I recall Jan Smithers on a talk show talking about being a model. Here she is on the cover of Newsweek. Here is a side by side Jan Vs. Loni comparison I always thought that Loni Anderson’s face looked weird.
It also seems to me that quite often the “second banana” character is more interesting than the obvious lead. Most of the (at least the female) characters who are supposed to be the beauties on the show seem to get by on that, pretty much. Yes, Jennifer was smart enough, but there was a lot more to Bailey. Same with Mary Ann and Ginger.
I can’t believe Hoshi vs T’Pol (Enterprise) hasn’t been mentioned yet.
Brian
Charlie’s Angels: I always had a crush on Kate Jackson. Farrah? Eh. I could recognize Farrah’s contribution to the show (let’s call it the “nip factor”), but I found Jackson so much more… substantive. Jaclyn Smith struck me as somewhat asexual- she had all the right parts, but I never felt that she knew what to do with them. Jackson didn’t have any sultry vixen-ness about her but I got the sense that she knew what she had to offer, and how to use it to rock my world.
I was going to post something to that affect myself, but after so royally messing up the firefly reference, I figured I shouldn’t try anything else.
I’m here for ya, buddy. 
Going back into the way back machine, what about Mary Richards and Rhoda Morgenstern? Rhoda was cute and funny, but Mary back then was sweet and smart and a real babe.
Let’s not debate LaVerne DeFazio vs. Shirley Feeney. 
And I can’t believe I didn’t mention it. My only excuse is that I’ve been trying not to dominate thread. Linda Park is quite a cutie, far more attractive in her subtlety than the more obvious charms of Sub-Commander Big Boobs.
On “The Patty Duke Show” I thought Kathy was far hotter than Patty. Smart yet demure versus overly enthusiastic but not nearly as much fun as the theme song suggested.
“Kids, look–she’s Sean Astin’s mom. And so is she!”
Agreed. But in the end I thought Priscilla Barnes (scroll down to her name) was the best-looking, as well as funny in a goofy way.
She had a blink-and-you’ll-miss-it appearance in Licence to Kill and, though it appears she’s been working steadily, that was the last I’ve seen of her.
I had never heard of Priscilla Barnes until Kevin Smith’s 1995 movie Mallrats, where you see her bare boobs (including a fake third nipple). Barnes fans need to check it out.
Heck, Dawn Wells now, at 60-something, is hotter than whatshername who played Ginger ever was. That one’s just no contest.
One of the great things about Firefly, though, is that Inara and Kaylee were both hot (as was Zoë, and (if you go for the psychopathic type) River. Granted, Kaylee is still far hotter than the others, but a guy who drools over Inara doesn’t exactly need to have his eyes examined.
Betty…WAAYYYYY hotter than Veronica. What the hell was Archie thinking?
Slight thread deflection: this “makeover” meme really bugs me. They go to all the
trouble of changing the girl (often from a tomboy to a fem), the girl herself is
severely insecure about her looks, and nobody is questioning the wisdom or
necessity of such a move-and she looks better in the “before” picture than the
“after” one!
There was one teen movie where the female lead has beautiful straight dark hair,
and a lot of it got chopped off and made “wavy” in the makeover! :smack:
Reminds me of one of my favorite bad TV movies Archie: Return to Riverdale when Betty (played by Lauren Holly) utters the unforgettable line: “I want to be bad, Archie!”
Carla over Diane / Rebecca?
OK, maybe not, forget I said that.
From Firefly, in order: Zoe, Kaylee, Inara, River - although the last is twig-like jailbait (in appearance, at least). I’m willing to go to war over that order, so you best be careful if you disagree.
I thought both Grace Park and Kandyse McClure put Tricia Helfer to shame in Battlestar Galactica.
Betty Rubble over Wilma Flintstone.
Chiming in on my own thread–I’ve been watching Xena: Warrior Princess on Bravo in the mornings, and I’ve been struck by how scrumptious Renee O’Connor was.
You keep away from my Renee, or that won’t be the only thing striking you.
I think the folks in this thread have sussed out the fact behind the phenomenon: these ostensibly worse looking sidekicks are cast as such because they’re “Hollywood ugly”; that is, they’re really good looking people, but they are cast to fill a character who is simply not the “type” that the other actor–the supposedly more beautiful top-billed actor–actually does fit. In any other context, these people walk into a room and all eyes immediately turn towards them.
Actually, given some of the earlier posts, I think Alyson Hannigan is not a good example of this. She was still quite gawky and kid-like in those first couple seasons of Buffy, whereas Sarah Michelle Gellar was top notch right from the start. Go take a look at those first few episodes; SMG was gorgeous right out of the gate, until she stopped eating and turned into a wraith. AH, on the other hand, grew up and turned into something really special. Right now, at this moment, you take Alyson over Michelle hands down. But not back in the day. I think folks are being fooled by hindsight.