Jump to content
 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Why the men of old Hollywood are sexier than today's men...


traceyk65
 Share

Recommended Posts

Not sure if I agree. There were body builders back in the 30s, 40s & 50s as well as men who had a 'sculpted' look that were not weight lifters.

 

I think some men today are healthier (not all, but some). A lot of those men from the studio era didn't take care of themselves very well and you can see how out of shape they became in their later roles, while they were still young. 

 

If the article writer is suggesting that today's male actors are more femme than the studio era actors, I think that is the wrong way to approach it. There were romantic leads back in the day that were not entirely masculine in their appearance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think a lot of male stars of the past worked out and  had a sculpted body. The studio bosses made them stay in shape as much as the women,

 

The difference is back then the clothing style for men was looser and maybe a little baggy.  Even if a major star was wearing a tailored suit it wasn't as "form-fitting" as they wear today. If an actor had to be bare-chested for a scene, the production code didn't allow showing his belly button so his swimsuit or whatever had to just about come up his ribcage. So who would know if he had a "six-pack".

 

I  don't think think that it's necessarily a fact that today's stars spend more time at the gym, it's just that they show off the results  more than the stars of the past. Think about it, when's the last time you saw a picture of Johnny Weissmuller in a speedo? ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, we certainly know that women were sexier back then. They had some meat on them and a few curves here and there. Today's women don't compare with all that stringy hair and skinny frames. I believe it was Elizabeth Curley who asserted that Marilyn Monroe was too fat. If so, gimme fat, any old day.

 

(This was sort of OT, sorry ... couldn't help myself.)

 

:D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personality may have something to do with it, no?

I can hardly tell one of today's film stars (was a television star ten minutes ago) from another.  Most of them seem decidedly lacking in personality.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting article.  While I'm all about talking about sexy hot men in movies, I think my particular taste differs from that of the author of this article.

 

I never look at a man and think "wow, what a sexy barrel chested man."  The only men that she even mentioned that I thought were hot was William Holden in Picnic and Burt Lancaster.  She also mentioned Fred MacMurray in Double Indemnity.  For whatever reason, while I never really found MacMurray to be "hot" I found him attractive in Double Indemnity-- maybe it was the bad boy factor, lol. 

 

I do agree with the author to some extent when she says the male stars of today are scrawny and that the stars of yesterday could probably kick their a sses. Of course, there are some stars today that would definitely hold their own in a fight, but for every Mark Wahlberg, you've got the pansies from Twilight.

 

I find a lot of the Old Hollywood men sexier than today's male stars simply because of their image they seemed to convey in their personal lives and their film personalities.  Men back in the day also seemed to be less groomed (except when it comes to mustaches and hairstyles) than the men these days.  Nobody would be calling Clark Gable a "metrosexual" in the 1930s.  Now it seems like many of the male celebrities spend an inordinate amount of time perfecting their faux hawks, using male facial and skin products, getting manicures, and the like.

 

Clark Gable was made out to be the outdoorsy/everyday man.  He often portrayed men at home in nature and not worried about getting in a brawl, getting dirty, and the like.  Combine that with his gruff sounding voice and his handsome looks (despite having kind of big ears, imo) and he was a hit with the ladies.  He exuded charm and confidence.  He gave the sense that he could take care of his lady and protect her. 

 

Cary Grant was the urbane, sophisticated, witty man.  He definitely wore a suit well and had that great voice.  His good looks combined with his smooth lines also made him a popular star. 

 

Errol Flynn.  Well.  Do I really need to explain why he was a hit with the female audience? While he was definitely a big man (height wise and had broad shoulders) he wasn't a barrel chested type like Robert Mitchum.  Flynn, in his prime, was svelte but athletic with very long legs.  In films, he could charm the ladies with a smooth line and his sexy smile and then immediately turn around and out fence (or out fox) his opponent.  He would effortlessly defeat his adversary with some fancy footwork and clever quips.

 

That's just naming a few examples.  There were some major male stars who weren't tall (Gene Kelly, James Cagney) others who weren't "barrel chested" (Humphrey Bogart, Frank Sinatra) and in between.  These men were all popular stars.  It's because these stars had attractive and distinct personalities.

 

In my opinion, that's what's missing these days in films-- personality.  While there are definitely good actors out there, so many of them are interchangeable, or they become one note performers.  How many times can Liam Neeson do various versions of Taken?  How many times is Bruce Willis going to make the same action film playing the same character?  Even if some Old Hollywood actors played the same type of character in their films, they do so with such confidence and style that it's hard not to fall in love with them. 

 

Perhaps that's another thing that's missing: style.  The men back then were much better dressed than they are now. 

