Hollywood Loves "Ugly Girl" Stories, Lacks Cojones To Use Real Ugly Girls

I’ve watched about six seconds of Ugly Betty, which apart from one huge problem seems pretty harmless.

The problem, of course, is that IRL America Ferrera is quite an attractive woman whom they have to go to great lengths to “ugly”-up.

http://www.celebopedia.com/america-ferrera/images/america-ferrera.jpg

She might be a bit curvy or “ethnic” for mainstream beauty queen standards, but she’s basically a cute Latina chick that most regular guys would readily consider dating.

I’ve been thrown into mild and periodic conniptions by this stuff at least since Racheal Leigh Cook’s turn in She’s All That (I, uh, saw it on a plane).

Tagline: “A high school jock makes a bet that he can turn an unattractive girl into the school’s prom queen.”

Now, RLC is many things, but “unattractive” is just mind-boggling. “Totally hittable” would be nearer the mark:

Latest Stills - IMDb http://www.douglass.co.uk/webpromote/celebs/ (NSFW! -Rico)

That movie may have been the inspiration for the Not Another Teen Movie moment where they very cleverly sent up this whole phenomenon by having the “ugly” girl transformed not by the usual “we need a montage” that at least implies some time and difficulty need to be invested – instead, they said “Wait!” and took her glasses off, and that was it. In the case of RLC, I think her “ugliness” consisted of wearing glasses, having a ponytail, and slumping around in sweatshirts because she was an “artist” – even then, she was obviously beautiful.

The notion of Anne Hathaway (http://www.douglass.co.uk/webpromote/celebs/ – NSFW!) as anything but hot was also part of what annoyed me so much about The Devil Wears Prada.

I’m sure you can come up with other examples. Yet even after the NATM satire, this stuff is still viewed as great, not preposterous. I think there’s a little bit of pandering to dorky guys that someone like RLC might really be lurking out there, on the shelf, unnoticed, because “nobody saw her true beauty.” IRL, attractive or potentially attractive young women are a very liquid and sought-after commodity. The market doesn’t miss much.

I suppose though these stories are mainly pandering to less than attractive women who hope they can similarly be magically transformed, with not much difficulty. So I guess it isn’t the existence of adult fairy-tales that bothers me so much (well, maybe it is) as when I read some magazine article, or see some interview, saying, in effect, this show is great because it helps show that you don’t have to be beautiful to be happy and successful, so it’s very empowering, sends a good message to girls, etc. I’ve seen a few of those for UB.

Wrong! You do have to be beautiful to be the heroine of those types of story. So it’s not teaching any lesson at all, except what we knew, which is that the stars of Hollywood vehicles are generally quite attractive as opposed to ugly, and being ugly thereby limits your options in life to some extent.

While I’m not one to run around looking for new forms of victimhood to trumpet, I will acknowledge that what’s clunkily been called “lookism” is a reality in our society (all societies). It may be hard-wired. I’ve probably “suffered” from it at least to the extent that my profession has a lot of men in it, so any attractive female candidate is going to stick out like a sore thumb and probably enjoy an unconscious edge over me when being interviewed by a bunch of guys.

There are thus interesting questions to be raised on the touchy issue of why unattractive people have it worse than attractive people, what we can do about it as a society, what they can do about it as individuals. But these kind of stories aren’t really addressing those issues, and it’s irritating when they claim they are. But I guess there would not be much of a female audience for a drama that posed the question, “What can a truly unattractive woman do to become a beautiful princess?” and answered it (as any realistic narrative would) “Probably not a whole lot.”

I don’t know enough about the UB narrative to know how it plays out – does she eventually get glam, or is she supposed to stay fake-ugly through the whole storyline? If the latter why not hire a really ugly girl? In any of the other versions abroad, did they use actually-fugly girls? The only example I can think of of a truly not-very-cute girl being used in an ugly/geeky girl role is Welcome To The Dollhouse. That girl, while not hideous, would probably be classified, even today, as “not beautiful in a conventional sense.”

I admire Solondz for doing that, but then he is hardly a peddler of happy fairy tales (more Brothers Grimm).

Your douglass.co links are porn, and not “slightly NSFW”. I’ve reported them for you.

Hollywood doesn’t have stones and is very very shallow. Then again, would the public watch a series with a star who was genuinely unattractive? I don’t know.

Uh, sorry, the jump pages I was attempting to link to were clothed, but they did not link right and it got the main site which is indeed fully NSFW. Sorry, and agree those links need to go.

Here are some definitely-SFW replacements that demonstrate my point just as well:

http://www.annehathaway.com.ar/
http://www.rachaelleighcook.com/

I take your point, but Hollywood has a strong tendency to stick to what made money last time.

