http://theweddingtiara.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/elizabeth-taylor1.jpg
― scott seward, Thursday, 24 March 2011 15:28 (thirteen years ago) link
Blimey
― Tom D (Tom D.), Thursday, 24 March 2011 15:30 (thirteen years ago) link
http://www.mimifroufrou.com/scentedsalamander/images/elizabeth-taylor-1957.jpg
― scott seward, Thursday, 24 March 2011 15:31 (thirteen years ago) link
http://www.twolia.com/blogs/heres-looking-like-you-kid/files/2009/07/elizabeth-taylor-sunning-herself-on-the-set-of-giant-1955-photo-by-sid-avery.jpg
― scott seward, Thursday, 24 March 2011 15:33 (thirteen years ago) link
love all the pictures from the giant set:
http://media.kickstatic.com/kickapps/images/66470/photos/PHOTO_9417186_66470_20752879_main.jpg
http://vintagestardust.files.wordpress.com/2010/11/fwc_dean4.jpg
http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/01467/jamesdean_1467951i.jpg
― scott seward, Thursday, 24 March 2011 15:38 (thirteen years ago) link
Guardian overlooks the fact the Jolie *can* act - she won an Oscar, FWIW - and to say her fame rests entirely on who she married is stupid. Her worst movies are no more shitty than many of Liz's, her love life no more the focus of tabloid attention than Liz's, her humanitarian work no less notable or laudable. Personally, I'm not a fan of either actor, but their parallels are manifest. To suggest, as the paper did, that Jolie is famous just for who she married is both a) terribly sexist and b) totally ignorant that she is a much bigger star than her husband.
― Josh in Chicago, Thursday, 24 March 2011 17:12 (thirteen years ago) link
Taylor had the life, the looks, the movies, the smarts and the talent, and she – unlike Jolie – looked as if she not only enjoyed the occasional plate of pasta but my God, to watch her eat it would have been an experience in itself.
Like, this last point is basically just "Liz Taylor was sexy and fat."
― Josh in Chicago, Thursday, 24 March 2011 17:15 (thirteen years ago) link
Impressed with CBS last night. They led with her death at 6:30 (as they should have), and gave her a full eight or nine minutes. And there was more coverage later in the broadcast more specifically about her AIDs work.
― clemenza, Thursday, 24 March 2011 17:16 (thirteen years ago) link
OTM xposts
Angelina Jolie was famous before she met Brad Pitt (though I suspect fairly widely-known for tabloid tattle about her marriage to Billy Bob Thornton rather than her movies, Oscar or not). We were discussing Genuine Hollywood Stars last night following the news of Liz Taylor's death, and we reckoned Clooney and Jolie were the only contemporary stars who even come close (basing on talent, level of worldwide fame, and general indefinable Hollywoodness)
― ailsa, Thursday, 24 March 2011 17:17 (thirteen years ago) link
tom cruise ? julia roberts ?
― AlXTC from Paris, Thursday, 24 March 2011 17:22 (thirteen years ago) link
Cruise is batshit insane and doesn't represent reasonable causes, just scientology. Roberts, maybe? idk
― sarcasdick (mh), Thursday, 24 March 2011 17:32 (thirteen years ago) link
No way
― Tom D (Tom D.), Thursday, 24 March 2011 17:34 (thirteen years ago) link
Also both not remotely sexy
― Tom D (Tom D.), Thursday, 24 March 2011 17:36 (thirteen years ago) link
Rip Taylor is still alive
― buzza, Thursday, 24 March 2011 17:42 (thirteen years ago) link
think the whole "they don't make them like they used to" thing has been talked about forever as far as hollywood goes. its a different place now. the people they prop up now are always gonna suffer by comparison. just cuzza the lighting.
― scott seward, Thursday, 24 March 2011 17:44 (thirteen years ago) link
Yeah, is separate thread (that we've probably done before), just musing that the Jolie comparison isn't a bad one.
― ailsa, Thursday, 24 March 2011 17:46 (thirteen years ago) link
Also, in many ways today's stars lead, ironically, more private lives. Just think of all the A-listers who don't even bother going to the Oscars, which 50 years ago would have been heretical.
