PRETTY?!
Julia Roberts is by no means pretty. It looks like a damn horse.
shareMaybe she wasn't pretty. But she was hot and cheap.
MovieChat Forums > Pretty Woman (1990) Discussion > PRETTY?!
[deleted]
She was chosen for the role ahead of Kim Basinger, Kathleen Turner, Debra Winger, Geena Davis, Carrie Fisher, Bo Derek, Kelly McGillis, Melanie Griffith, Sharon Stone, Michelle Pfeiffer, Madonna, Jamie Lee Curtis, Emma Thompson, Rosanna Arquette, Heather Locklear, Jennifer Jason Leigh, Joan Cusack, Phoebe Cates, Elisabeth Shue, Tatum O'Neal, Bridget Fonda, Lori Loughlin, Diane Lane and Justine Bateman.
There were probably several million men (and women) in 1990 who would have agreed she was "pretty" AND smart enough to top that list, except maybe Michelle Pfeiffer. That could have worked unless she was too headstrong to play along with Richard Gere's ego. Julia Roberts was just the right balance at that stage of her career. A few years later she probably wouldn't have taken the part.
From that list, I think Locklear, Stone and Loughlin are far prettier. Whether they could have carried the role is anyone's guess. Roberts did a good job in terms of the role, but she really isn't pretty, especially not in the way that would turn men's heads by walking down the street. She's got that unusually wide mouth with a lot of teeth, not all even. A long, thin nose with relatively large nostrils for a woman. Thick, high-arched eyebrows. Not all that great a figure, either, which really stuck out when they used the body double for the opening scenes when Vivian wakes up. For instance, the double had a flat belly, while Roberts had a definite bulge. Plus gangly arms and legs and big feet. Laura San Giacomo had much better legs and figure and you could see the difference when they were walking together poolside. Roberts looked positively masculine next to her.
shareNot all that great a figure, either, which really stuck out when they used the body double for the opening scenes when Vivian wakes up.
There are three scenes in the beginning of the movie in Vivian's apartment. 1) When she wakes up, turns around and reaches for the alarm clock, 2) when she puts her top on and 3) when she puts on the bracelets. Scene #1 in bed is Julia Roberts, NOT a body double. The other two scenes are the body double.
Personally I think Roberts is beautiful. Her mouth and her smile is one of her many assets. share
Scene 1 is NOT Julia Roberts...get your facts straight. And this is coming from a guy who loves JR.
share[deleted]
This is from a guy who loves Roberts? Well, then I guess it must be true. I'm sorry to disappoint you, your love and your "straight facts". People are really stubborn. I would suggest you get your facts together by listening to the director Garry Marshall's audio commentary on the DVD, instead of being so cocksure.
"… This shot is of Julia Roberts. [when she turns around in her bed and reaches for the alarm clock] Everybody thought this was a body double, because LOOK! you don’t see Julia Roberts’ head! But that is Julia Roberts and that is Julia Roberts’ hand. ... Now this is a body double, [when Vivian is putting her dress and bracelets on] this is not Julia Roberts, those two shots."
At 4:25
LOL...let me completely denounce what you and Garry Marshall think.
First off, Garry Marshall and JR have a great relationship, right from the Pretty Woman days till now. JR herself said in many interviews that she "absolutely adores him." Keeping this in mind, GM will stretch the truth to make JR look good, by saying 'yeah, that sexy body in the bed, that was hers" etc. When it in fact was NOT. Here's why:
Pop in the dvd if you got it, or watch it online its on YouTube even, and look carefully at the sequences of those scenes in question. Starting with the initial bed part...sexy body, supposedly JR, rolls over, reaches up and hits the alarm. Now, pay close attention to her arm...What do we see? A HAIRY forearm. Next bit, pulling up her shirt over he bra, there it is again, same hairy arm. SAME PERSON. So right then and there this proves that GM was straight up lying by saying the bed roll over girl was JR and the girl pulling up her shirt was a double. THEY WERE THE SAME GIRL. And in light of the aforementioned evidence, that is undeniable.
Now, JR is bare armed throughout most of the remainder of the movie. Do you see hairy forearms on her? No you don't.
