MovieChat Forums > Mary Tyler Moore (1970) Discussion > She was very likable and engaging - but ...

She was very likable and engaging - but not quite a 'knockout'

posted 9 years ago by tmitch-1
12 replies | jump to latest

Watching re-runs of The Mary Tyler Moore Show - I realize I didn't entirely appreciate all of the great things about the show, which originally aired when I was in grade school. The writing was sharp; the performances engaging; and the characters believable, funny, and above all - likable.

The one thing I have to call the show on, though - is how everyone constantly referred to how unbelievably attractive Mary was. Yes, she was very engaging and likable - and just about perfect for the show; and sure she was perfectly pleasant-looking.

But I'm sorry - despite the other characters' frequent comments to the contrary - she wasn't exactly a knockout either.

I kind of wonder if it was the writers trying to stroke Mary Tyler Moore's ego.

[–] InherentlyYours 9 years ago

I don't recall other characters calling her knock-out. Actually, if you remember the Ted Baxter-almost-cheats-episode with Trisha Noble, Ted says to Mary "she makes you look like a dog" (or similar wording). Mary had nice features, but I agree with you.

[–] tmaj48 9 years ago

Mary was decent-looking, but what irritated me about the show was how Mary was considered so much more attractive than Rhoda. I thought she was at least as pretty as Mary, and not too angular and skinny, as Mary was. But the show made this distinction about their sizes by presenting Mary as average sized, while
constantly depicting Rhoda as fat. She wasn't, and making her appear in oversize
clothing (even a sloppy looking gray sweat suit in one episode) and constantly making fat jokes about herself didn't make her so. She actually had a fun, trendy
fashion sense, and a lot of women viewers back then copied her colorful headscarf
look. She was more fun to hang around with, too.

I'm not crying, you fool, I'm laughing!

Hewwo.

[–] darryl-tahirali 9 years ago

Mary was decent-looking, but what irritated me about the show was how Mary was considered so much more attractive than Rhoda. I thought she was at least as pretty as Mary

Well, let's keep in mind that this is Hollywood ugly, which often means anything but. But I don't disagree with your point. I've been watching MTM off and on lately, and I'm struck by how attractive Valerie Harper was. She had gorgeous big brown eyes and lovely cheekbones that she showed off with her engaging smile. Not chopped liver at all.

I always liked Rhoda anyway, back from when I was a kid. My big sister had a number of apartments like Rhoda's, both in size and in decoration, and Jen was also the smart, wise-cracking sort, although physically she was an itty-bitty thing more closer to MTM. Jen was also an artist, and Rhoda was at least a window-dresser.

------------------
"Meretricious persiflage!" -- D.H. Lawrence

[–] darryl-tahirali 9 years ago

The one thing I have to call the show on, though - is how everyone constantly referred to how unbelievably attractive Mary was. Yes, she was very engaging and likable - and just about perfect for the show; and sure she was perfectly pleasant-looking.

But I'm sorry - despite the other characters' frequent comments to the contrary - she wasn't exactly a knockout either.

I kind of wonder if it was the writers trying to stroke Mary Tyler Moore's ego.

Not to sound too obvious here, but it was called The Mary Tyler Moore Show, so ego-stroking and puffery would seem to be obligatory. Moreover, Mary may have been an inspiration to modern working women, but this was still television.

We're from the same generation, and as a kid I didn't get that MTM was supposed to be a beauty, either. Looking now, I agree with your "pleasant-looking" description. I do think she had a terrific figure--and the costumers seem to have been very aware of that.

On the other hand, beauty is in the eye, right? There are many men and women considered to be "gorgeous" that I wouldn't say are that.

Getting back to the ego-stroking, don't think that it went unnoticed at the time: The contemporaneous Mad magazine parody of MTM is hilarious mainly because it does nail that star-fawning to a tee. Among other things, it pokes fun at her changing outfits regularly, and at how every man who sees her goes ga-ga for her. The punchline is that one of those guys shows up again--but he's interested in Rhoda (dubbed "Rodent" in Madspeak), which prompts the others to moan how he's blown the whole premise of the show. I have it in an anthology of 1970s Mad, and it's probably available online somewhere.

------------------
"Meretricious persiflage!" -- D.H. Lawrence

[–] anbmom 8 years ago

It was always implied that Mary was gorgeous and Rhoda was not. Funny thing is that I just read at the time they were thinking of casting someone else because Valerie Harper was too pretty. Now it comes out.

[–] sjbradford 8 years ago

Only on TV would Valerie Harper be considered the ugly one. In reality, she would have had men lined up outside her door. Oh well, that's television for you.

[–] thepartydjz 8 years ago

Mary dressed fairly conservative 99% of the time, but when she did wear something sexy, WOW

My Top 50 Films http://www.imdb.com/list/ls033211402/

[–] lonnieanixt 8 years ago

Really don't know what any of you are talking about, one of the great 'Babes' of all time. Stunningly beautiful. The greatest smile ever.

[–] suewa71 8 years ago

The Mary Richards character was from a small, rural Minnesota town, an attractive woman with Midwestern sensibility and a touch of naiveté, not some drop-dead gorgeous cosmopolitan ice queen. The Rhoda character was the wise-cracking NYC sidekick, and the MTM Show among the first, other than the I Love Lucy franchises, to have females as "buddies". I liked the way as the storylines progressed that Rhoda evolved into a stunning, attractive character with much more depth than in the initial episodes. Valerie Harper and Mary Tyler Moore both hit their strides beautifully in their portrayals of the characters.
Through the seasons, I never noticed that "everyone constantly referred to how unbelievably attractive Mary was."

[–] GlenEllyn (21653) 6 years ago

I suppose beauty standards were a bit different then. I never thought Rhoda was fat, although she wasn't slim, either. She seemed average. Perhaps Rhoda was written as rather dowdy, but casting Valerie Harper changed that.

I was more surprise that on I Love Lucy, Ethel was portrayed as having a weight issue.

[–] ProductionNow (1072) 5 years ago

Beauty standards were not different then, except that we did not deny how overweight we could wear skin-tight revealing clothes. Valerie Harper was overweight or she would not have deliberately lost 20-30 lbs on Weight Watchers for her own personal desire. And there was never a time when her character was called "ugly" nor "fat", not once. The bigger question is why posters are writing the script --and adjectives--that never existed.

[–] QOK (1504) 6 years ago

She was a Minnesota 9 but an LA 6.