Thus Rocky / Brits as villains / car chases / special effects.
And of course pretty girls.

That girl, Heather Matarazzo, is one of my favorite actresses because she isn’t a conventional beauty. (Some may remember her from *Saved! *and as the little girl who testified in Devil’s Advocate.)

Point taken, of course. Everyone likes pretty girls.

The perversity is why people keep wanting to have them play ugly girls.

It’d be as if in your examples, Hollywood kept insisting on having Brit villains, but played by Hungarian nationals. Instead, they get real Brits, of whom (like ugly girls) there are plenty to go around . . . .

Do you think casting agents are flooded with photos from trained, qualified, ugly actresses? Ugly girls are generally not chosen for school plays, or given chances to model clothes at the local department store, or represent their school at speaking engagements. There may be an equal distribution of “acting potential” scattered among the aesthetically unpleasing, but they’re probably not doing to do anything to realize it. Young girls know damn well if they’re not pretty; they either develop another skill (sports, academics, humor) or hide.

Beauty in women is so highly valued and such a source of power for us. I can’t imagine many women would want to be known as “that ugly actress” unless they went to temporary extremes to achieve it, i.e. Charlize Theron. When Roger Ebert discussed Ellen Burstyn’s performance in Requiem for a Dream, he went out of his way to mention a scene that “shows what an attractive woman she actually is”.

In Ettore Scola’s movie Passione d’amore is the only one I remember seeing in which the woman is really not good-looking at all, yet you end up understanding why the (good-looking) leading man fell in love with her.

It’s not a case of beauty being only skin-deep, Fosca (the heroine) is definitely not particularly nice, but… anything else I’d add would be too much of a spoiler for those among you who haven’t seen it.

By the way, since beauty sells, the cover of the DVD and the posters show Laura Antonelli – who is the leading guy’s mistress in the movie, not a very important role!

For the job she has, she’s ugly. And while I think America Ferrera is quite pretty, I am certain that if she were presented as “Pretty Betty” there would be a ton of people, men and women alike, who would laugh at the notion of someone like her being called “pretty.”

What about Bette Davis? She was definately not conventionally beautiful, yet she was a major hollywood star!
Katherine Hepburn also was not the norm for beauty, but was beautiful in her own way.

Well, neither of them were actually physically repulsive. Davis was a plain Jane and Hepburn a tomboy.

Oh, there are ugly actresses and actors out there. Let’s do UB with Camryn Mannheim. THAT’S courageous and taboo-challenging.

When I was in school, the drama dept. was not necessarily chock full of the hottest girls (those were the cheerleaders), sometimes it was just the actressy, stage-mom-prodded, but not beautiful girls (I dated one, cute but “not conventionally beautiful”). And, um, a disproportionate number of women of size trod the boards for our theatre productions. So I would question any premise that the huge majority of people with thespian aspiration or training are aesthetically picture-perfect.

By the way, I forgot to mention the corollary to my initial bitch, the less-common but still-annoying convention of having “geeks” played by chiseled Adonises kitted out with a pocket protector and taped-together horn-rimmed glasses.

The thing about at least some of the plots you mention is that the girls do have to actually be beautiful underneath. She’s All That is all about the makeover transforming a shlubby girl to someone beautiful. We all know that real ugly doesn’t get pretty with a new haircut, so they have to start with someone with the basic structures of pretty in order to get through the thing without plastic surgery.

My problem with those movies is not that the actresses were secretly beautiful all along, but that it’s only once they’re beautiful that they matter. Would Anne Hathaway get to be the Princess of Genovia without the hair straightening on the strength of her personality alone (actually, her personality is pretty whiny and unpleasant, so I’d go with no)? Would she get to go to Paris without the designer duds on the strength of her work as an assistant? Obviously not.

They can’t use ugly actresses for these parts, because they have to be beautiful by the end of the movie, anything else makes them unlovable and incompetent. And therein lies the true problem.

And you know, I think now that she’s really begun to grow into quite a beauty. I think she’s a doll and I wouldn’t mind one minute looking like her or America Ferrera. It’s, in my humble opinion, all about diversity and confidence. Good on them. :slight_smile:

I think we’re saying the same thing two different ways. That’s why it bugs me when people pretend these tales are “feminist” or “empowering.” Nah. They prove the trivial truism that it’s good to be beautiful and a princess. Of course a lot of fairy tales have some nasty notions lurking beneath the surface. Cinderella is not about how to find dignity and happiness even if you happen to be a maid. It’s about becoming princess and seeing those bitches who used to lord it over you pay for it.

It’s not a new problem, though. The Ugly Duckling was only ugly because no one realized that he wasn’t supposed to be a duckling at all. Instead, he was a beautiful swan.

Is this woman pretty?