Now apologize to me...i'm waiting ;)
LOL...let me completely denounce what you and Garry Marshall think.One thing is what I think, but Marshall? You seem mildly confused. And a bit of borderline fanatical fan.
I know that Marshall and Roberts have always had a good relationship. But do you really think that he would sit, on the audio commentary and lie on the grounds that Julia has - in your opinion - HAIRY arms?! Quite frankly, the elevator doesn't seem to go all the way up.
I've popped in the DVD and this is what I see; http://i.imgur.com/Z2IKaAc.png I see a female forearm and a glimpse of tiny hair. I'm surprised that you're not very knowledgeable about cinematography and lighting when filming. The scene in bed is filmed in a blackened room, so the light falls in a special angle, which is why you see the hairs so clearly. But why are you so upset about the HAIR? The film is shot in the late 80s when people weren't obsessed with shaving their entire body.
Next bit, pulling up her shirt over he bra, there it is again, same hairy arm. SAME PERSON. So right then and there this proves that GM was straight up lying by saying the bed roll over girl was JR and the girl pulling up her shirt was a double. THEY WERE THE SAME GIRL. And in light of the aforementioned evidence, that is undeniable.
You're nuts, honestly. If now Marshall, according to you, wanted to give Roberts cred for being sexy in the wake up scene, why would he hire a body double with HAIRY arms?! It's not only laughable that you even take notice and care about nonsenses, but also because it's not true. This is Julia Roberts’ body double; http://i.imgur.com/CqZGk9v.jpg does it looks like she's gorilla like?
And why would Marshall wanted to "stretch the truth" by saying that Roberts was sexy? When most people think she's sexy throughout the film? And then your comments about the hairy arms, I truly don't get you.
Forget about the apology. As long as you cannot come up with any better explanation, or a statement from someone who was on the set, preferably Roberts or Marshall, then believe what you want. I believe in Marshall. Meanwhile, you can always occupy yourself with why arms have hair in the first place. share
"One thing is what I think, but Marshall? You seem mildly confused. And a bit of borderline fanatical fan."
LOL you're hilarious. I'm a fanatical fan for pointing out the obvious?
"I know that Marshall and Roberts have always had a good relationship. But do you really think that he would sit, on the audio commentary and lie on the grounds that Julia has - in your opinion - HAIRY arms?! Quite frankly, the elevator doesn't seem to go all the way up."
That would be a question for GM. Not. Me. Maybe he didn't notice the hairy arms.
"I've popped in the DVD and this is what I see; http://i.imgur.com/Z2IKaAc.png I see a female forearm and a glimpse of tiny hair. I'm surprised that you're not very knowledgeable about cinematography and lighting when filming. The scene in bed is filmed in a blackened room, so the light falls in a special angle, which is why you see the hairs so clearly. But why are you so upset about the HAIR? The film is shot in the late 80s when people weren't obsessed with shaving their entire body."
Ok here you go again. First off, the snapshot you posted was a split second too late. You're showing mostly wrist there, i'm talking a few inches up closer to her elbow. Watch it again, and take another snapshot except this time do it a few frames earlier than the one you took. And i'm aware of lighting in cinematography, I think I can tell the diff between a dark room and illuminated one. Light falling in a special angle? lol my ass. Don't make excuses here with pathetic arguments about lighting now. The woman's arm was hairy, that is undeniable. So stop being petty talking about lighting conditions now of all things lol. And for the record, i'm not upset about the hair hahahaa. Not sure what led you to believe I was, as all I was doing was pointing out the obvious. Or do you accuse anybody when they make a factual observation of being upset? lol get over yourself. As for your last sentence in this paragraph, thanks for pointing out the obvious. This was never about the hair anyway, I only used that point as ammo to denounce GM and your belief that the bed roll over girl and the putting on the shirt girl were 2 different people!
"You're nuts, honestly. If now Marshall, according to you, wanted to give Roberts cred for being sexy in the wake up scene, why would he hire a body double with HAIRY arms?! It's not only laughable that you even take notice and care about nonsenses, but also because it's not true. This is Julia Roberts’ body double;
http://i.imgur.com/CqZGk9v.jpg does it looks like she's gorilla like?"
