The opening scenes of the Joan Rivers documentary show her- never full face but ‘here and there’ putting on her makeup and it’s horrifying. You can actually see the incision marks.
Florence Henderson was on a talk show recently and has now crossed the line into “Way Too Many Incisions”.
Most of the ones named haven’t just aged, they’ve aged noticeably badly, often due to a really rough lifestyle or to bad/too much plastic surgery.
Angela Lansbury and Betty White are two examples of women who aged but aged well and looked more or less natural (I’m sure each had some work done, but they knew when to call it quits). Harry Morgan and Jack Klugman would be examples of men who did.
Phyllis Diller is that rare exception who looks good (2010 pic) after having 392 cosmetic surgeries, but then she… um… had a great personality… before. (She’s 94 and had uncles- not great-uncles, but her father’s brothers- who fought in the Civil War [her dad was the youngest of a large family and was pushing 60 when she was born]).
She looks bad, because she had so much plastic surgery. She looks fake. She was absolutely beautiful and that also contributes to the fact that she’s had to come down as she aged. But overall she looks good, too bad she didn’t stop the plastic surgery earlier.
Her 80s copart Sheena Easton looks good, a bit overweight now, but still hot.
How the crap is that even the same person? The very bone structure of her face appears to have changed . . . it doesn’t just look like she “lost weight” in her face.
I disagree. To me, it just looks like she plucked her eyebrows and lost a little weight…that plus the aging process (albeit slowed suspiciously in her case).
I understand the premise, I’m arguing with the examples. Or maybe we need to define our terms better: have not aged well compared to whom? People who have aged particularly well?(Then we’d have to cite most everyone else, since the ones who age well are far less common than those who do not. Aging well, by definition is outside the norm.) Other celebrities randomly? People in general? Or, as seems really to be the case, their own youthful selves, which doesn’t make much sense.
Many posters seem to be surprised because someone who was youthful and attractive when they were young isn’t still youthful and attractive 30, 40 or 50 years later.
Most of the people being cited, if compared to their peers-by-age, (i.e., non-famous people who are 60, 70, 80) have aged either exactly the way you’d expect, or better (except the plastic surgery trainwrecks, which isn’t about aging well or badly, it’s about horrible plastic surgery.) Go to a dating site and pull up a search of people the same age as someone in Hollywood you think has aged badly, and I think you’ll find they haven’t aged badly, they’ve just aged:
Using the above random samples of other 60-year olds, and assessing aging (wrinkles, sun damage, fat, baldness, and general sag & collapse) I think anyone would be very hard pressed to make the case that Mark and Shelly are any worse than most other 60 year olds in how well they have aged.
Of course it makes sense. We are looking at stars who had youthful beauty and seeing how well that beauty held up.
Saying Mark Hamill looks better that the average 60-year-old schlub doesn’t tell us much about how well he has aged, because he started out much better-looking than did most of those sclubs.
I see no reason for us to be priggish about commenting on celebrities’ appearances as they age. Most of these celebrities made a lot of money on their looks when they were in their primes. That makes them fair game in my book.
Yeah…but…isn’t this thread about celebrities that aged badly, not celebrities that aged normally?
Seems we’ve got a few categories here.
Hot celebrities who retain their hotness beyond their years. Being a man helps here.
Hot celebrities who have aged normally.
Hot celebrities who have had horrible plastic surgery and are now circus freaks.
Hot celebrities who have aged beyond their years.
This thread should be about the last category, right? The hot girl who wore a bikini in 1961 was 25 then, and it’s 2011 and she’s 75.
Now, if we’re talking Lindsey Lohan, who was a hot girl in a bikini 5 years ago but looks 20 years older, that’s a different story. She hasn’t aged well.
Oh come on. Who doesn’t go to their class reunion and judge which of their classmates have aged well and which haven’t? We are just doing the same thing with celebrities.
If you disagree with some of the assessments here, that’s fine. It’s subjective. You might look at a 77-year-old former beauty and think she has aged “normally.” I might look at the same celebrity and think, “Wow, my Aunt Sally is 77 and looks much nicer. And she didn’t start out with movie star looks.” See how it works?
So, fine, disagree with the assessments, but spare us the moralizing about judging these poor celebrities for aging.
Really? This is probably the most recent picture I can find, and while he does look old (he’s 75 for god’s sake), he looks pretty normal and non-cartoonish to me. I’ve heard people say before that he’s had bad plastic surgery, but I just don’t see it. Looks perfectly normal. I think they might be thinking of Kenny Rogers.
I think the thing with Burt Reynolds is that his looks changed fairly drastically in a relatively short period of time. He went from this to this in about twenty year’s time. I think the change was due more to health trouble and at least some plastic surgery than the mere passing of time. I agree that after the transformation he has aged about like one would expect, but he really doesn’t look as if he’s aged normally from the way he looked as a young or middle-aged man.
Just saw an episode of Hawaii Five-O where one character had an ill-fitting Balki Bartokomous mask on. Turns out it was Bronson Pinchot doing his Stallone impression.
