MovieChat Forums > The Artist (2012) Discussion > The heroine didn't fit the time period, ...

The heroine didn't fit the time period, IMHO

posted 12 years ago by claudecat
115 replies | jump to latest

I really wish I could turn off the nitpicky part of myself that prevents me from just enjoying a film, but this movie had a few major anachronisms, in my opinion. For example, why is the Peppy Miller character considered a revelation of the talkies, when the spunky flapper persona she embodies is mainly associated with silents, and was certainly nothing new in the late 20's/early 30's?

In actuality, an Argentinian beauty like Bejo probably would have been cast as the "exotic" in that time period, not as the cutesy heroine. Not to say Bejo didn't perform well, or look gorgeous, and I liked her dancing, but I thought her look was way too sophisticated for the role as written. I would have toned down her Carole-Lombard-in-1936 eyebrows, for starters. (Lombard's eyebrows were a different shape in the twenties.) Bejo's whole look is very contemporary, and I could never quite believe that she lived in the movie's setting.

[–] charcas67 12 years ago

I disagree. I thought she looked like a star of the period. Check out stills of Norma Shearer, Kay Francis or even Joan Crawford in the late 20's/early 30's pre code talky era. I thought Poppy had the right mix of spunk, langour and sophistication.

[–] docudrama67 12 years ago

She has the face of a modern TV actress which is what she is, the OP is right. She didn't work. Most of this film didn't. Although Jean Dujardin was really great and deserves some attention. Without him the film would have been almost unwatchable.

Dying ain't much of a living, boy.

Josey Wales

[–] zurichpoet 12 years ago

Sure.

God's TV.

[–] claudecat 12 years ago

@charcas67
I've seen many films with Shearer, Francis and Crawford, and she didn't look like any of them to me during their early careers. Especially the eyebrows. She has a very slight resemblance to Crawford in the early 30's, but Peppy's look was supposed to have been created in 1927. Not to mention Bejo's modern hard-as-plastic body. Even the tall, lanky dancers like Crawford, and the extreme-height-of-fashion slim women like Jetta Goudal had more softness in their arms and legs at that period. I think Bejo should have given up going to the gym for a while before filming.

Here are a bunch of pictures of Crawford in 1927--you can see that her look is quite different from what it was in the 30's. The filmmakers could have had Bejo's look change quite a lot from 1927-1932/3 (the end of the film), but they seemed to keep pretty much the same hair and makeup throughout.
http://www.joancrawfordbest.com/images1927.htm

I also thought the clothing was a bit off--toward the end of the movie, Bejo is still in distinctly flapper garb, rather than the fashions of 1932.

And here's something no one seems to be talking about: her skin is too dark to have been the "sweetheart" of films in the time period; it's sad but true. Her skin is not even that dark, but compared to Pickford, Bow, Moore, etc., she looks different. South-of-the-border actresses like Delores Del Rio and Lupe Velez were not usually cast as the spunky heroine, but as the "exotic," as I said (though if you haven't seen it, check out the great "Lady of the Pavements" to get a showcase of Velez's comic touch). Instead of confronting this, the movie acted as if there was no such thing as racism at the time, and it seemed to create that sanitized world by just not casting any other actors of color, and bleaching Bejo out with lights when they could. I don't remember seeing any black or Asian actors even in the crowd scenes, though I could be wrong about that.

I think the plot could easily have had Bejo become a sophisticated talkies star, rather than the flapper type. It would have worked better with the film's timeline, anyway.

[–] elephantoats 12 years ago

newsflash: bejo, like most argentines, is white. furthermore, there were plenty of skinny brunettes in 1920s hollywood. take a look at louise brooks.
so she didn't have the same eyebrows as shearer or crawford. so what. who cares if "she didn't look like any of them" to you. it wasn't supposed to be a representation of some pre-existing woman. peppy miller is a fictional character. the hair, makeup, costumes, body language, and everything else was accurate to the period.
you're obviously not a fashion expert either, because her costumes, when she became the movie star, were not flapper. she was in long gowns and furs. you seem to be blinded by your own preferred details.
also, there WAS racial content in the movie. Valentin's failed jungle movie exhibited the racial caricatures of africans that were popular then. pay attention. besides, the movie is not ABOUT "confronting" racism of the 1920s, it's about a guy. everybody already knows people and institutions were racist in those days, there is no need to go off the topic of the story to discuss it. that's a different movie.

[–] Youwillhateme 12 years ago

NEWSFLASH. Argentines are latin, not white. You wanna see white people go to Sweden, Germany or Netherlands..

[–] Duchess89 12 years ago

NEWSFLASH. Argentines are latin, not white. You wanna see white people go to Sweden, Germany or Netherlands..
......................................................

Again with this...? NEWSFLASH: Latin is NOT a RACE, Cameron Diaz, Emillio Estevez are Hispanic AND WHITE.

I'm more of a breakfast for lunch type of girl.

