Or Frances Dee!
Oh, Frances Dee. If I could choose anyone’s face for my own, it would be hers.
She starred in numerous “A”-budget pictures at a major studio, and was nominated for the Academy Award for Best Actress. That’s not minor.
Hey, post 8 was only an “I think” this is who it is. We’re still trying to jar the OP’s memory.
I found these photos of Ann Harding, and I think she’s exceptionally beautiful - take a look:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/hginpa/3100589006/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/addariver/3111424354/
At last!!! While cleaning out some old files today, I ran across the obituary I mentioned in my original post. The actress was Dorothy Hyson, an actress I had never heard of and haven’t heard of since. None of the responders to my question suggested her name; I suspect very few of them had ever heard of her. Checking her pictures on the internet I must admit ideas of beauty must have been different in the 1930s.
I looked at the photos and agree – she’s pretty enough but not “beautiful”. Maybe still photos don’t do her justice.
Saying that Dorothy Hyson was widely acknowledged to be the most beautiful actress in Hollywood is bizarre on several counts. (I’m blaming the obituary, not you, Ronald C. Semone. You were just quoting it.) First of all, she wasn’t a Hollywood actress at all. Although she was born in the U.S., most of her career was in the U.K. I don’t find her to be particularly beautiful either, and if there was a group in the 1930’s that referred to her as the most beautiful, it was a rather small group, so that’s not “widely acknowledged.” It’s hardly surprising that we couldn’t figure out who was being referred to, since it’s a pretty dubious statement.
A color picture of her. Very pretty in that shot, better than some of the others I found. Not a great beauty but almost perfect symmetrical features, which are supposed to be best.
I’m a mild old film buff and I never heard of her either.
Here is an obituary for Dorothy Hyson from British newspaper The Independent, where she is repeatedly referred to as having been considered a beauty in her time. It sounds like her career was almost entirely on the British stage, so I’m wondering if Ronald C. Semone’s clipping really referred to her as the most beautiful actress in Hollywood. The Independent obit says that Rodgers and Hart wrote a song about Hyson called “The Most Beautiful Girl in the World”, so I’m wondering if maybe the OP misremembered that.
Anita Page was stunningly beautiful and huge in the 20s and early 30s. She got thousands of proposals of marriage from fans all around the world including a sheikh.
Died only last year though so a little late for the OP.
Why? Does she look like economic recovery? She’d be popular today, too.
And it goes without saying that fashions in beauty change every year. Here’s one of the greatest sex symbols of all time. Personally I don’t see it. Here’s another. Again, not seein it.
Beauty changes with technology too. Dietrich’s face, with its large planes and wide eyes, was made for black and white photography and, well, the opposite of high definition. Ditto Garbo’s, though here features were more, what, focused? Refined? A totally different look, but still all about the planes and shadows of B&W photography.
When you get Technicolor and Cinemascope, however, you need a different kind of beauty: creamy skin with hints of rose and peach. You can celebrate the flesh itself, and not just the negative space around it.
So while I don’t Dorothy Hyson (or Ann Harding or any of the other women disparaged in this thread as not hot by today’s standards) would turn as many heads today as she did in her own time, I can certainly see where she would be considered a great beauty in her day.
But yeah, not the widely acknowledged most beautiful. That’s the kind of statement that requires a cite.
Nobody’s mentioned Gene Tierney yet??
There’s no reason to mention other actresses now because the OP found the clipping and it wasn’t Gene Tierney or anyone else anyone here is likely to have heard of. It was Dorothy Hyson.
I’ve noticed that many actors and actresses who are fabulous on screen don’t convey the same qualities when they pose for a still picture. I’m sure that researchers have looked into this and found all sorts of perceptual reasons. That might be an interesting thread. But simply linking to a picture doesn’t work for a surprising number. It may be true, of course. And it works the other way round: people who take beautiful photos are nothing live. You just don’t know.
Theda Bara’s claim was novelty. Film actresses before her were not sold on sex appeal; there was nothing else to compare her with in 1910s cinema. And with those costumes, she was just out there.
William Powell was a popular leading man. But who even in the 1930s called him handsome?
Dietrich also looked pretty good in Technicolor close-ups.
[quote=“Markxxx, post:29, topic:498157”]
In the 30s the major women were
Marlene Dietrich,
Jean Harlow
Greta Garbo,
Norma Shearer
In the 40s you saw more “beauties,” because a lot of them did “pin-up” pictures for the troops. Rita Hayworth is definately thought of as a 40s actress, along with Marie MacDonald, Carmen Miranda and Betty Grable.
I agree with the one poster that said that the name recognition can extend beyond their actual fame. As Rachel Welch, just the mention of her name brings to mind beauty.
<<link removed due to virus warning>>
WARNING!!
Linked site has viruses!
I have no idea who the OP might have heard of but my nomination for most beautiful is Ingrid Bergman. I could’ve watched Casablanca on mute just because she was in it…
swoon
State Fair? With Jeanne Crain, Dick Haymes, and Vivien Blaine? I don’t know how that Andrews fellow got in it. His name is just an internal rhyme.
She did nudish That’s enough in 1910.
Powell was extremely cool, which is better than handsome.