Jump to content

Lucy, what happened to your face?


C L A U D E

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 69
  • Created
  • Last Reply

A while back we were discussing Lucy sitting with her back to Dick Cavett during her famous interview with him. I finally found an explanation for it. In an interview during the Mame press tour, Lucy mentioned that people keep asking her if she doesn't like Cavett because she turned her back to him. She said she adores Dick Cavett. What happened was that the studio air conditioning was blowing the feathers from her infamous outfit into her mouth and that was the only way she could sit to prevent that from happening.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes the hands are a give away. Even in her 30s you can see the age in Lucy's hands.

 

She starts putting make up and concealer on her hands in the late 70s and then on and off in the 80s. 

I think the same concealer she used for her face, was used for her hands. 

If you look at the Merv Griffin clip on youtube - he kisses her hand and he notices the make up- reacts- and puts it down lol 

Later, she is she checks if the make up is keeping

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seeing as Sir Brock is showing us how Lucy could look in his new Lounge avatar, once she had someone else do her make up for that famous Blackglama ad, we see that she could have looked so different when her make up was in someone else's hands.

 

The work is all Henry's!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think he did a very good job. I think her made her look chic and glamorous. 

She looked fine, the problem was the lighting and the retouching. They lit the picture up, so her face loses

a lot of its features and tones. Her eyebrows come out looking undone, and her lips done look to be fully applied. 

I think, had they had left the retouching alone and the lighting, she would have been a bit more "recognizable" and it would have came off a little more glamorous than just attentive. 

The smokey eyes, and leather gloves, in all black, give her a Kicka--glamorous rocker look that I adore. 

Picture+52.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exactly, the campaign was WHO BECOMES A LEGEND MOST?  And you are supposed to recognize the star without any name showing anywhere.  So even though Mr Bandy DID do a great job of making her look terrific, it no longer looks much like her to the millions used to seeing her look one way and getting Lucy Sophistication instead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think he did a good job. I think her made her look chic and glamorous. 

She looked fine, the problem was the lighting and the retouching. They lit the picture up, so her face loses

a lot of its features and tones. Her eyebrows come out looking undone, and her lips done look to be fully applied. 

I think, had they had left the retouching alone and the lighting, she would have been a bit more recognizable and it would have came off a little more glamorous. 

The smokey eyes, and leather gloves, in all black, give her a Kicka--glamorous rocker look.

Picture+52.png

 

I don't totally agree .... While this is a "different" style of dress, make up, etc. for her, it certainly emphasizes how glamorous, when done right, she could be.  I certainly have no problem "recognizing" her, although maybe it's my "bias" showing.... Funny how I never noticed before how wistful she looks here.... one of those shots where you can't help wonder what's going through the subject's mind as the photograph is being taken.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

She looks like a society matron in Beverly Hills.  The ad is for MINK coats and she's wearing two pieces flung together, you're not supposed to see material, you're just supposed to see MINK.  However great she looks, she does not look like herself.

Whaddya mean, she was a Beverly Hills matron!  And as for the mink coat, they were a different style in each and every star's ad, what's wrong with this one?? Now we know better than Blackglama what a mink coat should look like?? Hmmmm.........

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't totally agree .... While this is a "different" style of dress, make up, etc. for her, it certainly emphasizes how glamorous, when done right, she could be.  I certainly have no problem "recognizing" her, although maybe it's my "bias" showing.... Funny how I never noticed before how wistful she looks here.... one of those shots where you can't help wonder what's going through the subject's mind as the photograph is being taken.....

 

Don't get me wrong, I LOVE this pic, I just think some people were looking for it to be the thick, over the top clown Lucy.

In my opinion that is THEE MOST glamorous studio picture she takes in the 80s. Even considering LWL- I think these are superb. 

If only the negatives were around...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh it was a MASK all right.  Lee Tannen said they flung some pieces of mink on her, never doing it like a proper coat the way a woman who wore fur her whole life would have wanted.  As for the picture used, Lee said that she would have looked so much better in a clown LOOK which she was almost her entire life, America's most famous clown and that's the look they should have gone for.  It was not supposed to LOOK strung together, these people are experts in making mink look terrific and they failed miserably here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...