So I've just watched The Devil Wears Prada. It's a fun movie, and well done. Perhaps it is not a deep story, but an important message anyway, about sticking to your principles and being yourself. And it is often funny, and brilliantly acted by (of course) Merryl Streep, Stanley Tucci, Emily Blunt, and Anne Hathaway (who just yesterday was a teen star in The Princess Diaries).
Anne Hathaway is just gorgeous, eyes the size of Humvees and a smile which can't be human. It is pretty funny how in the beginning everybody at the fashion magazine treat her as an ugly duckling when she is clearly the prettiest woman in the building. Typical film "trick": she puts on a boring skirt and suddenly she is "ugly"? :)
A detail I like is how her character holds no grievances. Even after having left her job after a year of constant shit from her boss, when she sees her accidentally on the street, she smiles and waves at her, and genuinely so. She's just a generally loving person.
I have a bit more respect for the fashion world than I used to. For instance I have to admit that this movie show some very beautiful clothes, bags, and jewelry*. Gorgeous stuff. And perhaps it is just in human nature that you can't have this undeniable aesthetic without also getting the destructive ego and competition which comes with anything important on this planet, so people will pay $30,000 for a hand bag, and will judge each other harshly for wearing something which was fashionable six months ago, but now is the poorest taste.
Ooh, ooh: great example; the Birkin Bag, one of the most expensive and prestigious hand bags in the world, is becoming less prestigious, because the nouveau riche "footballers' wives" all have them now. Is that funny or what?
My biggest problem with fashion is the "sheep factor" in how otherwise intelligent people will let their clothing choices be dictated to them willy-nilly from designers and magazines, instead of using their own taste and judgement. But again I have to admit that this is surely just human nature, rather than a characteristic of the fashion industry itself. I mean, if I was a big designer "name", I really don't think I would have the bollix to say No to lots of people who were willing and eager to pay insanely inflated prices for anything I came up with.
* I don't get the fetish for shoes though. Women's shoes are ugly, and couldn't be less comfortable if they had spikes on the inside. (No, I haven't tried them, I don't think they make them in my size, but it's pretty clear from what women sound like when they take them off.)
23 comments:
Of course She does. The Devil is one elegant dame. Metrosexual. Hermaphrodite. Whatever.
It is also public knowledge that the Devil wrote in the Pravda. Right, Comrades? ;-)
Typical film "trick": she puts on a boring skirt and suddenly she is "ugly"?"
The scene in Harry Potter 4 where Hermione appears at he Yule Ball was similarly anti-clinactic. I mean, not only had I read the book, but since the first time I sam pre-teen Emma Watson in the first movie, I thought: "THIS is ugly duckling Hermione, with "teeth slightly too big"? But she's pretty, and has the loveliest smile!"
So, even though I wasn't thinking forward to the ball scene in all the movie's action, the only surprise there was her fancy dress. And she's blossoming beautifully.
Definitely out of my age group, but the world's full of pretty girls, many of which are also beautiful on the inside. Finding my match won't be a decades-long latin soap opera series. :-)
"I don't get the fetish for shoes though."
This brings me to the only default in the Domai site. One which is rather unavoidable. It is clear that these natural beauties are from today's "Western world", from one detail: the feet. Several of them have imperfect feet, because of the effect of today's shoes on the normal shape and tonus of the toes. One thing's for sure with my mother: she has normal, healthy feet. She never wears high heels. Except maybe once a year, for the occasional wedding invitation. At her age, the results, or rather absence of painful results, are invaluable for one's well-being.
That shoe fetish is about as dumb as the one for big, silicone-inflated breasts, or inexpressive botoxed faces. ):-P
My biggest problem with fashion is the "sheep factor"
Baaa?
"Typical film "trick": she puts on a boring skirt and suddenly she is "ugly"?"