 

I may be going off on a tangent now, but maybe we're seeing the Old Hollywood men as sexier because of the whole package of an Old Hollywood film.  Combine the black and white with the soft focus lenses, or complimentary lighting, the gorgeous leading lady, the rich film scores, the tailored and fitted suits or tuxes, just the whole package.  The overall aesthetics only enhance the overall effect and product of all those involved-- I mean, I always think Flynn or Holden make smoking look super hot and I think smoking is disgusting! Look how glamorous the leading ladies look with the long cigarette holders.  It's all about the overall elegant look of the studio era films.

 

(I was excited to see this article was from someone who works for The Oregonian-- a newspaper I'm very familiar with!)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personality may have something to do with it, no?

I can hardly tell one of today's film stars (was a television star ten minutes ago) from another.  Most of them seem decidedly lacking in personality.

I was typing that exact thing! My verboseness caused me to post the same thing after your very succinct post.  Lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think a lot of male stars of the past worked out and  had a sculpted body. The studio bosses made them stay in shape as much as the women,

 

The difference is back then the clothing style for men was looser and maybe a little baggy.  Even if a major star was wearing a tailored suit it wasn't as "form-fitting" as they wear today. If an actor had to be bare-chested for a scene, the production code didn't allow showing his belly button so his swimsuit or whatever had to just about come up his ribcage. So who would know if he had a "six-pack".

 

I  don't think think that it's necessarily a fact that today's stars spend more time at the gym, it's just that they show off the results  more than the stars of the past. Think about it, when's the last time you saw a picture of Johnny Weissmuller in a speedo? ;)

Re: the studios forcing them to stay in shape, agreed.  I don't think there are many stars (or any?) who constantly gained or lost weight for various roles, like actors do these days.  

 

Good thing Johnny Weissmuller worked out--not much room in that loin cloth to hide a beer gut.  Lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a lot more "sculpting" going on today. Muscle groupings are so defined now, because of modern workout equipment specifically designed for building specific shapes.

 

It was enough to be a strong and straight-standing man back then. No oil required. Yes, they worked out - but didn't sculpt like what's happening now.

 

And man-scaping was simply not done. Hair was manly, just so long as it wasn't WAY overgrown.

 

But, apart from the body image differences, there's something else about the ancient ones.

 

A simpler mentality - a code of manliness - a dependability - a sureness of one's role as a man.

 

Not being a woman, I'm not completely sure I'm making sense here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

   

A simpler mentality - a code of manliness - a dependability - a sureness of one's role as a man.

 

Not being a woman, I'm not completely sure I'm making sense here.

A keen observation-- makes sense to me.  Those attributes surely apply to actors of that era.  And as I read it again, I realized it also describes my father, he of the WWII generation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As for women being "meatier" back then & skinny now....do you realize Marilyn Monroe is BIG with the high school crowd? They think she's beautiful because of her round curves. I think chunkier girls identify with her body type and the boys are confirming they like it too. Thank goodness, the concentration camp Audrey look is OUT.

 

The reason why romantic leading men of old are sexier than the romantic leading men of today is most certainly because of personality. Gable had a "hunkster" personality, Cagney had a "bad boy" persona and Cary Grant's voice and mannerisms are almost cartoony.

No wonder people could do IMPRESSIONS of them.

Even though they had distinct personalities, they always could play against type and we still accepted them.

 

As much as I love Paul Newman, he seems to be the first ushering in the "modern" era of men- handsome but kind of plain, average style speaking voice & mannerisms. OK, but not nearly as memorable performances as actors with "charactor"

 

At least leading men in movies look better than the guys you see on the street: exposed buttocks, shaved head, mumblers that just look like giant toddlers shuffling along.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I do agree with the author to some extent when she says the male stars of today are scrawny and that the stars of yesterday could probably kick their a sses. Of course, there are some stars today that would definitely hold their own in a fight, but for every Mark Wahlberg, you've got the pansies from Twilight.

I've been following this conversation with interest, but you lost me with "the pansies from Twilight". If holding your own in a fight is the standard, then we get the men and the culture we deserve. A "fight club" mentality also bleeds over into men's relationships with women.

I'm not trying to derail an interesting thread; I just thought it needed to be said. Carry on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you regarding today's men?   Or today's male actors? 

 

I think the opinion may depend largely on a personal perspective.  Presentation of the man in the movie and such, appearance otherwise and all.

 

The person's age(the one whom replies is what I mean) may also be a factor in the opinion.  Sexiness in a man was something different than what it might be considered in these times.  As it is with women. 

 

There are young ladies in my family( in their 20's) who see an old movie with a young Robert Redford and wonder what all the FUSS was about.  Go back further, and none of them can fathom Clark Gable's appeal.  Yet, they swoon when Channing Tatum or Ryan Gosling make the scene.  And, their Mothers can't understand THAT!

