to be good looking and still have distinct features. I can tell these two guys apart.And all the rest of these fellows.
On top of their looks they all have extremely distinct voices, personalities and mannerisms. That's why they called them "stars".
32 comments:
Fat man in a bathtub. Priceless.
*Touchdown first comment.
I'm, .. there are no words for how pathetic I am being. lol
One of these things is not like the others!
Burt Lancaster had the cheesiest grin. In a good way. He was great in Vera Cruz. I'm a big fan of Clint and Kirk too. Don't forget Arnie and Stallone.
Oh my God! It's Stinky Wizzleteats!
I've made a little list of my own. They look alike because I have an aesthetic bias, but I still think the actors I used from both Old Hollywood and contemporary film are pretty distinctive.
HipChick Comics Pretty Boys
Hey Carmine, you make one too!
Burl Ives was so distinctive, he practically was a cartoon character. But he isn't what I'd call handsome. The all of that can be said for Peter Lorre, too.
But Paul Newman? Rrrrowr. Distinctive and incredibly sexy. Thank you for the underwear shot of him.
The most interesting thing about at least some of these men is that they continued to be handsome even into their 80s, Paul Newman being a prime example, though he was never quite as handsome as he was in his youth. Clint Eastwood was the exact opposite. He was rather unattractive as a young man, but as his face got craggier, he became handsome.
Stinky Wizzleteats!
Peter Lorre had one of the greatest faces of all freaking time. Voice, too!
I like these posts.
They remind me of when I made a "Top Ten Men" star/celeb list with some younger girlfriends of mine. I honestly could not tell any of their guys apart and I had no idea who any of them were.
The distintive-ness of these great stars makes modern "celebrities" look pathetic (which they are).
Yes sir! If John was elected president we all have to look like this; and you'll have my vote, o yes.
these ones have fascinating heads:
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_4yHKAPUdlzI/SsuEofYjEAI/AAAAAAAACcA/6W68FKP9jWs/s400/Humphrey+Bogart
http://cdn1.iofferphoto.com/img/item/181/910/985/humphrey-bogart-vintage-original-head-shot-portrait-fa39b.jpg
http://marielosier.net/gallery/pages/Humphrey-Bogart,-Lou%2310004.html
http://www.doctormacro.com/Images/Davis,%20Bette/Annex/Annex%20-%20Davis,%20Bette%20(Dark%20Victory)_06.jpg
http://imagecache6.allposters.com/LRG/27/2768/36JTD00Z.jpg
http://www.meredy.com/cagney/mcagsmartmoney.jpg
http://www.doctormacro.com/Images/Karloff,%20Boris/Annex/Annex%20-%20Karloff,%20Boris_05.jpg
http://www.serialexperience.com/image_gallery/Boris_Karloff.jpg
Hell, even modern "pretty boys" are different from each other.
I mean, you've done cartoons of Justin Bieber and the guys from Twilight, and as you can see they all have very different fracial structures.
I've seen some early Tangled sketches, and the guy had a similar face, but a different body structure. He was big and slightly clumsy, so he didn't look a lot like the common Disney lead: http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4147/5196023871_8dfc5f2575.jpg
The movie still looks pretty interesting for me because of all the production art and the technical achievements, but still, it could have been so much better...
Many of these actors were so unique in terms of vocal quality and physical mannerisms that the impressionists back in the 60's and 70's would cover them in their acts. Maybe that's the litmus test, John. Have you noticed that today there aren't really any impressionists working anymore? Nobody like Rich Little, Frank Gorshin or John Byner of years gone by. And even if there were, would they even be able to do impressions of the likes of Brad Pitt or Johnny Depp? They may be terrific actors, but are they identifiable personalities that audiences would recognize impressions of? I sincerely doubt it.
Yes, all hunks have distinct facial features, that's what makes them memorable.
Man! There's gonna be a ring around that tub!
My old man and I were talking about this the other day. We've decided that live action television is the biggest offender. Too many leading male "stars" are indistinguishable from each other. They all have the same general look. Same hair. Same cheek bones. Same nautilus physique. Same faux-cool 'tude. We flipped through the dial and found a show (maybe the new Hawaii Five-O?) with male characters that all looked the same even though some were Asian and some were Honky!
At least with women stars there's some variety if you ignore the assembly line one-size-fits-all knocker implants.
I can't tell most modern actors and actresses apart. It's a great service you're providing with your caricatures. You're squeezing out what little individuality they possess and amplifying it under a magnifying glass of great drawing.