[–] sellis1 12 years ago

Agree. Ethnicity and race are different.
http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/NOT-OD-01-053.html

[–] claudecat 11 years ago

btw, i wanted to clarify my original comment about this. I didn't mean that they should have used a "whiter" actress; just that I wished they had made use of the Latin aspect of her looks, rather than blasting them out, and not casting any other actors of "color" as main characters.

[–] Miquel-Angel 11 years ago

Yes, these people are so ignorant. It's really annoying.

My Favourite Films: http://www.imdb.com/list/XqrpBbhmslg/

[–] Miquel-Angel 11 years ago

Probably, you are the most stupid person I met on Internet.

My Favourite Films: http://www.imdb.com/list/XqrpBbhmslg/

[–] Youwillhateme 11 years ago

Stupid is what stupid does...

[–] vicky_lc2001-1 10 years ago

I have to agree with the OP a bit here. Bejo could've fit the 1920s ideal if only they tried, but her makeup was very very modern, especially her eyebrows. It also would've helped if she had stopped going to the gym & tried to get a softer, more delicate body type instead of the harder washboard abs popular nowadays.

Jean was perfect though, even his smiles & eyebrows had me in stitches, very charismatic.

Global Warming, it's a personal decision innit? - Nigel Tufnel

[–] pjpoconnell 12 years ago

A black couple was shown in the audience of one of the movie theaters. Re timeline: Wasn't the first talking film in 1927, not 1929 as "The Artist" has it?

[–] Zerose 12 years ago

I don't remember seeing any black or Asian actors even in the crowd scenes, though I could be wrong about that.

Wow. Active Asian American actors during the American silent cinema period: Sessue Hayakawa (one of highest paid actors), Anna May Wong, Tsuru Aoki, Keye Luke, Toshia Mori, Philip Ahn, Ah Wing, Charles A. Fang, Etta Lee, Duke Kahanamoku, Frank M. Seki, Frank Tokunaga, George Kuwa, Goro Kino, Henry Kotani, Iris Yamaoka, Jack Yutaka, Abbe “Yutaka Abe”, James B. Leong, James Wang, James Wong Howe, Komato Sungata, Kunihiko Nanbu, Lady Tsen Mei, Louie Cheung, Misao Seki, Mrs. Wong Wing, Mr. Yoshida, Sojin, Tetsu Komai, Togo Yamamoto, Tokuko “Taku” Nagai Takagi, Toyo Fujita, Yukio Aoyama and Willie Fung. You're welcome.

[–] prettynoose69 12 years ago

Joan Crawford was not tall- she couldn't have been more than 5 foot 3, and certainly not lanky.

[–] noveltylibrary 12 years ago

she kept reminding me of juliet prowse.

[–] joyce-miller777 9 years ago

Good call. She does resemble Juliet Prowse.

[–] joyce-miller777 9 years ago

Good call. She does resemble Juliet Prowse.

[–] Helpfan65 12 years ago

From a character part, I think she captured the Crawford/Bow style perfectly.

But what bothered me was the lack of transitioning in the her costumes. I do think she captured the 20s vibe, but why the costume dept. didn't tranform her into the 30s look is annoying. The fact that she's still in her flapper get up by the 30s is a big costume error.
________________________________________
Get me a bromide - and put some gin in it!

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] judith-mcgee1025 12 years ago

I thought she looked - and acted - very much like Joan Crawford did in the silent/early talkie era.

[–] Ambrosia-I 12 years ago

Yes, I thought so, too. And Joan Crawford definitely did not have a cupid's bow mouth.

[–] Gregoire-2 12 years ago

I agree 100% with a cherry on top. Where Jean Dujardin looked perfectly authentic, I thought Bejo looked a bit too much like a modern actress playing a flapperish role.

[–] Hazelrigg 12 years ago

this is what happens when the director casts his wife in the lead instead of finding someone more suitable for the part

- 40°04'56''N 86°33'47''W
I shoot when I see the whites of the eyes.

[–] tsegal-1 12 years ago

They toned down the period makeup for her (as was obvious in that studio poster of the "New Faces", when she's alongside genuine 1920s photos), but otherwise the costuming was good.(As an earlier poster noted, fashions didn't change overnight; 1932 had plenty of flapper-type styles). Being a dancer, she naturally was going to be a bit muscular, but she didn't seem overtly so -- no bulging biceps or anything.

[–] prettymaryk 12 years ago

I agree... though I loved her performance, I did think she looked a bit wrong. (Though all of the women in the film did, to an extent.) I don't know enough about silent film stars to be able to base this in a factual way, but she did look too modern: particularly, as you mentioned, her figure (much too thin), and her facial expressions as well. They were much more exaggerated than they did back then, I think. But I still liked her very much.

the angels have the phone box

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] apfelshaft 12 years ago

Yeah, this is one I'll let slide, easily. Most of the women of that era looked like hog monsters who you wouldn't take a second look at even if it were bar close. Authenticity isn't everything, and Bejo didn't diminish anything for me.

[–] Marbeque 12 years ago

I 100% agree. Bejo is definitely charming but she just didn't fit into the era.