This is perhaps the tip of the biggest iceberg in fashion -- and in Hollywood. I'm not happy with the blithe dismissal of the "trick" at all, and would probably be irked by the whole movie because of it. A stunningly gorgeous young woman goes about having an "average to below average" experience and then through romantic (old non-relationship sense) intercessions magically has a better life. Can't stand it. Further examples:
"The Truth About Cats and Dogs": Guy falls in love, sight unseen, with radio veterinarian. Really the vet is Janeane Garofalo (supposedly ugly), but she gets Uma Thurman to play the part for a while. Guy "loves" Janeane anyway. Problem: Janeane in Hollywood makeup is more gorgeous than any woman I've ever met in real life.
"Local Girls": Same problem. Guy who has moved on goes back to town for up-close-and-personal with his school mates who are stuck in dead-end town with dead-end jobs. Although he has a "meaningful relationship," the guy nevertheless almost jumps in the sack with the hottest chick in the class (again Uma Thurman) but eventually "holds out" for the arrival of his fiancee on the weekend. Problem: fiancee turns out to be super-duper hot, stunning.
"Shallow Hal": normal guy can't fall in love with normal girls because he's too concerned about their appearance. Magic potion (Tony Robbins) causes him to only see their inner beauty. But what is Hollywood's method of displaying inner beauty to the audience? Giving them outer beauty! Like Gwynneth Paltrow! Guy falls in love with Gwynneth. Gee what a surprise.
"Pretty Woman": guy can't get a date, is a bit of a social outcast. (But is ultra-suave, super rich, stunningly well dressed and fit, played by the actor voted one of Hollywood's "sexiest men ever.") Woman is down in the dumps, turning tricks, can't get herself out of "the life." (But is young, attractive, no drug addictions, has expensive clothes, never smudges her make-up, has no skin or health problems due to her erratic lifestyle, has no abusive biker who beats and pimps her, played by the actress voted one of Hollywood's "sexiest women ever.")
These inconsistencies shouldn't bother me. But they do, perhaps because I know they do the most damage where the least can be appreciated. Example:
On a long trip with a choir from a school where I was attending grad school, we got a video coach and put a VCR tape in. One of the flamboyant gay boys in the bass section (now since lost to us, suicide, God rest him) chose "Pretty Woman." I happened to be near the front of the bus, got bored with the movie halfway through, and moved PAST the monitors to the real front where the interesting people were having a talk while we rode.
Then, near the end, when the "meaningful change" happens and the beautiful people reconcile and get happily married ever after, I heard the characteristic "awwwwww" from all the college-aged girls in the bus. So I turned around. What I saw was a real lesson.
All the females who were ignoring the movie, either talking with some of the adults or doing homework or just having a look out the window, were the hotties whom I was hoping to date. But all the females who were rapt in awe-inspired devotion at the presumption that YOU TOO can have a horrible life and then get a perfect resolution magically because Richard Gere himself will solve it all for you? They were all the ugly dumplings, the "loser" girls who didn't have much interesting to them, neither looks nor character nor choir singing ability. They were the also-rans.
It was a literal 1:1 correlation. The people I thought of as "winners" hated the movie. These were, among others, the girls who look as good as Julia Roberts. But the people who WANTED to "disappear into the fabric of life" and just live a bland, sheep-like existence, loved the movie. These included the girls who would never look as good as Julia Roberts and therefore, most likely, would never ever have a shot at the Richard Geres of the world.
To me, that means the movie is doing the most damage exactly where the damage can least be tolerated. Those people who have something "going on" for themselves already, could probably stand a little mindless escapism, probably wouldn't slip into the solipsism of thinking "me too!" about the impossible fairy tale. But they don't. They don't need the fairy tales. They just ignore the movie. But those who are marginalized already, slinking off to neediness, probably MOST need to instigate getting something positive going on in their OWN lives, but thanks to movies like that, they are LESS likely rather than more, to do so. The escapism invites those who should least indulge in escape, to try to run away.
To put it metaphorically: dumpy boring girls identify with Julia Roberts on the false premise that they're "just the same." Attractive girls know better, for two reasons.