Elvis was so incredibly handsome & charismatic when he was young *swoon*!!
(if we're including musicians)I would add John Lennon:
http://tiny.cc/carx7
Peter, Johnny Depp is more of a character actor who changes his persona with each role ( unless you have a string of recent directors who instruct him to revive Jack Sparrow-bad Gilliam). So unless the impressionist imitates one of Johnny's characters, the audience won['t recognize him. People keep trying to pigeon hole the artist into the leading man role, but he isn't and never wanted to be. Depp is kind of a pliable blank slate in interviews. He's very much like one of my existential artist friends from pre .Com San Francisco. Moody, open-minded, and fanciful. He can turn any situation into a world of his own.
Brad Pitt has a deep, deep gravely voice that I would recognize anywhere. I'm not even that much of a fan of Pitt, but I know that voice.
I think of the reasons why contemporary actors are a bit less distinctive in their speech is that they are no longer second generation immigrants anymore. Also the America as a whole is merging as a culture. You don't quite have the regional dialects that the studio acting and diction coaches would try their best to hammer out, yet still leave a trace. You can still distinguish a Southerner from a mile away, but what about the Mid-West, the North East and North West? Many of those dialects are on the wane for they are morphing into the California flat dialect. That is unless you listen to The Prairie Home Companion. That Minnesota Scandinavian accent is head loud and clear for comic effect.
Demeanor is a totally different story. I'm not a great guy watcher, so I would have to revisit a few more films and pay attention a bit more to the male protagonist for that. And yes, I'm that way with classic movies as well so don't bother to make any arguments there.
It's funny how you could look back at those old classic animation that everybody almost unanimously agree are amazing, and seeing how they're done it hasn't caught on that you could use real reference to create fuller unique characters.
Oddly enough, you have just listed my favorite actors of all time. I'm certain its your intention, but the same can certainly be said for actresses. People tend to point out "the mole" as the defining feature for Marylin, or in Kirk's case, "the chin", but it really comes down to the overall composition, acting ability, and demeanor that makes them beautiful people.
Its funny, you could also post a series of "normal people" faces and most would be hard pressed to express what are the "defining features".
John you are really indulging the ladies with some eye candy right now- many thanks!
Makes me feel like less of a man. Did you forget Jimmy Stewart? Not the most "manly" man, but he plays a hard-core photo-journalist in "Rear Window" (and his love interest in the flick is the most beautiful woman to have ever walked the planet), so that gets him in the club.
I saw the original as well as the new "True Grit" over the weekend. As much as I really think that Jeff Bridges is a master, he just couldn't hold a candle up to the original character that won Jon Wayne his Oscar.
I always laugh at this since John Wayne was sometimes a freak. Still, I like the story where he told Leonard Nimoy that he didn't recognize him "without yer ears on."
Trying to think of some modern distinctive manly-men. There aren't too many. George Clooney, maybe? That southern guy from "Lost" (but he comes close to crossing over in to Brad Pitt/Fabio too-much-gym territory)?
Post-60's manly men? At least one of these must fir the bill:
-Robert De Niro
-Danny Trejo (Machete)
-Gene Hackman (French Connection)
-Antonio Banderes (Deperado, Four Rooms)
-Harrison Ford (Indiana Jones, Blade Runner)
-Ian McKellan (Richard III, X-Men)
-Mickey Rourke
-Kurt Russell (Escape from New York, The Thing, Death Proof)
-Ron Perlman
-Henry Rollins
Rollins even has that Kirk Douglas/Robert Mitchum chin
Wow, what a set of pics!
Sir you never cease to amaze and inspire.
Hey Soleil, great list :). I particularly agree about Brendon Fraiser and that guy from "House of Flying Daggers". I don't want to get too shallow, but here's a few I'd add:
Julian Casablancas
Brad Pitt
Louis Garrel
Seth Rogen
James Franco
David Blaine
Soulja Boy
Paul Walker
They all have distinct features and are pretty :) .
These men are extremely handsome and their distinct features makes them even more attractive.
Frank Sinatra is also very pretty. He has a great smile!
Great stuff, as always... but, what's this? No Lee Marvin?!?
Well I second Lee Marvin, but he's a little later than most of these guys. John, I'd love to see you turn your caricature eye towards these classic leading man types, as well as some of the great noir character actors like William Bendix, Mike Mazurki and Elisha Cook Jr.
Post a Comment