Not only her look, but there were several times where she tried to improvise but ended up committing some anachorisms. Just off the top of my head, there was the scene where she gets chosen to dance as an extra and she does this movement with her arm, I don't know how to describe it but it's completely modern and for a moment it took me out of the movie. Also quite a few times you could read her lips saying, "Oh my God!" Yeah, people of the time didn't use that phrase.

I feel like a snob, afterall she's fun to watch and the movie still works with all those little problems.

[–] amundsen 12 years ago

Actresses were shorter and softer then but for me, she didn't have to look exactly like Joan Crawford to sell the part. I thought she was emotionally believable and played well with the leading man. Just the same, Crawford started as a flapper and progressed from there. I thought of her more as a combination of Crawford and Loretta Young. Either way I liked her. And the leading man suggested both Douglas Fairbanks AND Gene Kelly, who didn't come around until the 40's.

[–] TOMNEL 12 years ago

Greta Garbo was a big star and she was well over 5 and a half feet tall.

The only thing that seemed a bit unrealistic to me was that the old time actresses were shot in soft focus, and typically shot to be more seductive in a way. The films in this film starring Peppy Miller didn't seem to do that.

[–] partydjz (424) 3 years ago

Fairbanks starred in Robin Hood - 1922, he passed away in 1939

[–] pjpoconnell 12 years ago

A functionary calls the cast and crew to order by saying, "Listen up!" Not an expression of that period.

[–] indalay422 12 years ago

I thought the term "Loser" was not used back then either...

[–] ahhjuicyfruit 12 years ago

Not only her look, but there were several times where she tried to improvise but ended up committing some anachronisms. Just off the top of my head, there was the scene where she gets chosen to dance as an extra and she does this movement with her arm, I don't know how to describe it but it's completely modern

YES! That really made me cringe. It's the "Yes-movement" (does that gesture even have a name?) I think the first time I saw it was in Terminator 2 - "Judgement Day" - something the Edward Furlong character did. A very contemporary movement. It's sad because despite the careful costumes, sets and photography, that one gesture totally ruined the moment.

And I also wanted to come back to what Gregoire-2 said:

It wasn't just Bejo's body, it was her face and mannerisms! She looked like she was acting in a silent film; Dujardin looked like a silent film actor. There's a critical difference there.

Very well put. The scenes where she's driving especially, near the end. It seems she's making a sort of caricature of the way actors used to "drive" in the 20's/30's, turning the wheel right and left constantly, to convey to the audience that they're "driving a car". Something tells me this was suggested by Hazanavicius, who seems to relish this kind of references to mannerisms of the classic period. It worked well in his OSS movies, because they were comedies whose point was precisely to make fun of these films, but in a crucial scene like the heroine rushing to save the hero from suicide in The Artist, I think that was a bit out of place.

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] vicky_lc2001-1 10 years ago

there was the scene where she gets chosen to dance as an extra and she does this movement with her arm, I don't know how to describe it but it's completely modern and for a moment it took me out of the movie.

I did notice that as well.

Global Warming, it's a personal decision innit? - Nigel Tufnel

[–] Gregoire-2 12 years ago

It wasn't just Bejo's body, it was her face and mannerisms! She looked like she was acting in a silent film; Dujardin looked like a silent film actor. There's a critical difference there.

[–] pjpoconnell 12 years ago

Nice point.

[–] MsELLERYqueen2 12 years ago

At first she did fit the time period. Later in the movie, she didn't. Her costume near the end of the movie looked more like 1927 rather than 1932. I have seen movies from the late 20s and early 30s, and I know what the differences are in the way women dressed.

-----

Ellery Queen(Jim Hutton) = HOT SEXY ADORABLE ATTRACTIVE CUTE

[–] rpniew 12 years ago

Actually, I thought there were some subtle changes that fit the period. My only quibble is very minor indeed: The use of the phrase "superstar" to describe her in one of the 30's magazines. I do not believe the phrase was used that early.

[–] MsELLERYqueen2 12 years ago

By the early thirties, the skirts were longer and not fit so loosely. They were more form-fitting by that time. At least, that's what I've seen in movies. The hats were worn more to one side of the head (berets, not hats). That's what she should have been wearing near the end of the movie.

-----

Ellery Queen(Jim Hutton) = HOT SEXY ADORABLE ATTRACTIVE CUTE

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] MsELLERYqueen2 12 years ago

I have seen various movies from those time periods, so I know what the ladies were wearing.

The clothes which the lady was wearing are only a minor point. I did enjoy this movie, and would probably give it either eight stars or nine stars out of ten.

-----

Ellery Queen(Jim Hutton) = HOT SEXY ADORABLE ATTRACTIVE CUTE

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] pjpoconnell 12 years ago

Would any of the guys complaining about Bejo's look kick her out of bed?

[–] itchyfriend9 12 years ago

That's so funny, I was having the exact same thought, and then I immediately scrolled down and found this post on the main page expressing the thought I just had!

But yeah, I never really bought her as a '20s/'30s actress. Leading ladies from that era had a certain look, which Bejo, lovely as she is, just doesn't have.