So I dislike the "typical film trick" of making someone as attractive as Anne Hathaway supposedly unattractive (great joke about this in "Another Teen Movie" and in "Airplane" where the 'ugly' girl removes her glasses and KABOOM new gorgeous actress appears). It can't happen. Anne Hathaway has a "better shot at life" BECAUSE OF HER OUTER BEAUTY. Humans are like that.
The shallowest of judgments might be something a bit extreme. Beautiful people with perfect nails aren't always good heart surgeons. But the opposite isn't necessarily true, either. Physically fit, outgoing, active folks are both more slim and more mentally active, usually. Hollywood denies it to help make a buck off the dumpy boring ones, and does damage to those people in the process.
Oh yeah, forgot. And I *DO* understand the shoe thing. Back in the good old days, nearly everything you owned had the same degree of "couture" and "craftsmanship" to it. A nice overcoat, or smoking pipe, or fountain pen, these days, might still be carefully designed and crafted, but generally they are simply mass-produced and therefore uglier but still functional. Shoes -- at least, the high-fashion ones -- somehow have managed to weather the industrial revolution better than (for example) hats or belts (though high-end versions of those things are still out there, few of us indulge in them). Don't know why THAT has happened (though I could speculate), but it means that people who are instinctively looking for visible outward signs of "class" (word used advisedly, to mean all the myriad problematic associations with money, style, taste, breeding, social networks, etc.), which is a quest all young women on the hunt for a mate engage in instinctively, will look at shoes among other things as evidence.
Don't forget "She's All That", the one much lampooned by "Not Another Teen Movie" (which I love), amongst other things for exactly this trick. (Though I don't recall them switching actresses.)
"But the people who WANTED to "disappear into the fabric of life" and just live a bland, sheep-like existence, loved the movie."
Typical. The bane of women's true liberation: the ever-sneaky "prince charming" syndrome.
Definition: "You're a lifeless loser nothing? No biggie. There's a perfect man out there, and he's destined to find you effortlessly, sweep you off your feet and shovel you in the trash basket... I mean, and take you on his white horsie to make you his princess and you'll live happily ever after. And have lots of kids, but they'll all be perfect little angels."
The dirtiest trick ever played on women was to brainwash them with that sickeningly naive, archaic mirage cliché since infancy. So much that I was honestly stunned, in Pocahontas 2, to see that she WAS NOT marrying John Smith. Not that is was decently explained. In the first Disney movie, it was fairy-tale love. Okay, so far I'm still following. In the sequel, they just simultaneously and very maturely realized they weren't "truly in love" with each other, so they remained good friends just like that.
"Good friends", another ignoble scam. Either when it claims that guy-girl friendship remains friendship and can/will NEVER evolve into love (so seek it elsewhere than right under your nose), or when it convinces you that you can dump a man who's in love with you because friendship will be largely satisfactory for him. Show him the sun, then leave him with a candle.
And this is the recipe for making normally nice girls into heart-rippers. Or into their own worst enemy ("I know he beats me up, but he'll change because he loves me and I love him").
The Devil distillates syrupy dreams that'll give you diabetes and tooth cavities.
"You fall in love when you think you've found the perfect mate. You STAY in love when you accept that your mate can't be perfect."
They should teach this in kindergarten. That way, 6 year-olds would understand everything about why grown-ups sometimes behave so strange an illogical. "Oh ya, they're in luv. Some day soon they will fight, but still be in luv. Mistress says one day we'll also become silly like that. Part of growin' up."
I wonder whom it makes more angry, me or Pascal. :)
I do see exactly all your points (and raise you a few!). I don't know what's been worse, seeing a lot of capable young women ruin their lives because of their need for the princess Disney myths, or trying to date them and seeing them ruin MY life because I didn't fulfill the princess Disney myths.
