Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. Oh wow, she looks much older than 53. I didn't say she looked horrible or anything, just that I didn't recongize her - she looks so different.

Oh wow. Then you don't know what a skinny white 53 yr old woman looks like without outside intervention.
HH is a great example.

Skinny white woman of 53 here with no "outside intervention," not even Retin A.

I do not look like that. That is a smoker and sunbather. She looks twenty years older than me.

You should be grateful for you good genes.
I'm 53, fit, healthy eater, non-smoker, etc, etc and don't look nearly as good as HH.

Most people don't at 33.

Also, for god sake other PP, Helen Hunt is no where near "stocky."


The fabulous Miriam Margolyes is definitely stocky. Chunky, heavyset. So what?

Helen was almost stocky. I identified strongly with her all those years ago, because I had the same build, and it was rare to see an actress with a muscular, almost stocky build. And then she stopped eating or whatever, and has cultivated her starved shar pei look ever since. The wonderful Miriam Margolyes did have a build like younger Helen Hunt's. Miriam obviously eats, though. As do I, so now I too am looking like Miriam Margolyes, but can only dream of being as fabulous.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Her lips and eyes have "basically disappeared" because she hasn't stuffed them full of filler and had them lifted, respectively, like many (most?) actresses her age. Kudos to her for aging gracefully.

I agree! I think I she looks great.

She looks great for a corpse

You wish. Come back when you're 53.

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand what the 3 pics above are supposed to suggest. Whatever, I thought NK was gorgeous in Cold Mountain. Maybe your point is she should have looked less so and more civil war torn. That could be a fair point.

Yes that was the point (and that the costume designer was overly influenced by the 80s and those silly hats).

Of course she's gorgeous, but even Scarlet O'Hara got a little dirt on her.

Look how awesome Olivia de Havilland looks now-- age 100!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Her lips and eyes have "basically disappeared" because she hasn't stuffed them full of filler and had them lifted, respectively, like many (most?) actresses her age. Kudos to her for aging gracefully.

I agree! I think I she looks great.

She looks great for a corpse

Anonymous wrote:Her lips and eyes have "basically disappeared" because she hasn't stuffed them full of filler and had them lifted, respectively, like many (most?) actresses her age. Kudos to her for aging gracefully.

I agree! I think I she looks great.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What middle-aged women in Hollywood used to look like:


Olivia de Havilland at age 49:


Lana Turner at age 53


Lauren Bacall in "The Shootist" at age 52


Rita Hayworth at age 52 in "The Road to Salina"


Grace Kelly at age 49


Elizabeth Taylor at age 49 appearing in the soap General Hospital:

These ladies look so much better than the plastic/botox crowd with the creepy taut and poofed out faces. Natural aging is so much more attractive.

I think they all look terrible for their stated ages! Probably because they didn't have sunscreen and everyone smoked back then. My mom is in her 60s and I think she looks better than most of them.

Lack of sunscreen (& botox, fillers, chemical peels & retin A) is the main reason middle aged actresses generally looked older 30-40+ years ago than they do know. Another reason is out (&, subsequently, Hollywood's) changed perceptions about age. Until fairly recently, 40-somethings were more likely to be the grandparents of elementary & preschoolers than the parents (even in higher COL/well educated areas) & both the way they dressed, did their hair, etc & the roles they were typically cast in reflected this.

When my parents got married in the 70s, for instance, my grandmothers were in their mid-40s & they have short, permed (or maybe hot-rolled?), un-dyed gray hair & are dressed like stereotypical "old ladies" in the wedding pictures. I remember looking at the wedding album when I was in middle school & bring shocked when I did the math & realized they were about the same age in the pictures as my mom was at the time! Meanwhile, my mom & mother-in-law were 59 & 63 when DH & I got married in 2010 & neither of them look like "old ladies" in our wedding pictures. This is thanks, in part, to their skin having aged better because they used sunscreen for most of their adult lives & had access to good anti-wrinkle cream from mid-age on but also because, unlike women of their mothers' generation, they didn't feel like they should start dressing in shapeless clothes, stop getting stylish haircuts, etc, once they reached a certain age.

This thread does prove that women cannot win. Other women won't let them.

I don't understand what the 3 pics above are supposed to suggest. Whatever, I thought NK was gorgeous in Cold Mountain. Maybe your point is she should have looked less so and more civil war torn. That could be a fair point.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good for her for aging naturally. It's distracting when I watch movies and the women have had so much done to their faces, like the movie with Nicole Kidman and Jude law and the Bridget jones actress set in the 1800s.

Nicole Kidman was 35 yrs old when she did Cold Mountain with Jude Law and Renee Zellweger.

Maybe but she looks ridiculously plastic in many scenes (and more out of an 80s rom com) than toughing it out on a mountain during the civil war:



Now only if they had put glasses on her, that would have distracted from the perfectly over-coiffed eyebrows:



Wait, what movie was it again?



Nope, try again.

This is why men have affairs