― Josh in Chicago, Thursday, 24 March 2011 17:47 (thirteen years ago) link
doesn't represent reasonable causes
well, it wasn't one of the criteria
basing on talent, level of worldwide fame, and general indefinable Hollywoodness
also : di caprio ? will smith ?
― AlXTC from Paris, Thursday, 24 March 2011 17:48 (thirteen years ago) link
Stars don't sell movies anymore – franchises like games and comic books do.
― Rich Lolwry (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Thursday, 24 March 2011 17:49 (thirteen years ago) link
(Cruise discounted on batshittery, btw. Could make a case for diCaprio and Depp, would like to make a case for Blanchett on the glamour/star/interestingness front)
― ailsa, Thursday, 24 March 2011 17:50 (thirteen years ago) link
xp: that is not really true, not unless there is for example a "Limitless" videogame I don't know about
― 'lol u stuck with me now watch this ass expand, joeks on u' (DJP), Thursday, 24 March 2011 17:51 (thirteen years ago) link
Shh! They'll hear you!
― Rich Lolwry (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Thursday, 24 March 2011 17:51 (thirteen years ago) link
It's almost wholly true – the NYT published a story about Hollywood woes a couple of months ago in which studio execs made the same point. Of course a Sandra Bullock, Will Smith or DiCrapio film will draw their respective fans, but these films aren't automatic hits like they were even ten years ago.
― Rich Lolwry (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Thursday, 24 March 2011 17:53 (thirteen years ago) link
ha actually that would be kind of an interesting game mechanic; your character is completely hopeless and useless unless you use these pills, of which you have a finite supply
how do you stretch the resource that makes you capable of playing the game long enough to actually beat the game...?
― 'lol u stuck with me now watch this ass expand, joeks on u' (DJP), Thursday, 24 March 2011 17:53 (thirteen years ago) link
jolie comparison isn't bad and i'm not sure she could pull off some of liz taylor's epic performances but i think she's vv good at what she does, probably stemming from utter confidence w/what she can do in her particular (albeit limited) acting skill set.
― omar little, Thursday, 24 March 2011 18:00 (thirteen years ago) link
friend of mine has some huge pic from the giant set
― puff puff post (uh oh I'm having a fantasy), Thursday, 24 March 2011 18:07 (thirteen years ago) link
this one, no liz
http://www.jamesdean.com/images/photos/giant/pics/jd5.jpg
― puff puff post (uh oh I'm having a fantasy), Thursday, 24 March 2011 18:08 (thirteen years ago) link
also, just for shakey
http://chzdailywhat.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/80e40d51-01cf-4396-b3e8-56c211eaedb3.jpg
― puff puff post (uh oh I'm having a fantasy), Thursday, 24 March 2011 18:13 (thirteen years ago) link
Jolie *can* act - she won an OscarJolie *can* act - she won an OscarJolie *can* act - she won an OscarJolie *can* act - she won an OscarJolie *can* act - she won an Oscar
― Fuck bein' hard, Dr Morbz is complicated (Dr Morbius), Thursday, 24 March 2011 18:19 (thirteen years ago) link
Roberto Begnini to thread.
― Thraft of Cleveland (Bill Magill), Thursday, 24 March 2011 18:23 (thirteen years ago) link
He was actually a good film comedian before the Holocaust hit him.
really, you hadda be there (or immersed in the history) to understand why the Liz-Jolie comparison is laughable, I guess.
― Fuck bein' hard, Dr Morbz is complicated (Dr Morbius), Thursday, 24 March 2011 18:30 (thirteen years ago) link
it's sort of like comparing Clint Eastwood (now The Last Movie Star) in the mid/late '60s to Jason Statham
― Fuck bein' hard, Dr Morbz is complicated (Dr Morbius), Thursday, 24 March 2011 18:32 (thirteen years ago) link
I'm kinda with Morbz on this one...don't see the comparison AT all. Compared to what Liz could do, Jolie's best performance has all the intensity of a dim refridgerator bulb. There's no child that's going to be as attached to her stupid roles in Tomb Raider as I was, or my mother was, to National Velvet.