Nuts? Lol the truth hurts, don't it? LOL YOU are not only NUTS, but petty and ridiculous as well. Add blind too. To put it bluntly, you're a blithering idiot. As for your first question here, again, that's not a question for me. Go find GM and ask him. You rhetoric is laughable. The fact that you can't admit that the rollover in bed girl and putting on shirt girl is THE SAME GIRL is laughable also. You can call my hairy arm observation laughable, nonsense, whatever.Fact of the matter is that observation, whether you or GM like it or not, completely smashes your stance on this. IT'S THE SAME EFFING GIRL. Look at it again and get off your high horse. It's right there. ARE YOU BLIND? I know who Shelley Michelle is. As for your last question here, by the same token, does it look like JR is?! Wow...
"And why would Marshall wanted to "stretch the truth" by saying that Roberts was sexy? When most people think she's sexy throughout the film? And then your comments about the hairy arms, I truly don't get you."
He's not stretching the truth that Roberts was sexy, JR sexiness in this movie and her life overall is undeniable. He's lying over this and this specifically: the rollover in bed girl not being the same girl putting on her top over her bra. PERIOD. Nothing more, nothing less. As for you last sentence here, just like I said in my last paragraph, I used the hairy arms observation solely to prove that the first 2 actions by the girls were of ONE girl, NOT two. Question for you now...and be honest. Do you notice the arm hair on the girls in the first 2 actions? No? Then you're either blind or purposefully lying your ass off. Yes? Then please explain to me how you still think the 2 girls are different. Am I clear now? Cause honestly if you can't comprehend what i'm saying here and still make statements like "I truly dont get you" then in all seriousness you are a bonafied IDIOT.
"Forget about the apology. As long as you cannot come up with any better explanation, or a statement from someone who was on the set, preferably Roberts or Marshall, then believe what you want. I believe in Marshall. Meanwhile, you can always occupy yourself with why arms have hair in the first place."
I've explained well enough. More than good enough actually. You, either purposefully or otherwise cannot get the point that i'm trying to make here. Hairy arm on girl from both actions equals SAME GIRL. Eff what GM thinks. Have your own mind and don't be a sheep. You turned this into an all out attack on my arm hair observation without realizing and understanding that I was only using that as a tool to establish this: the woman's IDENTITY. IDENTITY, NOT HAIR. I-D-E-N-T-I-T-Y.
So lose the hairy arm quips, it was just a tool to confirm IDENTITYYYYYYYYYYYYYY. Say it again with me, IDENTITYYYYYYYYY. Understood? Now unfortunately this simple concept looks like it'll need some time to seep into your brain and intellect. Assuming you have any.
Talk soon ;)
LOL you're hilarious. I'm a fanatical fan for pointing out the obvious?That's the thing though, there's nothing that is obvious, unless one's a borderline fanatic fan. I would guess that 98% who've seen the film didn't even notice if there was hair on an arm or not, and much less trying to convince people on IMDb.
Ok here you go again. First off, the snapshot you posted was a split second too late. You're showing mostly wrist there, i'm talking a few inches up closer to her elbow. Watch it again, and take another snapshot except this time do it a few frames earlier than the one you took.
Okay, I watched the arm and yes, there's more hair. But it's not as if it couldn't belong to Roberts. Not sure why you're so stubborn about it.
And don't give me sh.t for talking about angles and lighting, there's no excuse or any pathetic arguments. I've just listened to how Marshall himself talks about the scene when Gere is down in the restaurant playing piano, which is a pretty dark scene. He explicitly spoke about the opportunities it meant, that one could use different angles to illuminate the scene.
What's quoted below is a summary of the insults you have puked during one single post. Screaming with caps lock. If that's not fanatical, I really don't know what is. But that's usually how people tend to act when lacking arguments. And when one's not able to deal with being contradicted.
Nuts? Lol the truth hurts, don't it? LOL YOU are not only NUTS, but petty and ridiculous as well. Add blind too. To put it bluntly, you're a blithering idiot. You rhetoric is laughable.
The fact that you can't admit that the rollover in bed girl and putting on shirt girl is THE SAME GIRL is laughable also. You can call my hairy arm observation laughable, nonsense, whatever. Fact of the matter is that observation, whether you or GM like it or not, completely smashes your stance on this. IT'S THE SAME EFFING GIRL. Look at it again and get off your high horse. It's right there. ARE YOU BLIND?
