June 3, 2008

Speaking of over-developed arms ...

Here is famous beauty and style-setter Sarah Jessica Parker, star of "Sex and the City." And here is a similar picture (just with more vein-popping!) of her making like Hans and Franz while unveiling her new perfume last year. Trust me, that's how she looks in the movie, too.

On the other hand, here's a picture of the love of the life of actress Cynthia Nixon, who plays Miranda, the prickly red-head in the movie. In contrast to Parker (who publicly abjures Botox and facelifts), Nixon, who has two children from a previous relationship, looks like she's had some work done since the show went off the air in 2004, perhaps to please her new love interest. (In case this picture has you wondering, Nixon is not dating her own son.)

Finally, 43-year-old Kristin Davis, who plays the feminine, maternal-minded Charlotte, remains as nice-looking as ever, perhaps because, as she's said, she's never ever wanted to have any children because they'd just interfere with the ruthless pursuit of her acting career ... which is made possible by her looking so feminine and maternal-minded.

My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer

72 comments:

David said...

The ubiquitous and insistent assertion that SJP is a beauty is a textbook example of the Hitlerian "Big Lie," though benign.

The Emperoress has no looks, and never did. In a word, YECCCH.

Anonymous said...

Why are they forcing that poor horse to wear earrings?

travis said...

Since 2004, when the show's tv run ended, Kristin Davis has appeared in The Adventures of Sharkboy and Lavagirl 3-D (2005), Deck the Halls (2006), and The Shaggy Dog (2006). No doubt she'll proudly watch those movies in her childless old age.

bitter said...

As someone fast developing into a matron who resembles a cross between Barbara Bush and a Cabbage Patch doll, I think Sailer should be stripped naked and forced to look at himself in a funhouse mirror for an hour or two for writing this.

Anonymous said...

Agree with david. It's like living in bizarro world and makes one question their sanity: how is it that this woman graces so many covers, has done so many ads, and is not pretty. I've always thought it must be because she was an articulate, militant pro-choice feminist. May not mean much to readers, but a huge plus in the entertainment industry? BTW, one of the bloggers who is a part of the paleo/evol con sphere (Audacious?) did another "hot women and demographics" feature. He used Maxim magazine and I've seen this type of thing before. Anyways, it made me wonder if the best route to go for finding out "who's attractive" is not through these lists but to the Forbes list. If the theory is true that the richest and most powerful get the best women, look at the wives of the richest men. It may be disappointing in comparison to the mags' lists, but I think more accurate. I think the most striking thing it would show is that most people prefer their own kind; I just wonder to what degree.

Anonymous said...

Ive heard her, SJP, described here in Britain as a "geezer-bird".

Will provide translation on request!

Billare said...

Clearly she's been weight training quite a bit, but I don't think that as a rule women with muscle mass are unattractive.

She could definitely use more body fat on that musculature. Probably too much lean protein and not enough carbs in her diet.

But then again, I have more "ethnic" tastes than many here.

Anonymous said...

There's something about lesbians that makes them pick "mates" quite a bit different from the ones that pornography has taught us they would pick.

http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2007/12_02/FosterAEDT1112_468x517.jpg

Anonymous said...

SJP was voted one of the ugliest women by Maxim magazine. I have to concur. Looking at her is the visual equivalent of hearing nails on the chalkboard.

Who finds her attractive? I've asked women and they don't seem to find her attractive. She never outgrew her boring midwest (Cincinnati) personality and is plainly lacking any non-visual charisma. What gives?

Anonymous said...

Are you going to do a review of Sex and the City?

Anonymous said...

So SJP walks into a bar, and the bartender says: Say, why the long face?

/ Just flew in Las Vegas, and boy are my arms tired. Try the veal.

Lucius Vorenus said...

Speaking of Sarah Jessica Parker not deserving to be a movie star - what gives with her husband, Matthew Broderick - how did he ever get to be an A-List star [back in the day]?

Talk about fingernails & blackboards.

I guess we can all be thankful that we lived to see him fall from grace [even if those poor people that he "manslaughtered" in Ireland didn't live to see it].

beowulf said...

I thought Maxim magazine was right on with rating her the Unsexiest Woman Alive. The problem isn't that SJP is ugly per se (she's more attractive than Eleanor Roosevelt, less attractive than Katherine Hepburn on her deathbed). Its the whole Emperor Has No Clothes deal-- she's clearly not all that attractive, so why are we supposed to think SJP is a sex goddess and not, say, Angela Lansbury? Is it some kind of sick joke, a gaydar test or what?

