? She used to look good now she looks freakish, just like Courtney Love did after she radically altered her face and her distinctive look. You should still be able to recognize a famous musician, actor instead of wondering, "That person sort of looks like [fill in the blank]."

As for Maestrowork's comment about the mystery behind Old Hollywood, well....
you have obviously not read the Hollywood Babylon books. Fabulous debunking of those 'glamorous' stars of yesteryear. Sometimes to the point of grossness. I don't want to see someone's corpse after they burned to death in a house fire. Or the pile of puke next to the body after a drug overdose.
It gets worse. This is what she looks like now:
http://mrsgrapevine.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/02/lil_kim_michael_jackson.png

One of the captions about this picture on whatever website suggests that Lil Kim looks like her assistant who is different race.

I don't get it???

Fraulein
06-13-2008, 08:17 PM
things really havent changed much since that time period.
The overall look of Hollywood has changed dramatically. Almost all of the female celebrities suffer from severe hunger pangs, to say the least. That kind of stuff filters down and reaches the public eventually. It's really no different than how the dads on this forum feel about the way dads are depicted on television, or the commercials with the "perfect" families except for the lowsy, lazy dad.

Today's Hollywood "image" is all wrong, in my opinion.

maestrowork
06-13-2008, 08:26 PM
Why do people look to celebrities and Hollywood for life's inspiration anyway?

Fraulein
06-13-2008, 08:40 PM
Why do people look to celebrities and Hollywood for life's inspiration anyway?
I don't know. Life isn't inspiring sometimes, so people look to fantasy land for inspiration.

I don't watch tv anymore (except a few college football games), and I rarely watch movies, because I can't fall in love with the characters anymore. :( Seriously, Russell Crowe was hot and bothersome until he hit a hotel attendant with a phone.
That kind of crap just keeps happening too. Perhaps I would still like him if I was oblivious to his faults.

Bourgeois Nerd
06-13-2008, 08:50 PM
Why do people look to celebrities and Hollywood for life's inspiration anyway?


Because they're not exposed to anything better? Ignorance perhaps. I think it could have to do with the difference between supposedly 'high art' and 'pop culture.' Speaking of that, I have a friend who has written on this subject in a related way. She talks about writers getting upset at electronic media and pop culture for eroding the readership for books.

Here's her link:

http://www.eurydice.net/rants/Literature/body_literature.html

maestrowork
06-13-2008, 08:51 PM
I don't know. Life isn't inspiring sometimes, so people look to fantasy land for inspiration.

I don't watch tv anymore (except a few college football games), and I rarely watch movies, because I can't fall in love with the characters anymore. :( Seriously, Russell Crowe was hot and bothersome until he hit a hotel attendant with a phone.
That kind of crap just keeps happening too. Perhaps I would still like him if I was oblivious to his faults.


Now that's strange to me. I'm sorry, but shouldn't you separate the person (actor) from his work (the acting)?

To me, I don't give a flying eff what Russell Crowe does in his real life. I'm there to watch a movie, about some characters that are NOT Russell Crowe.

And I certainly don't hold any "celebrities" on a pedestal. They're human. Their onscreen images may be larger than life, but they're just human in real life. So what?

Fraulein
06-13-2008, 09:02 PM
Now that's strange to me. I'm sorry, but shouldn't you separate the person (actor) from his work (the acting)?

To me, I don't give a flying eff what Russell Crowe does in his real life. I'm there to watch a movie, about some characters that are NOT Russell Crowe.

And I certainly don't hold any "celebrities" on a pedestal. They're human. Their onscreen images may be larger than life, but they're just human in real life. So what?
I guess I'm suppose to lower my expectations because they're movie stars???

Nope. If a celebrity was caught beating an animal, should I, an animal lover, still watch their movies? Maybe you would say so, but I don't put up with that. Violence and abuse towards innocent people or animals is a no no in my book.

Fraulein
06-13-2008, 09:13 PM
Because they're not exposed to anything better? Ignorance perhaps. I think it could have to do with the difference between supposedly 'high art' and 'pop culture.' Speaking of that, I have a friend who has written on this subject in a related way. She talks about writers getting upset at electronic media and pop culture for eroding the readership for books.

Here's her link:

http://www.eurydice.net/rants/Literature/body_literature.html
Huh? Interesting.

maestrowork
06-13-2008, 09:21 PM
I guess I'm suppose to lower my expectations because they're movie stars???

On the contrary, I'm saying we shouldn't hold them to a higher standards because they're movie stars. Everybody slips up and makes mistakes, and why should we mix their personal lives with their work? Surely, if you have a problem with random violence, it's your choice to not support an actor who beats people for fun. But I would caution about something like "I don't watch Robin Williams anymore because he was an alcoholic."

Fraulein
06-13-2008, 09:54 PM
On the contrary, I'm saying we shouldn't hold them to a higher standards because they're movie stars. Everybody slips up and makes mistakes, and why should we mix their personal lives with their work? Surely, if you have a problem with random violence, it's your choice to not support an actor who beats people for fun. But I would caution about something like "I don't watch Robin Williams anymore because he was an alcoholic."
You're right about raising the bar arbitrarily and Robin Williams. I just think that if they have a personal problem, then they should keep it to themselves instead of blabbing about their problem to the whole world. The less I know about their addictions, pregnancies, and toiletry use, the better.

Jcomp
06-13-2008, 10:03 PM
You're right about raising the bar arbitrarily and Robin Williams. I just think that if they have a personal problem, then they should keep it to themselves instead of blabbing about their problem to the whole world. The less I know about their addictions, pregnancies, and toiletry use, the better.

Kinda hard to hide those pesky pregnancies, particularly with the constant attention and photographers and TMZ in your mug...

Blondchen
06-13-2008, 11:10 PM
Why do people look to celebrities and Hollywood for life's inspiration anyway?

Because many people who don't live in this town and work in this business think that the whole SoCal basin is a magically fantastic place filled with nonstop glamorous parties and events, which on some level, they would love to oneday experience.

The reality, of course, is that this place is mostly populated by "normal" people doing relatively unglamorous jobs tied to the entertainment industry that just happens to be chronicled by TMZ.

And for the record, Hollywood is squeeky clean these days, compared to the 70s and 80s. It's the difference between spending a day with Ward Cleaver, or Sid Vicious.

Bourgeois Nerd
06-16-2008, 05:31 AM
Huh? Interesting.

I was responding to Maestrowork's question about why people revere celebrities and think of them as icons. I think most people aren't intelligent about 'celebrities' and follow pop culture too much. My friend's art rant had something to say on that subject.

Did you respond "Huh?" to her article or my post, which should have quoted Maestrowork.

Fraulein
06-16-2008, 08:26 AM
I was responding to Maestrowork's question about why people revere celebrities and think of them as icons. I think most people aren't intelligent about 'celebrities' and follow pop culture too much. My friend's art rant had something to say on that subject.

Did you respond "Huh?" to her article or my post, which should have quoted Maestrowork.
I responded to her article. Well, it was more like a response to the idea of what she wrote about. Pop culture has a way of infiltrating everyone's lives.

Interesting. :)