Am I clear now? Cause honestly if you can't comprehend what i'm saying here and still make statements like "I truly dont get you" then in all seriousness you are a bonafied IDIOT.
Have your own mind and don't be a sheep. You turned this into an all out attack on my arm hair observation without realizing and understanding that I was only using that as a tool to establish this: the woman's IDENTITY. IDENTITY, NOT HAIR. I-D-E-N-T-I-T-Y.
So lose the hairy arm quips, it was just a tool to confirm IDENTITYYYYYYYYYYYYYY. Say it again with me, IDENTITYYYYYYYYY. Understood?
🐞
He's not stretching the truth that Roberts was sexy, JR sexiness in this movie and her life overall is undeniable. He's lying over this and this specifically: the rollover in bed girl not being the same girl putting on her top over her bra. PERIOD. Nothing more, nothing less.
Finally, and I've already said this without being offensive. Think whatever you want, I don't care. I still think what Marshall says is the right thing. I still believe that it is Roberts in the scene in bed.
I'm well aware of that Touchstone for quite some time denied that Roberts have had a body double at all in the film. But finally came clean about it, and Michelle Shelley’s body got a face. So why (and this is a rhetorical question) on Earth would Marshall still be lying about it?! It makes no sense whatsoever. What difference would it make if it was Roberts or Shelley who were reaching for the alarm clock?! Nada, niente. That's why I still think it's Roberts. If Marshall says it's Robert, then it is Roberts.
Last but not least, I did a small investigation. This is what you said to me in your former post; "Now, JR is bare armed throughout most of the remainder of the movie. Do you see hairy forearms on her? No you don't.
So I took a peek and this is what I saw and I actually liked this, I think I'll open a detective agency. It seems as if Roberts actually has as much hair on her arms (and her thighs) in the rest of the film. And wears a lot of different gloves. Also, note her little finger and especially the nail, and compare it with the hand that hits the alarm clock. Over and out.
http://i.imgur.com/SFdTc7y.png
http://i.imgur.com/ZciefZw.png
http://i.imgur.com/ltvIduA.png
http://i.imgur.com/wfmrcKr.png
🐧
http://i.imgur.com/ug1qmNK.png
http://i.imgur.com/JDaTsef.png
Bonus http://i.imgur.com/2ahVkbI.png share
"That's the thing though, there's nothing that is obvious, unless one's a borderline fanatic fan. I would guess that 98% who've seen the film didn't even notice if there was hair on an arm or not, and much less trying to convince people on IMDb."
There's nothing that is obvious? The bed girl and the girl putting on the shirt being the same girl isn't obvious to you? Regardless of whether it's JR or not, can you at least admit that they are the same girl? Have you discussed this with the tens of millions who has seen this film? Lol Hell no, you have not. So you're not in any position to guess that 98% haven't noticed. Get over yourself. Add to the fact that you yourself have finally acknowledged the presence of hair, and even went to the length of posting several snapshots from the film showing so. So what is your point here? lol even if 98% didn't notice, but I did, that would put me in rare company, no?
"Okay, I watched the arm and yes, there's more hair. But it's not as if it couldn't belong to Roberts. Not sure why you're so stubborn about it."
Thank you for finally admitting that. Seriously. As for whether it belongs to Roberts, having analyzed those scenes many times now, you're probably right. No, i'm serious. I am now leaning more towards the possibility that it is JR vs. not being JR. My apologies. See how easy that was? When evidence presents itself heavily enough against my stance, I have no problem taking it back and apologizing for it. BUT. I would expect the same from you, as you're still wrong here, just not as wrong as I made you out to be initially, but still wrong. Wrong in that you still haven't agreed with me that the bed girl and the girl putting on her shirt are the SAME girl. Or are you still sticking with his stance that the second action was by a different girl?
"And don't give me sh.t for talking about angles and lighting, there's no excuse or any pathetic arguments. I've just listened to how Marshall himself talks about the scene when Gere is down in the restaurant playing piano, which is a pretty dark scene. He explicitly spoke about the opportunities it meant, that one could use different angles to illuminate the scene."
