MovieChat Forums > Stumptown (2019) Discussion > Why is Hollywood waiting until actresses...

Why is Hollywood waiting until actresses are in their late 30s...

posted 5 years ago by kuku (3510)
19 replies | jump to latest

People have been waiting for a Black Widow movie for years. Scarlet Johannson was stunning in early Marvel movies. Now she looks like a 40s chick, now they give her the Black Widow movie...

Evangeline Lilly was stunning in Lost. After that, nothing. Once she was in her late 30s: The Hobbit and The Wasp.

Cobie Smulders was stunning in How I Met Your Mother. After that, just some minor secondary role in Avengers. Now she's in her late 30s (and she looks like it), now she has a TV show???

It's like Hollywood had some weird empowering ideological fetish with chicks in their late 30s.

[–] exatera (3942) 5 years ago

Why does it bother you? This is really sexist - you don't seem to be bothered that Iron Man is in his 50's (and was never particularly attractive even when he was young), but Black Widow in her 30's - ooh, run for the hills!

And no, Scarlett Johansson doesn't look like she is in her 40's at age 34.

[–] kuku (3510) 5 years ago

his is really sexist - you don't seem to be bothered that Iron Man is in his 50's (and was never particularly attractive even when he was young)

I'm afraid you're confusing 'sexism' with biology.

Male humans find female humans much more attractive when they're in their 20s. That's biological, and logical from a evolutionary point of view: it maximizes the fertility window. On the other side, the attractiveness of a male for a female human is much more dependent on other features like status or dominance. Again, that's not 'sexism', that's biological.

Robert Downey JR is much attractive at his 40s/50s than he was at his 20s. That's why he got the role. He's not there because some kind of magical 'privilege'. He's there because he reached his peak of attractiveness at 40s. If he hasn't, he wouldn't be there. As simple as that.

[–] exatera (3942) 5 years ago

Who cares about your friggin biology?? Life doesn't end at 30! And the beautiful female actresses don't just go to live out the rest of their lives in a cave!

Seriously, it's extremely arrogant and egocentric to believe that the world should cater to the "male biology".

And newsflash: many men aren't interested in having kids.

[–] TandyMan (10364) 5 years ago

I was just saying this to the tv the other night. Said it about Lauren Cohen when she had that new show coming out last year. They finally give her her own show now? She's not the looker she was when TWD started. And I was saying it about Smulders in this.

[–] Wint3rFir3 (6923) 5 years ago

It's like Hollywood had some weird empowering ideological fetish with chicks in their late 30s.

What ageist nonsense is this?

Some of the hottest and most talented actresses working now are in their 30s. Natalie Portman, Anne Hathaway, Gugu Mbatha-Raw, Emma Stone, Constance Wu, etc. I mean, Margot Robbie is 29, still looks incredible and is killing it. If movie execs and TV networks have noticed an opening in the market for such aged actresses, by all means we should be welcoming shows that employ them provided those shows are good. Wtf does their age matter? Also not really sure why their looks matter - since actors's skills generally improve with age regardless of looks.

As for the "explanation", or rather the excuse, of biology as the reason Male humans find female humans much more attractive when they're in their 20s, I'm not gonna buy into that.

Angelica Huston was, respectively, 40 and 42 when she did The Addams Family films - and she never looked hotter. Sure, she's aged now because she's 68. Lucy Liu was 44 when she began working on Elementary and, seven years on, still looks damn fine. Not to mention the slew of actresses 40 and over that are stunningly beautiful - Nicole Kidman, Sofia Vergara, Charlize Theron, Angelina Jolie, Kate Winslet, Christina Hendricks, Halle Berry, etc.

Again, not sure there's any correlation between talent and looks, but there are plenty of older actresses that look amazing and have talent. That's all.

[–] kuku (3510) 5 years ago

Some of the hottest and most talented actresses working now are in their 30s. Natalie Portman, Anne Hathaway, Gugu Mbatha-Raw, Emma Stone, Constance Wu, etc. I mean, Margot Robbie is 29, still looks incredible

Women have a boundary at some moment in their 30s when they go from 'hot chick territory' to 'milf territory', losing much of their physical attractiveness. Portmen crossed that boundary a while ago. Johannson has already crossed it. So did Cobie Smulders. Emma Stone is still 30 and Margot Robbie still 29. Anne Hathaway just crossed that boundary, and that'll be clear in the movies to come. Fortunately, she got some really good roles before that. No idea about Gugu Mbatha-Raw, I don't follow African movies.

As for the "explanation", or rather the excuse, of biology as the reason Male humans find female humans much more attractive when they're in their 20s, I'm not gonna buy into that.

Who cares?

Angelica Huston was, respectively, 40 and 42 when she did The Addams Family films - and she never looked hotter

So you're telling than Anjelica Huston here...
http://images6.fanpop.com/image/photos/33100000/The-Addams-Family-anjelica-huston-33154088-1599-1068.jpg

...looks hotter than here:
https://i.huffpost.com/gen/1218051/thumbs/o-PHOTO-570.jpg

Again, not sure there's any correlation between talent and looks,

Good to know, mate.

