I
You're right about the actresses looking modern-dressed-as-retro. I can accept that, though, because of budgetary constraints. That, and in some ways, it seems like people just look different from that time, generally speaking. I remember reading some opinion about Ian Fleming's vision of James Bond (resembling Hoagy Carmichael), that it was very pre-WWII. I kind of get what they were saying, in terms of facial structure, and wonder if there's something similar about the way people look now, compared to the '40s.
I'm rambling, but I hope you guys know what I mean. Whenever there's a movie that's supposed to take place in that time, the actors rarely seem to fit that world 100%, at least in comparison to film stars of those times. If you drop someone like Tom Cruise into a '40s/'50s movie, for example, he just wouldn't look right, no matter how you do his hair and clothing.
Maybe it's something age-specific about modern actors. Maybe 40 really is the new 30, if you're in Hollywood.![]()
clooney is one of thr few that really fits in with period pieces.
disappointed to see they are redoing the wolfman makeup.
[/QUOTE]
That looks amusing. The other movie I'm really looking forward to is Trick 'r' Treat. That has a really good vibe to it.
Thanks for being cool about it.
I've been getting the archive editions, but I didn't know they intended to revive it; okay, I've definitely got to go to the store today....
But they will try to get one for me, and I subscribed. The new Archive edition was in, though, and my pain was also ameliorated by the new issue of Alter Ego with coverage of all the Mad imitators of the 50s.