|
|
Post by kostgard on Aug 18, 2010 15:12:12 GMT -4
I think the problem is that Peggy has terrible hair. Even though it is improved this season, it's still kinda awful. A good or bad hairdo can make all the difference in the world.
|
|
|
|
Post by smitten on Aug 18, 2010 15:20:25 GMT -4
I think the problem is that Peggy has terrible hair. Even though it is improved this season, it's still kinda awful. A good or bad hairdo can make all the difference in the world. I agree, her hair on the show always makes the more unfortunate features of her face stand out. But when her hair is more loose and flowy in real life, it softens everything and she's very striking. |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Dec 1, 2024 6:24:37 GMT -4
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 18, 2010 15:50:41 GMT -4
I think she's very plain/average but with a pleasant demeanor. "Striking", to me, doesn't come close. If she wasn't an actress, she isn't someone I'd notice on the street. As she gets older, I think her face could get a bit jowly.
By the way, has anyone ever seen anything about how they did her makeup and costuming during Peggy's pregnancy? I thought that was very realistically done, especially her double chin.
|
|
|
|
Post by smitten on Aug 18, 2010 16:09:29 GMT -4
I consider someone striking if there's something unusual about them that makes their face interesting if not conventionally pretty at all. She fits that definition for me. Like Jennifer Grey before the infamous nose job.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ginger on Aug 18, 2010 19:38:52 GMT -4
Striking=pretty with a big nose.
|
|
xenna
Lady in Waiting
Posts: 450
Feb 22, 2006 22:34:04 GMT -4
|
Post by xenna on Aug 18, 2010 19:58:49 GMT -4
Striking=pretty with a big nose. Okay, you're making this up. |
|
|
|
Post by chonies on Aug 18, 2010 21:40:47 GMT -4
I think she's pretty enough, but I prefer her as Peggy. The look may be bordering frumpy (maybe just by 2010 standards) but I am more drawn to the structure of that look, rather than tumbling blond hair. I do find her necklessness distracting, although she has a great complexion.
|
|
|
|
Post by kostgard on Aug 18, 2010 21:43:24 GMT -4
I was both completely distracted by it, but also impressed at what a good job the makeup department did. Seriously - the makeup, wardrobe and set people on Mad Med should win every award out there. Being on a smaller cable network (and one that doesn't bring in huge ratings, despite all the attention they get in the media), their budget can't be that big. Probably 1/3 to 1/2 of that of a network drama, and they do a much better job. While I wouldn't call Moss "striking" myself (I would just call her "pretty"), I agree with the definition. Also? While not a requirement, I think is often true. I was trying to think of women I would call "striking" and the first one that popped into my head is Claudia Black, and yes - big nose. But I think all of CB's features are big and striking, and I would call Tilda Swinton striking as well, and she doesn't really have large features. I would also call Gabourey Sidibe "striking" as well, because while she isn't conventionally pretty, I think there is something very attractive about her (starting with her skin tone). I think the "big nose" rule often goes hand-in-hand with "striking", but not a requirement. |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Dec 1, 2024 6:24:37 GMT -4
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 18, 2010 22:01:32 GMT -4
That's ridiculous, why would I make it up?
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Dec 1, 2024 6:24:37 GMT -4
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 18, 2010 22:08:41 GMT -4
I thought Princess Diana was beautiful because of her nose. It was probably longer than what most people would consider conventional, but I think that's what made her distinct looking.
I'd classify Elizabeth Moss as pretty because when she acts it seems like she has a brain. I have no idea of what her actual intelligence level is like (if she's a Scientologist, I know I'm in a heap of trouble for mentioning this quality in relation to her), but she does convey a certain smarts in her roles that a lot of other actresses have difficulty doing.
|
|
