Jump to content

 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Sign in to follow this  
Ascotrudgeracer

People L@@K DIFFERENT Than They Did in 1941.

Recommended Posts

Is it just me, or have you ever thought that nobody today looks like the kind of people who were running around 60-70 years ago?

 

It's more than hairstyles and clothes; bone structure isn't the same, or something.

 

Theory: this is precisely why films made today "miss the mark" when they attempt to create a film or play set during WW2; actors and actresses look like they're "pretending" or worse, "dressing up."

 

Edited by: Ascotrudgeracer on Aug 5, 2011 9:44 AM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you been reading the Paulette Goddard thread? The consensus is that Paulette looked very much like a 21st century woman..... I don't think, though, that you'll see too many people walking around today who look like Wallace Beery or Marie Dressler.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

this is strange weirdness...i haven't seen the Goddard thread, BUT about one week ago I said to someone: "For some reason, Paulette Goddard looks like women look in 2011."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A woman ahead of her time------If Paulette were around today, she'd be the biggest star in Hollywood, even bigger than Lindsay Lohan..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i disagree. movie actors and actresses (especially actresses) looked different then than they do today because beauty tastes have changed. Also back in the 30's and 40's studios tended to hire teens and 20-somethings for "pretty lady"-type roles that today would be played by women in their mid/late-20's to 30's. not to mention hairstyles and makeup styles and little things like the positions of eyebrow lines were drastically different then. Paulette Goddard had a more natural look in the 1940's than many actresses (when puffed up poodle-like hairstyles were oddly popular) and that is why she looks current.

 

As for males, actors generally didn't have as "defined" muscles back in the 40's. like today, there were people who worked out a lot, but steroids and other cheats hadn't been invented yet, so men looked more natural.

 

Also, in general, there were more skinny people running around back then compared to today, i think due to people needing to walk places all the time (usually while chain-smoking LOL). as opposed to today when many of us find ourselves sitting most of the time, either at home or in our cars. and good food is cheaper and more widely available today than back then, with ridiculously huge portion sizes at restaurants being the standard now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it is the makeup, the hair styles, and the way people acted in the movies in the old days. If Wallace Beery did't say "Aww, shucks" all the time and make his famous faces and have his special way of talking, he would look like any other old grump chubby man today.

 

Take a look at this lady. She looks like a 21st Century lady, because her makeup has been altered and her hairstyle is messed up in this particular movie. Do you know who she is?

 

http://i55.tinypic.com/16jlk44.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who is she, Fred? She looks so familiar, yet I can't seem to identify her. It's driving me crazy ! Tell us who she is, or I'll be distracted all day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

> {quote:title=finance wrote:}{quote}..... I don't think, though, that you'll see too many people walking around today who look like Wallace Beery or Marie Dressler.

Haven't been inside a McDonalds or a Wallmart for a while, eh finance?

 

(...or a Burger King or a K-Mart...or a.....)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are several reasons, the first I will keep simple. Why do you think America is called *the great melting pot?* I won't go into details fearing what I might write may be taken out of context but you can figure that one out.

 

By the way if anyone are over 50 years old, you might remember that minorities was not shown in advertising and commercials plus TV programming during the time period before the 1970's.

 

Second people dress very different, just look at the clothing and hair styles from the 1940's. I hate how kids dress today.

 

Not only appearance but how people *talk* is different. Its the "reflection" aka mannerism in how today's generation speak. But this can be expected as language evolves over time.

 

I found humorous that the producers of "Star Trek Voyager" didn't take this into account with that episode where Colonel Braxton from the 29th century came back in time. We probually won't even recognize the language people will use then, lol!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's Fay Wray in The Most Dangerous Game, 1932, after messing up her makeup and hair style while running through the jungle. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the following here might be a form of these "anachronisms":

 

The clean-shaven faces and the '30s, '40s, '50s perfectly combed and parted on the side hairstyles of the cowboys in Westerns made during those years, but said cowpokes or Old West folk are supposed to be in the later half of the 19th Century, where in reality there was a whole lot more facial hair and longer hair worn back then.

 

In fact, and please don't none o' y'all cowpokes around here take a potshot at me for sayin' the followin' "sacreligious" thing, BUT this point here is somethin' I think SLIGHTLY makes *High Noon* a little off in its visual impact. Ya see, every male actor(especially) in it looks like they've just parked their '52 Buick Roadmaster or whatever they were driving to the set that day, hit the makeup and wardrobe department, and waited for their scene to be shot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you search the site for the term "oval," you'll get to the discussion we were having recently about the different shapes of faces that were popular in the 30s. SansFin suggested that long oval faces were the standard for male stars then, as opposed to short oval faces and bilateral symmetry as the desired look today. JackFavell posted some pictures of the long oval faces.

 

Paulette may have been lucky to dodge the various "helmet hair" looks that were, alas, popular in the 40s. June Allyson and Ann Sheridan got stuck with a lot of these. The hair that's rolled up all around the edges seems designed to prevent a man from running his fingers through a woman's hair.