Its disconcerting watching her in movies. I can never tell if we're supposed to suspend disbelief and see her as the cute girl who smiles and makes the whole world smile with her, or to see her as an unattractive woman going through the film trying to be cute.

As for the Cynthia Nixon. she's never looked straighter, ever. Was she out on the show, or were you supposed to think she was straight?

Her girlfriend looks like a chubby guy, the kind with man boobs. I guess the tie threw me, I wouldn't have picked her out as a female without your tipoff.

anony-mouse said...

I recall a fourth. Where is Kim Cattrall? The brunette in Porky's and the Police Academy masterpieces. Don't tell me she's not good looking.

Ron Guhname said...

People keep mentioning fingernails on the chalkboard: this is what I hear when I contemplate going to see Sex in the City.

Gaurav Ahuja said...

Her parents were divorced when she was a baby. Her childhood hero was Gloria Steinem. I am glad she isn't reproducing since bad parents reproduce bad people. http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0004862/bio

Truth said...

"If the theory is true that the richest and most powerful get the best women, look at the wives of the richest men."

Bill Gates- No
Sergei Binn - No
Rupert Murdoch - No

"Don't tell me she's not good looking."

She's not "good looking" she's "good looking for her age." There's a football field of difference there.

Good Looking - She looks hot in a Bikini

Good Looking for her age - She looks hot in an evening dress.

Lucius Vorenus said...

By the way, the Total Fertility Rate [TFR] numbers for this quartet are as follows:

Sarah Jessica Parker
25 March 1965
imdb.com
nndb.com
Spouse: Matthew Broderick (19 May 1997 - present) 1 child

Kim Cattrall
21 August 1956
imdb.com
nndb.com
Mark Levinson (4 September 1998 - 2004) (divorced)
Andre J. Lyson (1982 - 1989) (divorced)
Larry Davis (31 May 1977 - 1979) (annulled)
[no children]

Kristin Davis
23 February 1965
imdb.com
nndb.com
never married, no children

Cynthia Nixon
9 April 1966
imdb.com
nndb.com
Boyfriend: Danny Mozes, 2 children


So their TFR is

[1 + 0 + 0 + 2] / 4 = 0.75

which, from a demographic standpoint, is more or less suicidal.

In another generation or so, from the statistical point of view, these people simply won't exist anymore - they will all have gone extinct.

Anonymous said...

Looking at SJP the only thing I can think about is a medieval witch with lipstick. She is horrid.

Kristin Davis is hot.

William said...

Speaking of Sarah Jessica Parker not deserving to be a movie star - what gives with her husband, Matthew Broderick - how did he ever get to be an A-List star [back in the day]?

Off the top of my head I can't think of asingle SJP movie I've ever liked (and I've tried a couple). Footloose was good, but I only remember Jon Lithgow and Kevin Bacon from that, so it no count.

One I did try was The Family Stone, which tried to convince you to believe two myths: 1) that SJP is beautiful; 2) That big families from the country are a bunch of lefty liberals while small families from the city are snotty conservatives (only the snotty part is true).

OTOH, I can think of a dozen or so movies with her husband that were quite memorable: Ferris Bueller, Ladyhawke, Election, You Can Count On Me, The Producers, Glory, War Games, etc.)

I'm sure Broderick is attracted to SJP for some reason - I just can't figure out what it is. It doesn't come across the screen.

Martin said...

"beowulf said...

....so why are we supposed to think SJP is a sex goddess and not, say, Angela Lansbury?"

I'll note in passing that Angela Lansbury was a real stunner:

http://drspark.dreamwiz.com/c_spark/photo9/angela-1.gif

http://dowhatnow.typepad.com/do_what_now/images/2007/05/14/hotness_she_wrote_2.jpg

Or check out pictures of her from "Samson and Delilah" on IMDB, for example. And she aged remarkably well. One of the best preserved actresses in Hollywood history (even in the 70's, she was a very handsome woman).

I agree with the general opinion about Miss Parker. Neigh. Whinney. I'd sooner expect to see her in the winner's circle at Santa Anita, then on stage at the Oscars. Bear in mind that she hasn't been selected by men who like women - the target audience for her show is women and gay men.