 

 

Sepiatone

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The author of this article maintains that today's men are less manly than the men of Classic Hollywood because they aren't meaty enough. They spend too much time in the gym getting "sculpted" instead of living. I think she (he?) may have a point...

 

http://www.salon.com/2000/10/24/barrels/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=socialflow

That was a fun article to read, thanks for the link.  :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why the average men actresses of old Hollywood are more appealing to me than today's men actresses...

For me as a guy, it is presumably similar to a couple of the replies so far.  Physical attributes are part of it, but factors such as grooming, decorum, presentation, attitude, and personality (which often get overlooked today) go a long way with me.  Just like in real life!  Hey you, get off yer Iphone long enuff to talk to me!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for all the replies! I thought a little more about this and while someone like Ryan Gosling is lovely to look at, it's like looking at a piece of fine sculpture. Kinda cold and hard. In real life, I, like the author, prefer a man who's a little cushion-y and who can get things done, like changing the oil or fixing brakes. Or turning a pile of wood into a beautiful built-in dining room hutch (which my decidedly non-sculpted hubby did last year). (For the record, Im inpressed with a woman who can do these things too)

 

Someone mentioned that the pendulum is swinging back towards curvy for women and I think that's true. Women like Beyonce, Jennifer lopez and Kim Kardashiskank, among others have gone along way towards bringing back the hourglass figure. When women get implants to make their butts bigger, well, that seems to say that we, as a nation "like big butts and we cannot lie." LOL

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Justin Timberlake tried to bring sexy back a few years ago.

 

How so?

 

Apart from knowing my teen daughter loved him, I'm not very familiar with his acting. I have seen him on SNL a couple of times - didn't seem that sexy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for all the replies! I thought a little more about this and while someone like Ryan Gosling is lovely to look at, it's like looking at a piece of fine sculpture. Kinda cold and hard. In real life, I, like the author, prefer a man who's a little cushion-y and who can get things done, like changing the oil or fixing brakes. Or turning a pile of wood into a beautiful built-in dining room hutch (which my decidedly non-sculpted hubby did last year). (For the record, Im inpressed with a woman who can do these things too)

 

Someone mentioned that the pendulum is swinging back towards curvy for women and I think that's true. Women like Beyonce, Jennifer lopez and Kim Kardashiskank, among others have gone along way towards bringing back the hourglass figure. When women get implants to make their butts bigger, well, that seems to say that we, as a nation "like big butts and we cannot lie." LOL

Tracey,

 

I think the original article is a little too biased to be taken seriously. It really doesn't cover all the angles.

 

And where would we put someone like Bruce Jenner...?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How so?

 

Apart from knowing my teen daughter loved him, I'm not very familiar with his acting. I have seen him on SNL a couple of times - didn't seem that sexy.

 

"SexyBack" was a song released by Justin Timberlake in 2006.

It was his first number 1 single.

 

The video was pretty cool (in my opinion).

 

The opening line was: "I'm bringing sexyback."

 

The very catchy (again in my opinion) chorus is "Go ahead, be gone with it."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"SexyBack" was a song released by Justin Timberlake in 2006.

It was his first number 1 single.

 

The video was pretty cool (in my opinion).

 

The opening line was: "I'm bringing sexyback."

 

The very catchy (again in my opinion) chorus is "Go ahead, be gone with it."

I love that song! I'm not usually a Top 40 pop music fan, but that song is pretty catchy.  I've never found JT to be all that attractive and his voice is pretty nasally, but many of his songs have good beats. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How so?

 

Apart from knowing my teen daughter loved him, I'm not very familiar with his acting. I have seen him on SNL a couple of times - didn't seem that sexy.

I've seen Timberlake in a few minor movies.  He seems to do OK.  Well, THE SOCIAL NETWORK wasn't considered a minor movie when it was out, and Timberlake had a role in it, and he kept pace with the others fairly well.

 

MY thing is about how today's young male "stars" appear off screen.  On talk shows and stuff...

 

They stride out with what looks like a two or three days growth of beard, and their hair looks as if they just rolled out of bed( and they pay BIG bucks to get it like that!), and the young women all go BONKERS at their "hot" look!

 

I kept MY appearance like that through most of my HIGH SCHOOL years, and the girls back THEN all sneered at me and said I looked "seedy".  In old TV commercials for a game called "Dream Date" (remember THAT one, ladies?) the "date" that was the "dud" looked pretty much the same.  HE'D be the "dream date" these days! :rolleyes:

 

 

Sepiatone

  • Like 1
Link to comment
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
 Share

© 2022 Turner Classic Movies Inc. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...