A cinephilac blog about an actress, silent film, and the Jazz Age, with occasional posts
about related books, music, art, and history written by Thomas Gladysz. Visit the
Louise Brooks Society™ at www.pandorasbox.com
Saturday, October 16, 2010
For the record
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/b80ba/b80ba1e417bf49aa88140962dacf32f542e77562" alt=""
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
She looks nothing like Louise, she's just styled like her. To me it looks like Mischa Barton.
Speaking of look-alikes, this pastel artwork is also being passed off as Louise Brooks. I don't think it is.
http://cgi.ebay.com/Antique-French-1932-pastel-Louise-Brooks-sign-illegible-/180574106935?pt=Art_Paintings&hash=item2a0b0e3537
It is Mischa Barton. She did a whole photo spread in which she was done up to look like various stars of Old Hollywood.
well, i colorize old photographs (at my blog at http://theyhadfaces-silentfilmblog.blogspot.com/), and (having had the pleasure to work with photos of louise many times)i can tell you that painting that they say is louise is NOT and CANNOT be louise.
#1. the bone structure on her face is way off. louise had high cheekbones and a long delicate nose, this painting is all together too plump.
#2. the bangs are combed in a direction that, even in her earliest years, louise never combed them.
#3. her upper lip is not the correct shape, too clara bow like.
#4. her eyes are far to mundane, they do not look with the feirceness that louise possesed, they are boring.
#5. louise's eyebrows were farther apart and thinner than they are in this painting
http://thedarkwoods.free.fr/blog2.php?nature=clones&debut=749#top
I am always a little surprised that people do not see the difference. So bravo to the photographer!
Post a Comment