Kim Cattral was something else when she was younger, but she now looks like a dried-out, jaded old tart. Kristin Davis I only remember as the girl that Jerry Seinfeld dumped after a toilet exploded all over her. Cynthia Nixon looks nice, in a brittle English sort of way - I gather that she has become a "celesbian".

I chanced to catch parts of a few episodes of Sluts in the City - the show that tried to break the glass ceiling for crude locker-room talk. Just a few minutes of it was enough to exceed my bitchy-chick/gay-vibe threshold. I don't wonder that gay men watch it - it would tend to confirm their choice.

testing99 said...

Sex and the City was written mostly by gay men. Family Guy joked it was three whores and their mother (Kim Cattrall).

SJP was voted Unsexiest Woman in Maxim, beating out Amy Winehouse, probably just because of Sex and the City. Women (and gay men) love SJP because she's thin and can project an "all that" vibe. She looks good in designer clothes because she's lean.

Is she beautiful? Nope. But that's not the point, as Steve has said (and he's right) stars have to appeal to their own gender.

Lucius -- good call on the TFR. Although actresses at the A-List may have a huge opportunity cost and can substitute family for fame/celebrity. Not a choice I'd make but I'll admit I'm extremely unlikely ever to be offered it.

dearieme said...

Isn't she a "jolie laide"?

Anonymous said...

So that's what happened to Ralph from Happy Days - he's dating Cynthia Nixon. What a schlub!

The tip off is that s/he dresses too shabby to even be a hetero guy.

Re SJP, she has such a flat personality I have no reaction to her. However, it does raise my dander when the powers that be egregiously try pass off a sows ear as a silk purse (like the MSM packaging of Obama).

agnostic said...

Am I the only one who thought Steve was using a flawless deadpan delivery when he said "Here is famous beauty... Sarah Jessica Parker"?

I mean, he just expressed interest in Mila Kunis, has posted pics of Jessica Alba, that hot Clinton bodyguard, etc. Calling SJP beautiful doesn't fit in.

Anonymous said...

Id like to second Angela Lansbury as hot.

In the link posted earlier:

http://dowhatnow.typepad.com/do_what_now/images/2007/05/14/hotness_she_wrote_2.jpg

She exhibits more appeal in that pic than SJP et al put together - ever!

noxor said...

I'm friends with a modern dancer and they look similar. All those hours of training and their strict diets do lend them a masculine image. They are also surprisingly strong in their arms.

Maybe this "S&S" chick is also doing dancing.

noxor said...

"how is it that this woman graces so many covers, has done so many ads, and is not pretty."

This is what I think about Obama and black leaders like Mandela. If you cut away all the hype, you wonder what#s supposed to be so great about them. It must the obsession of the media or deliberate.

rob said...

If I recall, Ms. Nixon's significant other is very nearly a transperson.

From Deborah Solomon's interview
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/18/magazine/18wwln-Q4-t.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=nixon%20cynthia%20questions&st=nyt

Q: Can you share clothes?

A: No. Christine doesn’t wear women’s clothes; she only wears men’s clothes. She won’t even wear any kind of women’s shoes. I bought her a pair of cowboy boots that were from the women’s department, and she was like, “Don’t do this again.”

John Craig said...

Has it occurred to anyone else that the reason SJP has been wearing all these outlandish outfits recently (anyone catch that green hat with the big feather?) is to deflect attention away from her face? She's lucky she wasn't around in Salem in 1693.

That said, I will say that back in the day (around the time she was making "Honeymoon in Vegas" she had a smoking body.

Anonymous said...

Lucius Vorenus -- Matthew Broderick is, like his wife SJP, half-Chosen. Your guess is as good as mine as to whether this gave him an in with the directors and producers who chose to make him an A-list star.

Lucius Vorenus said...

william: OTOH, I can think of a dozen or so movies with her husband that were quite memorable: Ferris Bueller, Ladyhawke, Election, You Can Count On Me, The Producers, Glory, War Games, etc.)

Dude, we will just have to agree to disagree about our taste in movies.

[Broderick single-handedly ruined Glory all by himself, and that was way back in the 1980's, when I still had some sympathy for the Negro cause in that war.]

I'd rather watch SJP with Bruce Willis in that stupid Pittsburgh river boat movie than anything her husband has ever made.

[Do you remember the execrable Family Business - oh my GOD! - what an awful movie.]

