I had no idea. She was actually kind of pretty.
|by Anonymous||reply 29||08/26/2013|
This is better:
|by Anonymous||reply 1||10/25/2012|
You had no idea what she looked like, OP? Have you never seen any of her films?
|by Anonymous||reply 2||10/25/2012|
Then there is this Bette. Not so much.
|by Anonymous||reply 3||10/25/2012|
I understand there's a nude bronze of a young Davis in Central Park.
|by Anonymous||reply 4||10/25/2012|
Isn't the statue in Boston? I know - Google is your...
|by Anonymous||reply 5||10/25/2012|
I wouldn't call her pretty. At her best, she was somewhat attractive. But never pretty. Neither was Joan Crawford. They both had trademark, iconic looks but neither one of them was pretty at all.
|by Anonymous||reply 6||10/25/2012|
Lots of primary colors.
|by Anonymous||reply 7||10/25/2012|
So full of meaning, fire and music!
|by Anonymous||reply 8||10/25/2012|
Joan Crawford was beautiful, R6. You're nuts.
|by Anonymous||reply 9||10/25/2012|
I wouldn't call Bette Davis beautiful, but she had a unique kind of prettiness about her in her youth. I've never thought of her as homely.
|by Anonymous||reply 10||10/25/2012|
She's got Bette Davis eyesssssssssss!
|by Anonymous||reply 11||10/25/2012|
"Joan Crawford was beautiful"
No, she wasn't. She never was. Striking maybe, for a while. But she become like a caricature of femininity very quickly.
|by Anonymous||reply 12||10/26/2012|
The picture R1 posted she looks like Susan Sarandon.
|by Anonymous||reply 13||10/26/2012|
She was attractive rather than pretty.
"Pretty" is an only slightly advanced state of "cute," which should be reserved for little girls in party dresses.
But why dress as a Halloween pumpkin candy?
|by Anonymous||reply 14||10/26/2012|
The photo by r11, looks like Jean Harlow.
|by Anonymous||reply 15||10/26/2012|
Very good, R14!
|by Anonymous||reply 16||10/26/2012|
r14 Bette would have put her Chesterfield out in your eye, you pedantic idiot.
|by Anonymous||reply 17||10/26/2012|
R13, that's because Susan Sarandon has bulging Bette Davis eyes!
|by Anonymous||reply 18||10/26/2012|
She and Joan were both attractive. Bette was cute, Joan was gorgeous. I don't want to get into a debate about the different levels of attractiveness ("cute," "pretty," "beautiful," etc.) but whatever you call them, they certainly weren't ugly.
|by Anonymous||reply 19||10/26/2012|
Who remembers seeing the ancient, infirm Bette on talk shows in the 80s? She looked awful but her mind was still sharp as a tack and she still smoked cigs.
|by Anonymous||reply 20||10/26/2012|
If Bette had not been such a heavy smoker and drinker, she could have kept her looks much longer than she did. By the end of the forties her soft, rounded features started taking on rough edges. The smoking had given her copious wrinkles around her eyes and mouth, and the drinking had made her face puffy. She was a very attractive woman early on. Just look at films like Jezebel and Now, Voyager, where she really is quite beautiful. Her voice, also, began to harden and take on the craggy quality that is so dear to Davis impersonators. In short, she became a caricature of her early self. Too bad. I still love her, but like with Judy Garland, I wonder what her career might have been like if she hadn't been so self abusive.
|by Anonymous||reply 21||10/26/2012|
Goodness, is that Tammie Brown in the OP's photo?!
|by Anonymous||reply 22||10/26/2012|
Young Bette and young Susan Sarandon - similar look
|by Anonymous||reply 23||10/26/2012|
Warner Bros. bleached their new starlet Bette Davis' hair peroxide blonde in the hope of creating another Jean Harlow, who they lost to MGM after Harlow debuted in Public Enemy for Warners.
My question is: How did Warners let Jean Harlow slip by?
|by Anonymous||reply 24||10/26/2012|
I was watching "Beyond The Forest" (1949) and noticed that she'd still kept her face and figure (even though the movie is kind of lurid camp). But there was a rapid decline in her appearance throughout the 1950's.
|by Anonymous||reply 25||10/28/2012|
I saw BD in an interview once where she commented on how she would have loved to have had plastic surgery, but she was terrified of the actual procedure - not of a botched, or different look . She said she hated the idea of a scalpel cutting into her skin, and it was that reason - not the frozen face / no expression result, that prevented her from going under the knife. Thus we had the haggard, wrinkled Bette. I wouldn't have wanted it any other way .
|by Anonymous||reply 26||10/28/2012|
Boys, if you think Bette Davis was "pretty," all that means is that you're gay.
Now Joan Crawford, as a youth, was positively HOT.
|by Anonymous||reply 27||10/28/2012|
She was beautiful when she was younger. She had her style certainly!
|by Anonymous||reply 28||08/26/2013|
Joan was more manipulative that Bette. Bette was more strict than Joan.
Bette's movies were better than Joan's but Joan took more risks in her personal life than Bette did.
Personally i prefer Bette but Joan was a big star as well and she had star quality undoubtedly.
|by Anonymous||reply 29||08/26/2013|