You turn a nice phrase: "Show him the sun, then leave him with a candle." I thought you'd go on from there to explain that men who aren't getting sex from someone who claims to "really care for him" are men who are being cruelly manipulated for the woman's ego gratification. Surprised you missed that chance. :) But instead, you went to talk about friendship versus love. What? How dare you!
Final Identity said...
"I wonder whom it makes more angry, me or Pascal. :)"
Oh, that's not the real angry me. You've never truly seen me *angry*. ;-)
"You wouldn't like me when I'm angry." -- (Pr. Robert Bruce Banner, PHD)
Come to think of it... I think even *I* have never seen me truly angry. Good thing, that.
Actually, ranting makes me very happy, in a twisted masochistic sort of way. Especially when I feel I'm being heard and making people reflect.
"I thought you'd go on from there to explain that men who aren't getting sex"...
That's because I meant more than sex. (Don't get me wrong, I love sex!) I meant the courage to commit oneself and accept a radiant full love relationship that would make both parts very happy. Sex is only a component of that.
Really, what I can't bloody understand is women who (in theory) "really care for" a man friend, but flee the eventuality of a love relationship with somebody who is clearly sincere and acknowledged as such... an attitude which has no sensible explanation whatsoever!
Not only us, they're also causing great harm to themselves by trampling a diamond that was sticking out of the world's mud. As if they could only conceive such a long-sought treasure as lying beyond the horizon at the end of a pink rainbow.
Well, being turned down by such a woman is probably for the best, if she lacks some vital common sense. It probably wouldn't last even if your magic genie granted you the wish that she change her mind.
"But instead, you went to talk about friendship versus love. What? How dare you!"
Well, as you've noticed I love taking risks. :-)
Besides, I'm not worried that you'll show up at my doorstep to punch me silly (I don't need punching for that anyway): first you don't know my address, and second even YOU aren't desperate and depressive enough to come chasing me in today's Lebanon.
Unless you want us to meet in the Baghdad Café and settle this like men? Your (admittedly classy) hat says you're not afraid of pointless manly high noon pistol duels.
I'm giving you a fair warning: I have a Mega-Turbo-Super-Soaker and I know how to use it. Equip yourself accordingly, tenderfoot.
I enjoyed the movie and thought that both Meryl Streep and Ms Hathaway both did an excellent job. And I liked that the main character stuck to her guns no matter what, that was good. :)
Same thing with Hermoine, btw - in the books she's described as perhaps not the prettiest, but she's always been really pretty in the movies.
I avoid fashion... mostly because the current fad looks stupid and I can't be bothered to be wearing the same thing everybody else is. Sure, I wear comfortable clothes that really don't change much, but I'm not trying to squeeze myself into the lastest fad.
How's that for an incredibly un-structured, grammatically incorrect and generally weird comment? :)
Really good, thanks.
I think I'm just picking what's comfortable. On the other hand I have to search for something I like, so I must have some kind of style.
I'd like something more colorful, but they don't have it in this town, and I don't care to travel to find something.
Wow! This has been the greatest thread I have ever read when it came to women! Bravo fellows! Bravo! You guys hit the bull square between the eyes in the middle of a midnight storm! I'm saving this entire conversation!
Show him the sun, then leave him with a candle.
TAKE A BOW PASCAL! That has to be the classic quote of the CENTURY!
Can I have your autograph? No joke either. Very well PUT my friend!
Hannah said...
"Same thing with Hermione, btw - in the books she's described as perhaps not the prettiest, but she's always been really pretty in the movies."
Exactly my point! Have you seen that SMILE?
Hey, new pic, Hannah? Careful there, or you'll have people asking all the time "why the hat?" ;-)
"Sure, I wear comfortable clothes that really don't change much"
And how, pray tell, is this even remotely close to following fads?
Dressing comfy? Bah! Bah! Triple bah! How DARE you call youself a sheep in our herd???
If it doesn't make you suffer, it doesn't make you beautiful.
"Squeeze yourself into" is the proper term indeed! :-P
"How's that for an incredibly un-structured, grammatically incorrect and generally weird comment? :)"
I'll be absolutely nasty and say: "Just perfect!" ;-)
Terry said...