Lucius Vorenus said...

rob: If I recall, Ms. Nixon's significant other is very nearly a transperson... Christine doesn't wear women's clothes; she only wears men's clothes. She won't even wear any kind of women's shoes. I bought her a pair of cowboy boots that were from the women's department, and she was like, "Don’t do this again."

I guess we know who wears the strap-on in that family.

Lucius Vorenus said...

Anonymous: Lucius Vorenus -- Matthew Broderick is, like his wife SJP, half-Chosen. Your guess is as good as mine as to whether this gave him an in with the directors and producers who chose to make him an A-list star.

You know, I suspected as much.

Even back in 1989, when I didn't know diddly squat about ethnicities or tribalistic agendas or population dynamics or dysgenic fertility or anything else, I remember wondering, as I watched Family Business: "Why are all these Jewish actors pretending to be Irish Catholic mobsters?"

As I recall it, there's a scene somewhere in that movie [it might have been twice - once in the middle, and again at the end] where a bunch of Jewish actors are all standing around singing "Danny Boy" - a scene which is absolutely surrealistic in its incongruousness.

DV said...

I'm not getting all the rage over SJP's success in show business - are people who are not beautiful not allowed to be lead actresses? Non-beautiful women have no right to be the main attraction of a tv show unless their role consists of moaning about how ugly they are? Must they only play the dateless best friend role?

SJP deserves her fame & wealth because she does what she's hired to do - she makes the powers that be money. She appeals to her audience. They like watching her. She successfully carried out her role as the main character in a hugely successful show & movie. And while you all may not see her appeal, there's plenty of people who think she's a talented comic actress.

She's not at the top of my "hot list" (although men with plenty of other options, like Matthew Broderick & JFK Jr obviously felt differently), but I think some of her performances, especially pre-Sex and the City, have a quirky, off-kilter comic charm. It's no surprise to me that people like watching her on screen.

And I must say that I appreciate that SJP lives a quiet life with her quiet husband & son and does not behave objectionably or like a famewhoring loudmouth in public, which is certainly not a given among today's stars.

corvinus said...

SJP is Jewish.

Jews are dominant in the film industry, having basically STARTED it, but let's face it: unfortunately, they aren't exactly the purtiest people on the block.

Proofreader said...

Sex and the City was written mostly by gay men.

Well, knowing that fact, the plot makes more sense. You see so many heterosexual characters acting like homosexuals in modern shows that it wouldn't surprise me if half of the writers were majority homosexual and New York-based (and the other half metrosexual).

Sit-coms in particular are increasingly unrealistic and unbearable to watch for ordinary people.

But since you cannot watch anything else, I doubt the ratings would reflect the real distance between the writers and the audience.

Same goes for Hollywood: you just cannot avoid the liberal slant no matter what movie you watch.

William said...

Matthew Broderick is, like his wife SJP, half-Chosen. Your guess is as good as mine as to whether this gave him an in with the directors and producers who chose to make him an A-list star.

Broderick is/was a very popular and good actor. Maybe he's made a few flops, but who hasn't?

As for the lame "Family Business" - they weren't all acting like Irish mobsters. The silly premise was that Sean Connery was an Irish mobster with an Italian wife. Dustin Hoffman plays his son, who inherited more of his looks/personality from his Italian Ma. He, in turn, is an "Italian" who marries a Jew. Matthew Broderick plays his son who, yes, inherited most of his looks/personality from his Jewish ma.

Connery can pass as Irish. Broderick can pass as Jewish. Hoffman as Italian? Not even he could pull that one off.

Silly premise, dumb movie.

but I think some of her performances, especially pre-Sex and the City, have a quirky, off-kilter comic charm. It's no surprise to me that people like watching her on screen.

They do? "Sex and the City" aside (where she was part of an ensemble in a chick show), what's her biggest grossing movie? Honeymoon in Vegas did $35 million. "Failure to Launch" did $89 million - not bad, but carried more by McConaughey than her.

Seriously. Look at her resume. Name one movie besides Footloose (minor role) and "Sex in the City" that stands out.

Some people like her. Some (barely)tolerate her. She's a niche star, at best. All-in-all she's dropped more bombs than the Memphis Belle.

So why does she keep getting roles? In her case the definition of celebrity is expecially apt: she's someone famous for being famous.

William said...

Speaking of overhyped actors and the chosen people, does anyone besides me not get all the todo about Natalie Portman?