Great. Tell me how lighting and angles dilutes the fact that JRs arm was hairy. As evidenced by the very photos you posted, the hair is still visible in low light scenes. So what exactly is your beef here? Are you saying that due to the lighting conditions it appears as if JR has more hair than she really does?
"What's quoted below is a summary of the insults you have puked during one single post. Screaming with caps lock. If that's not fanatical, I really don't know what is. But that's usually how people tend to act when lacking arguments. And when one's not able to deal with being contradicted."
HAHAHA if you think speaking in cap locks in fanatical, wow, your really need to get out more, read the news, or check out what's happening throughout our world currently. People capitalize their words to emphasize them, to put power and presence behind them. If you think that's fanatical, you must live in some fantasy world with big bright rainbows where you ride through fields upon fields of flowers on your magical unicorn. Calm down. I ain't mad, or fanatical. Or even bothered, not even in the slightest. This back and forth with you has been funny and has made me laugh though. For you to use a word such as fanatical to describe my words shows how truly ridiculous you've been here.
"Finally, and I've already said this without being offensive. Think whatever you want, I don't care. I still think what Marshall says is the right thing. I still believe that it is Roberts in the scene in bed."
I think you've pretty much convinced me that you do care, that ship has sailed my friend. Does someone who doesn't care go back and forth with me how many times now? If you still think that GM was saying the right thing, then you're really gullible. I can agree with you on one thing, that the bed girl was JR, I have no problem siding with you guys on that, but him saying the girl pulling up her shirt was a double is where I draw the line. For the billionth time, the girl in bed, yes, agreed it's JR. But then again so is the second action. Can I at least get you to admit that? So we can at least part ways with a 1-1 tie? With you admitting a fault, and me too? ;)
"I'm well aware of that Touchstone for quite some time denied that Roberts have had a body double at all in the film. But finally came clean about it, and Michelle Shelley’s body got a face. So why (and this is a rhetorical question) on Earth would Marshall still be lying about it?! It makes no sense whatsoever. What difference would it make if it was Roberts or Shelley who were reaching for the alarm clock?! Nada, niente. That's why I still think it's Roberts. If Marshall says it's Robert, then it is Roberts."
As i've stated a handful of times now, I admit he's right in that the bed girl was JR. But not that the second girl was different. They were both JR, so that would make what he said WRONG right? You gotta admit that! As for what difference it would make if it was Roberts or Shelley...really? If the producers didn't think JRs body was good enough for the scene, don't you think that might affect JRs rep or sex factor? Right??
"Last but not least, I did a small investigation. This is what you said to me in your former post; "Now, JR is bare armed throughout most of the remainder of the movie. Do you see hairy forearms on her? No you don't."
Wow, you went through the entire movie with a fine tooth comb and found all the scenes that show JRs arm hair. See? Told you the hair argument was a good one! Although quite shocked you went to these lengths coming from the same person who crucified me for using the arm hair point to establish identity, now you yourself have done the same thing, no? Bonus points for me on this one ;)
"So I took a peek and this is what I saw and I actually liked this, I think I'll open a detective agency. It seems as if Roberts actually has as much hair on her arms (and her thighs) in the rest of the film. And wears a lot of different gloves. Also, note her little finger and especially the nail, and compare it with the hand that hits the alarm clock. Over and out."
See last sentence from my previous response ;) And bonus points for me again for molding and inspiring you to use what you hated on me for (the hair observation) into a passion and a possible career for you lol.
Talk soon ;)
That's the thing though, there's nothing that is obvious, unless one's a borderline fanatic fan. I would guess that 98% who've seen the film didn't even notice if there was hair on an arm or not,
There's nothing that is obvious? The bed girl and the girl putting on the shirt being the same girl isn't obvious to you? Regardless of whether it's JR or not, can you at least admit that they are the same girl? Have you discussed this with the tens of millions who has seen this film? Lol Hell no, you have not. So you're not in any position to guess that 98% haven't noticed.
You know perfectly well what I mean. I'm not talking in general, but about "the hair on arms importance". And as I've said, I doubt that 98% of the people who've seen the film have even noticed. Let's not drag this out, because you're the one who'll end up just nagging about nothing. No, I don't think it's obvious, but of course there's a possibility that it's the same girl in all three scenes, I won't deny that. But as I've said more than once, why would I doubt Marshall? But yes, there's a possibility that it's the same girl.
