MovieChat Forums > Gentlemen Marry Brunettes (1956) Discussion > Isn't Jane Russell just a little chunky?

Isn't Jane Russell just a little chunky?


One has to have a broad mind (so to speak) for the female figure in the 50s, but even so, isn't Jane Russell just a hair's breadth away from fat? Thank God for foundation garments!

reply

Nope. She looks fantastic in this.

reply

I noticed in a couple of scanty-costumes scenes that her hips were "Kardashianesque." But she didn't look fat: maybe a tad fleshy by today's standards, but pretty solid. Still had very nice legs.

reply

Jane has the worst hairstyle of her career in this film, way too short, and as a result I think she's probably at her least attractive in this movie. Jane was always a "healthy" gal, never reed thin, but never very close to being plump either. I think the clothes in this movie generally did her figure no favors and with that bad haircut to top it off, she wasn't as gorgeous as we normally expect from her in her thirties.

reply

>>Jane has the worst hairstyle of her career in this film<<

That's funny because the late fifties were known for this type of chique, short hair do originating from France... think of Leslie Caron in "An American in Paris" and Audrey Hepburn in "Roman Holiday." I absolutely LOVE this hair-do...
Though now that I think of it, Mamie Eisenhower also wore this kind of pixie-do in the fifties.

Perhaps the problem you're having with Jane Russell in this type of hair do has to do with her being so large in size. The above-named gals were all small in stature, which goes with a petite-do. And Jane Russell, we all know, just isn't "petite." Though I didn't have a bit of a problem with Jane Russell wearing this very short hair-do...

Flanagan

reply

Agreed; it's the hairstyle. She had a team of hairstylist, makeup person and costume designer during her years at RKO. Perhaps they were not available for this film.

reply

I would never refer to her as fat, even in this film which, as a previous commenter stated, she looks probably her least attractive, but that's more the stylist and costumers fault as Jeanne Crain's hair style didn't suit her very well either. I Jane's figure is just a lot different from the norm of women in the 50's like Marilyn, and also she was quite tall, but I think it was just the hair style and costumes that made her look anyway bad, if done similar to the ones in Gentlemen Prefer Blondes (1953), she would have looked fantastic again

reply

Nah, she's not the least bit fat. One needs to take into account that the camera, especially the CinemaScope type equipment they used back in those days, puts at least 10 lbs. on a person's frame. Also, consider the fact that Jeanne Crain was much smaller, all around, than Jane Russell. While Russell was 5' 7" Crain was a petite 5' 4" - whereas Marilyn Monroe was about 5' 6" and more filled out than Crain. Thus, I think the chunkiness you saw was more an optical illusion which was a result of the studio pairing Russell with a tiny lady, rather than someone whose body was more comparable to hers. Personally, I liked the hairdo, on Russell, which was in actuality originally introduced by Gina Lollobrigida, but thought Crain's hair looked shapelessly cut and haphazardly styled. The costuming/fashions delighted the eye, but the plot was mindlessly silly.

reply

I have to agree with the consensus: Jane Russell looks worse than I've ever seen her in this film. I think she looks old in the short pixie cut which the hair stylist has given her. It also seems she is playing the 'Monroe' role in this sequel which doesn't suit her - even when they put her in a blonde wig as her aunt (or is it mother) Jones. My guess is that making her the 'smart' sister would've felt too close to the first film so they switched it up although making Crain the 'dumb' one might've worked better. Chunky though? No. In fact she just come on screen with the green striped dress and looks quite fetching despite the hippiness I've noticed in the other costumes.

http://crewdtees.com/category/movies

reply