She did phenomenally well (when she was about 12) in The Professional. Her performance in Garden State wasn't bad. But I haven't been much impressed with anything else she's done.

Anonymous said...

SJP is probably using steroids or a Human Growth Hormone, just like Stallone, Madonna, etc... Some experts say steroids and hormones are a remedy to aging.

SJP and the red head are homely, the brunette is decent but nothing special and Catrall was a piece back in the day.

Josh said...

Few thoughts:A)Matt Broderick is the son of James Broderick,an Irish-Am actor who was pretty good,and fairly handsome.(That gruesome show,"Family" UGH!) I always thought Matt was a bit weird and sickly looking. I ignored "Ferris Bueller" for 10 years,-mistake. Finally saw it on cable and LMAO!"Bueller... Bueller?..." I get the impression SJP wears the pants in their home,I guess the "sickly" thing is still there abit. :( SJP? Yep,she's a witch,WHICH is the point;these girls are hip and happening but NOT goodlooking,not threatening. Re "lucius" and Jewish actors,I recall the Bob Evans story (The Kid Stays In The Picture) as he was putting 2gether Godfather. They wanted him to use Kirk Douglas as Vito.He says he told them the reason so many mob pics fail is because they use Jews to play Italian mobsters---people dont wanna se jews as mobsters,they want Italians. He put in the obscure Al pacino as Michael,and the rest is history!

josh said...

Oops,sorry for the 2nd post,but re Nixons lesbian lover(I refer here to Cynthia,not Dick--and no pun intended BTW)refusing(rather petulantly I might add)to wear any womens clothing---and for which we can all be grateful--I ask,whats the big deal? Why should 'she' wear womens clothing---she's a MAN!!(BABY) And why do so many "lesbians" reject men,and then go out and find some lesbian who is more obviously a man than most men?? Why doesnt she date David Spade,who looks more like a woman than this creature ever could?

tommy said...

I second, no third, no fourth.....74,318,292nd the motion on SJP not being that great. If you're looking for a hot Jewish Sarah, try SMG instead.

Dennis Dale said...

That unfortunately revealing picture of Sarah Jessica induces a reaction similar to when I saw those infamous photos of Britney Spears revealing her depillatory practices.
At least there's no harm in being tempted to swear off armpits.

Half Sigma said...

Steve, you are vastly exaggerating Sarah Jessica Parker's muscle. You can see her muscles because she has no fat covering them up. Someone needs to feed her a few Big Macs.

And while I agree that none of these women are super-hot, I thought that Sex and the City was an enjoyable TV show, and I recommend renting the DVDs if you've never seen it. But I'll pass on the movie; whenever Hollywood makes a movie out of what was once a good TV show, the movie always sucks. So no thanks.

William said...

Jews are dominant in the film industry, having basically STARTED it.

Thomas Edison was Jewish?

William said...

And why do so many "lesbians" reject men,and then go out and find some lesbian who is more obviously a man than most men??

Put that one in the "Questions for Eternity" box.

If you're looking for a hot Jewish Sarah, try [Sarah Michelle Gellar] instead.

Ummmm...since we've decided that fifty percenters count.

Mind you that I have NO opinion on her acting (or singing) one way or the other.

Lucius Vorenus said...

William: Speaking of overhyped actors and the chosen people, does anyone besides me not get all the todo about Natalie Portman?

She did okay as the perky, smartass, pre-pubescent kid in The Professional, and provided the necessary pedophilic undertones [overtones?] which Jews - or maybe I should say, "NYC People" - seem to demand in their movies.

But Star Wars I, II, and III proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that she can't act her way out of a paper bag.

On the other hand, having said all of that, I was under the impression that she took an enormous amount of grief at Harvard when she stood up for the nation of Israel after 9-11, so her heart is probably in the right place, and, in real life, I imagine that she might be a really fun girl to get to know [where I'm guessing - or at least hoping - that there's a chance she might harbor some philosophies & outlooks on life other than the standard, inane, nihilistic drivel which you get out of most Hollywood types].

Anonymous said...

SJP played a witch in Disney's 1993 flick "Hocus Pocus," back when she was in fact still a hottie. I've an acquaintance who in the last year had seen SJP without makeup, and confirmed that she was pretty bad off in the looks department these days. She may have a delightful personality however!

William said...

I imagine that she might be a really fun girl to get to know...