Get over yourself. Add to the fact that you yourself have finally acknowledged the presence of hair, and even went to the length of posting several snapshots from the film showing so. So what is your point here? lol even if 98% didn't notice, but I did, that would put me in rare company, no?This is exactly what I mean, see? Do you really want me to elaborate about the 98% and you within the 2%? Neither is really important in this context, because unless you're stupid (and I don't think you are) you'll understand that. But yes, my point is that most people don't even notice, which will mean that you're in a rare company.
Thank you for finally admitting that. Seriously. As for whether it belongs to Roberts, having analyzed those scenes many times now, you're probably right. No, i'm serious. I am now leaning more towards the possibility that it is JR vs. not being JR. My apologies. See how easy that was? When evidence presents itself heavily enough against my stance, I have no problem taking it back and apologizing for it.
That's okay, and thank you, I really mean it. Just so you know, to me, this is not a contest between the two of us, and it never was. We both like this movie. I haven't been rude to you, I did say (while making the laughing emo, meaning to be nice) that you're nuts, but only because I thought it was an odd thing to say that Marshall would "stretch the truth".
BUT. I would expect the same from you, as you're still wrong here, just not as wrong as I made you out to be initially, but still wrong. Wrong in that you still haven't agreed with me that the bed girl and the girl putting on her shirt are the SAME girl. Or are you still sticking with his stance that the second action was by a different girl?
Okay, here we go again, haha. You just can't let it go. Okay, I've got to be honest with you. It might be the same girl, I'm happy to admit that. I've never even thought about it until I listened to GM's commentary, I think it was last year. So how would I know? Still think it's odd if what Marshall said was false. He did point out that it's an error when Vivian is eating a croissant at breakfast, and in the next shot it's a pancake, that was no big deal for him to admit. But yes, it most likely is the same girl.
Remember the scene where Gere accompany Roberts for shopping? In that sequence, there're more shots of the outfits, all headless. Among them is a pink dress with a belt, and another when she puts on her stay-up stockings, and these sequences are apparently not Roberts either. Probably because it's a waste of Roberts' time and no one would even notice.
Great. Tell me how lighting and angles dilutes the fact that JRs arm was hairy. As evidenced by the very photos you posted, the hair is still visible in low light scenes. So what exactly is your beef here? Are you saying that due to the lighting conditions it appears as if JR has more hair than she really does?Well, sort of. But I'd say it's the opposite of what you said. In the photo where they're kissing, the hair is more visible. The scene is too short, so it's difficult to get an idea of it. But I believe it's also why you discovered that the arm was hairy in the bed scene, in the first place. Compare it to the photo on Rodeo Drive. It's less visible in broad daylight. It has nothing to do with how much hair Roberts has, but how much is visible on the basis of how the scene is shot, and how they have chosen to light it.
HAHAHA if you think speaking in cap locks in fanatical, wow, your really need to get out more, read the news, or check out what's happening throughout our world currently. People capitalize their words to emphasize them, to put power and presence behind them. If you think that's fanatical, you must live in some fantasy world with big bright rainbows where you ride through fields upon fields of flowers on your magical unicorn.
I never said that you were fanatical because you used caps lock, I said that you were screaming. Borderline fanatical because of persistently stomping the floor, trying to win me over. http://www.newrepublic.com/article/117390/netiquette-capitalization-how-caps-became-code-yelling
Calm down. I ain't mad, or fanatical. Or even bothered, not even in the slightest. This back and forth with you has been funny and has made me laugh though. For you to use a word such as fanatical to describe my words shows how truly ridiculous you've been here.
And just when I thought you almost became nice and won me over, you went back to being you. Okay, you're not fanatical, you're probably just very stubborn. I did say borderline. Although, I do think it's unnecessary with all the insults, it’s not very nice being called an idiot.