I like the more natural bodies of actors in classic films.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's Fay Wray in The Most Dangerous Game, 1932, after messing up her makeup and hair style while running through the jungle. :)

 

A far cry from "The Wedding March," that's for sure!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If some clever director could teach all the people I see in WalMart to act, we would have hundreds of great new character actors, including me. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have noticed many times about people from the 30's, 40's especially looked a lot more grown up than today's stars.

 

I mark it up to most people were reall skinny and that makes you look older.

 

I remember my Father getting home from the army in '46 and he was skinny as a rail.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So the fatter you are, the younger you look? I want to look really young, so it's time for me to start going to McDonald's more. Maybe I'll even see some guys who look like Wallace Beery.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have noticed many times about people from the 30's, 40's especially looked a lot more grown up than today's stars.

 

Acted that way, too. Think of "Platinum Blonde," where Jean Harlow, all of 20, plays the titular heiress (no puns please), and Loretta Young (18 at the time) portrays a big-city newspaper reporter! Carole Lombard's first starring role was the now-lost Fox silent "Marriage In Transit," where her character gets married as a plot point; it was made in early 1925, when Lombard was only a few months past age 16.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

> {quote:title=William wrote:}{quote}I have noticed many times about people from the 30's, 40's especially looked a lot more grown up than today's stars.

>

> I mark it up to most people were reall skinny and that makes you look older.

>

> I remember my Father getting home from the army in '46 and he was skinny as a rail.

I believe that what you are referring to as "grown up" involves much, much more than the mere physical appearance. At least, I do. Specifically, I think that the way the actors were dressed, their general behavior, their command of the language, their class, their intelligence, their awareness of the surroundings, their ability to follow a story line coherently, etc., etc. all contribute to the grown-up "look."

 

Gerald

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People have definitely changed over time. In 1930, 5' 5.75" was the height of the average male in an industrialized country. That rose to 5' 10.9" by 1980.

 

Although I'm clearly not an expert, I assume that difference in height did not happen in isolation -- other changes in musculature and skeletal growth had to happen at the same time.

 

Also -- In the late 1970s and 1980s, I had the computers to handle advanced CAD programs. I also used them to do digital restoration and digital enhancement of old photographs after I found I could charge more per hour for scanning/retouching . . . um . . . let's call them risque photos than I could for converting hand drawn blueprints to CAD files. (And I enjoyed the irony of being paid to look at porn.)

 

I can state with some confidence that for photos taken between 1880 and 1930, and with three or more women pictured, I can date it to within ten years by the shape/firmness and height of the breasts. (The length of the legs is also a clue, but it's mainly the breasts.)

 

The look in male faces (the long oval) may be that high foreheads were more popular in the 1930s. Today, women seem to want men's hair to brush their eyebrows.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with Dargo. One of the most hilarious things now is to watch old 60's TV westerns like Bonanza, Gunsmoke or The Big Valley. The actors all look like 1960's archtypes. The woman all have perfectly coifed hair with bangs and and a WHOLE lot of hairspray. The guys all have that fake "newscaster" hair with sideburns. (and all very very clean shaven) .Somehow I just don't think the real Old West was like that. I've often wondered why , with the size of most movie and TV budgets, they just can't get actors and actresses to look the part when the movie is set in the past. I'm sure there are many other examples .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*I have noticed many times about people from the 30's, 40's especially looked a lot more grown up than today's stars.*

 

*I mark it up to most people were reall skinny and that makes you look older.*

 

What it is was the Youth Culture coming into play. Teenagers as a concept, came into popular being only in the 1940s. Before that, they were youngsters trying to, and expected to, fit in and take their place in the adult world. They were not viewed as a separate group that might have their own tastes and buying power. Of course, with the 50s Rock and Roll Revolution, and culminating in the 60s Counterculture, a definite schism between "us' vs. "them" was codified, acknowledged and revered. And now with the emphasis on youth, you have a prolonged adolescence period in terms of habits, styles, etc. lasting well into the 30s; we even have many 40 and 50 somethings still trying to look and act like teenagers.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Teenagers as a concept, came into popular being only in the 1940s. Before that, they were youngsters trying to, and expected to, fit in and take their place in the adult world.

 

Yes, you are right. Before then, kids and young people looked forward to becoming adults, they didn't look forward to becoming teenagers and remaining teenagers forever.

 

I first noticed this when I went on some medical trips down to remote villages in Central America. The local village kids went from childhood to young adulthood. There was no long drawn-out teenage culture. I saw mothers with two or three kids at the age of 15 and 16. They were very mature people. The American teenagers who went with us from the US were all immature idiots compared to the local young people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Capuchin, great to hear from you. Love hearing about your, er, specialized studies.

 

In Renaissance paintings children were painted and dressed as little adults. The concept of childhood, let alone adolescence, was slow in developing. A fascinating book on this subject is *Centuries of Childhood* by Philippe Aries.

 

Some of our 40-year-old actors still look like teenagers: Brad Pitt, Matt Damon, Leonardo DiCaprio, for instance. Someday they'll probably look like 70-year-old teenagers. Boyhood--or boyishness--lasts a long time.

 

At some point, probably in the 60s, young people no longer wanted to dress like adults. In *West Side Story* (1961) the gang members dance in coats and ties. This would change radically.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

© 2020 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy
×
×
  • Create New...