― VegemiteGrrl, Thursday, 24 March 2011 18:34 (thirteen years ago) link
there are several adults who will be, though
― 'lol u stuck with me now watch this ass expand, joeks on u' (DJP), Thursday, 24 March 2011 18:35 (thirteen years ago) link
I phrased that badly but you know what I mean, hopefully.Sorry!
― VegemiteGrrl, Thursday, 24 March 2011 18:37 (thirteen years ago) link
girls my age (20s) use jolie as a Style Touchstone/insist that they want to fuck her pretty frequently, but they never cite any actual movies. meanwhile i can't even remember if i've actually seen her in a movie.
― difficult listening hour, Thursday, 24 March 2011 18:38 (thirteen years ago) link
oh, i saw sky captain and the world of tomorrow. she was a prop but it was kind of hard not to be.
― difficult listening hour, Thursday, 24 March 2011 18:39 (thirteen years ago) link
I have likely seen an unhealthy number of Angelina Jolie movies and am trying to think of one that I actively disliked. I don't think there is one.
― 'lol u stuck with me now watch this ass expand, joeks on u' (DJP), Thursday, 24 March 2011 18:45 (thirteen years ago) link
pretty sure I've only seen AJ in Pushing Tin and The Good Shepherd
― Fuck bein' hard, Dr Morbz is complicated (Dr Morbius), Thursday, 24 March 2011 18:51 (thirteen years ago) link
i liked the bizarro sexy alien boy look
http://webtvdeluxe.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/angelina.jpg
― scott seward, Thursday, 24 March 2011 18:51 (thirteen years ago) link
she was good in gia. um....i mean i'll watch anything. she doesn't approach ashley judd though as far as my i'll watch anything and like it hall of fame goes.
― scott seward, Thursday, 24 March 2011 18:52 (thirteen years ago) link
anytime someone says jolie is a good actress in something i always feel like its just a way of saying hey she was good in that for such a glamour puss.
― scott seward, Thursday, 24 March 2011 18:54 (thirteen years ago) link
Jolie is good in the Daniel Pearl movie. Regardless, Jolie is 35. I have a hunch she'll make another dozen or so movies before she's dead. Anyway, the comparison is just that: a comparison. Holding Taylor up as unique Hollywood royalty with no match is a conversation killer, but I'd be hard pressed to think of a current star *more* like Liz Taylor than Jolie. How about that?
― Josh in Chicago, Thursday, 24 March 2011 18:54 (thirteen years ago) link
even her dirty fingernails roles aren't THAT dirty. liz went further as far as getting to the heart of things and not caring how she looked doing it.
― scott seward, Thursday, 24 March 2011 18:55 (thirteen years ago) link
way fewer people have seen an angelina jolie movie than an elizabeth taylor one. when she started out people still went every week. that's one big difference.
― BIG GERTRUDE aka the steindriver (history mayne), Thursday, 24 March 2011 18:55 (thirteen years ago) link
I stopped appreciating AJ when she started Botoxing.
― anna sui generis (suzy), Thursday, 24 March 2011 18:55 (thirteen years ago) link
jolie has the regal thing and the tortuous private life thing, so, yeah, i get it. but liz was iconic royalty when she was, like, 18. that's a big difference.
― scott seward, Thursday, 24 March 2011 18:56 (thirteen years ago) link
i find the comparison almost insulting!
― BIG GERTRUDE aka the steindriver (history mayne), Thursday, 24 March 2011 18:57 (thirteen years ago) link
if only madonna could act we might have a better comparison. but madonna as singer/controversy/icon/etc works. kinda.
― scott seward, Thursday, 24 March 2011 18:58 (thirteen years ago) link
well thats a tribute to a bygone era though. nobody compares. and jolie didn't wait till she was older to start making forgettable movies. she's been doing it for years.
― scott seward, Thursday, 24 March 2011 18:59 (thirteen years ago) link