I think you've pretty much convinced me that you do care, that ship has sailed my friend. Does someone who doesn't care go back and forth with me how many times now? If you still think that GM was saying the right thing, then you're really gullible. I can agree with you on one thing, that the bed girl was JR, I have no problem siding with you guys on that, but him saying the girl pulling up her shirt was a double is where I draw the line. For the billionth time, the girl in bed, yes, agreed it's JR. But then again so is the second action. Can I at least get you to admit that? So we can at least part ways with a 1-1 tie? With you admitting a fault, and me too? ;)
I guess I am gullible. But as I've already said, I think three times in this post, it's most likely the same girl. I guess a tie is the best way to go, meaning 1-1 ;)
See last sentence from my previous response ;) And bonus points for me again for molding and inspiring you to use what you hated on me for (the hair observation) into a passion and a possible career for you lol.
I did tooth combed the film, well not really but it was fun, I would lie if I said I didn't enjoy it. I really like talking about films, in whatever angle, haha. It's been a trip, otherwise I would hardly posted ladybugs and penguins. I'll think about the career, and while I do that I think you should listen to Marshall's audio commentary. He's really nice and you're a big fan and there's a lot of great trivia. Take care! 🌹 share
wow look at the size of those posts!
those guys had too much time on their hands
The body double's belly was almost supernatural in its sheer flatness.
I wouldn't compare pretty much ANYBODY'S abdominals against that woman.
Julia's tummy looked just fine in the scene where she strips down in front of Edward.
Nice smooth tan too.
I will say that Laura San Giacomo had better legs. Julia's legs looked like a chicken's.
"I'd say this cloud is Cumulo Nimbus."
"Didn't he discover America?"
"Penfold, shush."
by TVholic » Thu Oct 30 2014 21:08:56
From that list, I think Locklear, Stone and Loughlin are far prettier. Whether they could have carried the role is anyone's guess. Roberts did a good job in terms of the role, but she really isn't pretty, especially not in the way that would turn men's heads by walking down the street. She's got that unusually wide mouth with a lot of teeth, not all even. A long, thin nose with relatively large nostrils for a woman. Thick, high-arched eyebrows.
Of course you would say that. It sounds like you have a thing for blondes. Buddy, being blonde does not automatically make a person attractive. You need to learn to look beyond hair colour. Additionally, Julia Roberts WAS and is pretty, which is why she got the role and why the film was a success. If she wasn't a "pretty woman" in 1990 or now, then nobody would have bothered to see this film.
Also, I'm sure if you saw her walking down the street, a nerdy keyboard warrior like you would break your neck in several places trying to look at her. And all those features you have described are generally what society considers attractive: a large smile with big teeth, a slim/narrow long nose, and arched eyebrows. As opposed to small teeth and large gums, with a wide crooked nose and flat eyebrows. That is generally not what society sees as "beautiful" or "attractive". I'm not saying it can't be attractive, but Julia's painterly features are usually the standard in sex appeal.
BTW, this "ugly hot" nonsense is *beep* The word you people are looking for is UNCONVENTIONAL! A person is either attractive or they aren't. There's no such thing as 'ugly-hot'. End of. share
You sound like you have a serious case of blonde envy. In point of fact, I also find brunettes, redheads, blacks, Asians, etc. attractive as well, if they are actually pretty. Which Julia Roberts most assuredly is not. For that matter, I don't think Daryl Hannah was hot, either. Wait, I'm supposed to like all blondes according to you. What happened? And wait again, Lori Loughlin was a brunette. Whoa, serious weirdness here. I guess you don't speak for all of "society."
shareWTF are you talking about? Julia is gorgeous in this movie.
shareShe's not a conventional or traditional beauty, but I find her really attractive. Very sexy.
You people are insane. You've been fed too much plastic Hollywood crap. Julia IS a classic beauty. She has strong features, big eyes and a wide smile. Back in the early 90s, it was about natural beauty. Julia has it in spades. Every time she did herself up in that expensive clothing, my jaw dropped. Nowadays, it's all about looking perfect to the point where you look like a Barbie doll that has come to life. The Kardashian clan aren't beautiful, they're artificial. Julia is the real deal. share
"Julia IS a classic beauty."
Exactly. And what's more. Her classic beauty isn't or should I say, wasn't fake in Pretty Woman.
With that big smile, one can only imagine what else she can do. :-D
I thought she was very pretty. A pretty face, and tall and slender with a nice body. Her ankles were not overyly shapely, but they were slender, so overall, she, especially with the right clothes, was a gorgerous woman.
share[deleted]
LiKE SARAH JESSICA PARKER U MEAN??
shareAverage looking
share