"You guys hit the bull square between the eyes in the middle of a midnight storm!"
Hey, nice cow-boy talkin' there, pard'ner! @}:-)
I promise, Terry, I'll autograph you my first book. Provided you buy it at full price, natch! A man's gotta earn a profit. ;-)
Hey, I just phrased how I felt when it happened to me. Of course, that was bound to become instantly universal... Heck, I may use it in case I get unlucky again. (I have the author's permission, since *I* wrote it.)
(odd: I could swear that you just wrote something re: Anne Hathaway, recently, but I wasn't even able to find via a Google search.)
Was just looking at this trailer. Seems like it might be a nice movie. Anne looks quite beautiful in the short haircut as well. :-)
Too funny: I was trying to decide what movie I want to go see, tonight. I thought that I had decided to see this one but...then, there was a "teaser" trailer of 'One Day,' on the side bar (damn advertising! ;0) and...I think that I have, now, decided to go see this one! lol!
And...I thought that I had told you about this film but couldn't quite remember so...I search for Anne and think "really?! This is the only thing that you have ever posted on Anne?!" and, then...I see that I have already posted this movie for you, here, and...the comment that I had wanted to make re: her hair is here, too! It's been a LONG night, I guess! :-P
We all do it.
Well, I've seen Alice, the Depp one. But looking her up, I see there are several movies with her I might like, so they go on my rental list, thanks.
That's what I was just thinking: I can't recall having ever watched a movie w/her in it; hence, why I, often, will, purposely, watch it, just to see how good they are. :-)
For some odd reason, I can't ever recall being "drawn" to see her acting abilities; can't explain it.
It's funny, though: I had completely forgotten about 'The Devil...' even for the fact that Meryl is in it...I had wanted to watch it; so...(no...no...I'm not going to be side-tracked to watch an "old" movie! lol!)
And...I had wanted to watch 'Alice...' because of Depp (the make-up :-) and had, completely, forgotten that she was Alice! lol!
But...this newest movie hits the spot of my favorite subject and...I'll watch whomever is willing to "go there." :-D
OK I admit it; I'd watch this "smut" just "looking for a thrill," these days! :-P
Well, it's a comedy and has high reviews on imdb where they are low on average, so it seems likely it's one I could stand.
We'll have to switch reviews, when we've seen it! :-) Went to see the 'One Day' movie, last night. Was pretty good but...not sure if you would much care for it (except, perhaps, just to look @ Anne throughout the entire movie w/different hairstyles; they are going over a coupla decades of time w/these two.) as it has a lot of..."relationship issues" threaded through it. You'd probably not much care for that bit. :-(
(Funny...it's been long enough that that first link is gone!)
Following the thread of this conversation: conversely, you dudes should try being "the ugly duckling" that never got asked out for a date...just because she didn't look like a model! Not so much fun, neither! :-(
So...watched the movie, tonight. I had a good laugh @ all the rounds of Streep dumping her coats and purses on Anne's desk! FUNNY! That and Streep's continual "that's all" line! lol!
I think that, just like having the appropriate "tools" of any trade, it's certainly nice to be dressed where you aren't an eye sore compared to your surroundings. In that industry, as all others, you are representing the company so...it helps to "look the part." I "got" that! I think it might be fun, for awhile ('cuz I LOVE beautiful clothes and shoes), but...do admit that there are far deeper things to "love" than fashion!
I thought the boyfriend, 'Nate,' had some AMAZING peepers, as well! And...that Simon Baker... :-P
It's quite interesting to note (for me, anyway): Stanley Tucci was also used in a fashion sense in 'Burlesque.' (And I'm trying to remember what I, first, saw him in; it seemed as though it was something quite funny but none of the imDb titles are hitting me! Seems like it was something like 'Beverly Hills Cop' type stuff.)
Thought this was quite interesting/cool.
Post a Comment