Only problem: I was talking about correlation between age and looks. It seems that you got a bit distracted thinking about old ladies. ;-)

[–] Wint3rFir3 (6923) 5 years ago

Women have a boundary at some moment in their 30s when they go from 'hot chick territory' to 'milf territory'

I disagree. Obviously, I care and, seeing as how you posted on the topic and responded to me, you care somewhat. So that's at least 2 people who care.

And yes, I'm absolutely saying that 40-year-old AH looks way hotter than 20-year-old AH.

Only problem: I was talking about correlation between age and looks I wasn't distracted; I just don't see any correlation between the two. Saying someone looks like they're in their late 30s does not automatically equate in my mind to them looking ugly or less hot. I think a lot of women look better with age.

But agree to disagree, I guess.

[–] kuku (3510) 5 years ago

And yes, I'm absolutely saying that 40-year-old AH looks way hotter than 20-year-old AH [...] Saying someone looks like they're in their late 30s does not automatically equate in my mind to them looking ugly or less hot. I think a lot of women look better with age.

That just means you are into old ladies, or at least into MILFs.

Don't get me wrong: there's nothing wrong with it. I'm not trying to be sarcastic, the only thing I despise is being into little kids. Anything else: well, enjoy it! You like fat ladies? fine. You like bondage? fine. If you like it, what's the problem? it's nobody business but yours.

However, what I mean is: it's not the standard thing, and if we're talking standard attractiveness, we should leave fetishes aside.

[–] [deleted] 5 years ago

Whether someone is attractive or not is like an opinion. Everyone finds different things attractive or unattractive. But in general there is a point at which hot young girls become soccer mom's... Not to say that a soccer mom can't be attractive or can't be desirable in a sexual way... But the simple fact is there is a point where a woman is no longer hot, if that weren't the case and well known then you wouldn't have actresses constantly jumping on the botox bandwagon because the would only be more attractive as they showed their age, right?

As for Angelica Houston... well she was never beautiful by any stretch of the imagination. But if you think she was more attractive at 40 than at 20... well you either have very strange taste in women, or you are looking at some bad photos of her when she was 20 compared to when she was 40. I've seen photos of her in the late 60's and early 70's and she was more attractive back then... still not someone I would have thought of as hot but a damn sight more attractive than when she made The Addams family.... Hell maybe you are comparing her photo from that movie to when she was in just normal street clothes in the 60's and 70's, it might explain things.

[–] sslssg (27744) 5 years ago

Since you are posting this on the Stumptown board, I would say that the character is not supposed to be a beautiful 20 year old. So if you dislike the fact that there are women in their late 30s and 40s and perhaps even older that have stories that people find interesting to watch, then don't watch them. It's pretty simple.

There is a demographic out there outside of the 18-40 year old male, and they do watch tv and movies.

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

Possibly one of the goofier threads I've read.

You seem to confuse 'stunning' with some sort of age -- 20s and 30s. My entire life -- I'm older than you -- I've found women of all sorts of ages 'stunning'.

And stunning don't always equal attractive. You learn that along the way.

You'll learn too... or not.

[–] earl237 (1106) 4 years ago

Lots of male actors don't get a big break until they're older. Roger Moore was 45 in Live and Let Die. Charles Bronson was 53 in Deathwish.

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

Roger Moore was established long before his Bond gig, mostly for TV stuff. The Saint and The Persuaders among two of his many series. Bond probably raised his paycheques but not his profile.

Death Wish wasn't Charles Bronson's big break. He was already well known for great movies such as The Dirty Dozen, The Great Escape, Once Upon a Time in the West, The Mechanic... Death Wish just marked a stage in his career where he started churning out action movies as the ordinary guy thrust into situations where he has to take on assorted baddies.

[–] kuku (3510) 4 years ago

You seem to confuse 'stunning' with some sort of age -- 20s and 30s. My entire life -- I'm older than you -- I've found women of all sorts of ages 'stunning'. You'll learn too... or not.

Most males feel attracted mainly by women in their 20s and perhaps early 30s. That's not an opinion, that's a biological fact. Women's attractiveness decreases heavily out of that range (again, for the average male).

I understand that you feel attracted by females of "all sorts of ages". That's OK. That's fine. If you like to shag a 90 years old lady, as long as she agrees, that's OK. But I was not talking about personal fetishes, but about average sexual market value.

One detail, though. I don't know what country you are from, and I'm not judging, but if you travel to some western country, no matter you feel attracted by females of "all sorts of ages", I would recommend to leave females under 16 out of your game. It's not exactly considered as acceptable.

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

"That's not an opinion, that's a biological fact. Women's attractiveness decreases heavily out of that range (again, for the average male)."

Reference please?

Your last comment...weirdly random.

[–] kuku (3510) 4 years ago

Are you fucking kidding me? This is widely known fact and there's abundant literature on the subject. Do your homework first.

Asking people to waste their time looking for references about general knowledge is dishonest debate.

Holy shit.

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

Dishonest debate... yes, I agree.

[–] TruMovieFan (1967) 4 years ago

Maybe it is because viewers are tired as hell as watching mindless twenty-somethings in unbelievable shows saving the world while in positions they would never be in to start with......

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

when you grow up , you'll realise that 30 is young.
20 year old girls are unnattractive to a lot of grown men because of their childishness.