Probably. She's pretty, sort of - a little too petite for my taste, but who'd believe me if I said I'd turn her down?

[where I'm guessing - or at least hoping - that there's a chance she might harbor some philosophies & outlooks on life other than the standard, inane, nihilistic drivel which you get out of most Hollywood types].

Don't know about that. There was V for Vendetta, which was a crapass movie about "fascistic Thatcherite England." Then of course there's the fact that she dated Che Guevara.

She seems to do her best playing Lolita wannabes. I don't think The Professional was "pedophilic," but Beautiful Girls certainly was.

testing99 said...

First, while Jews did found most of the legendary studios (after Biograph and most of the early studios died out) like MGM or Warners and the like, today the studios are run by various WASPs reporting to mega-corps.

Warners for example is merely a cog in the wheel of Time-Warner. Who's recent CEO was Black. United Artists is run by Cruise and his business partners, Fox by Murdoch, etc.

There are relatively few Jews in Hollywood today, Scientologists probably outnumber them 5-1, and occupy more powerful positions. As far as Jewish actors not looking good, I give you Sarah Michelle Gellar, Alona Tal, and Michelle Trachtenberg. But there's not that many of them (Tal is an Israeli import).

Groups just fade in and out of dominant positions in industries. It happens. Partially network effects, partially attraction, partly demographics and economics. Blacks used to dominate boxing, now it's Eastern Europeans and Mexicans, while Whites occupy the MMA areas.

About 80% of sitcom audience is female, so it's not a surprise that Gays are over-represented there, or that sitcoms are aimed at women, with little interest for men. Who have fled TV anyway. Meanwhile ad buyers are mostly women in their twenties. Which is why even stuff aimed at men (Lowe's or Home Depot commercials) makes men look like idiots. Cause the twenty something female ad buyers love it.

As far as Broderick's career, it's of lesser quality than say, Sean Penn who looks and acts like a weasel (he was convicted of spousal abuse of then-wife Madonna for tying her to a chair and leaving her for hours). Or explain Tim Robbins appeal to me? Or Shia La Boef? Or Leo Di Caprio? Just knowing people is enough, and none of those guys are Jews.

Parker's big role is Carrie Bradshaw. It's one she's born to play. It wouldn't be my choice to see her but she does have her fans, many of them new ones, middle schoolers and up who watched sanitized TBS re-runs of Sex and the City. Fashion, shoes, guys, relationships, female friends, that's pretty much the teen girl universe.

I would put Portman along with Scarlett Johansson and Jessica Biel as kid actors who did not make the transition to adult roles. All of these girls were great as kids, Johansson in the Horse Whisperer, Biel in Ulee's Gold with Peter Fonda, Portman as noted in the Professional. But they didn't just grind out lots of films and TV, developing skills, instead became too "arty" and mannered. Portman relies on her Winona Ryder Part Two slender looks, Biel on bulking up to be the Amazon (check out HER arms), and Johansson on wordless confusion.

If you've seen Girl with Pearl Earring, and the Nanny Diaries, you'll see Johansson do the same downward, abashed look in both films. It's mechanical, rote.

By contrast, Sarah Michelle Gellar, Amber Tamblyn, Michelle Trachtenberg, Eliza Dushku, Hayden Panatierre, and to a lesser extent Anne Hathaway would show up for anything that had a paycheck, even silly minor roles. So instead of lots of acting classes they got real-world feedback on what worked and what did not. [Julia Styles seems to have given up on acting and moved to directing.]

I think Biel, Johansson, and particularly Portman started to believe their reviews instead of just going on to the next role and so on. Not enough work made them mechanical and forced.

David said...

dearieme said

Isn't she a "jolie laide"?

No. Only laide.

David said...

evil neocon said

today the studios are run by various WASPs reporting to mega-corps.[...] Groups just fade in and out of dominant positions in industries. It happens.[...] There are relatively few Jews in Hollywood today"

Oy vey. Somebody is in denial.

Murdoch is Jewish; so is Shia La Boef (so is Harrison Ford, for that matter); Time-Warner is NOT a black company, but the baby and plaything of Murray Rothstein (Sumner Redstone), etc., etc., etc., etc.

Fifty paragraphs could be written detailing Jewish ownership of Hollywood, past and present - but why bother? It's like trying to refute someone who asserts that the Pope isn't Catholic.

Still waiting for those nifty Muslim speedboats to take over Spain.

Anonymous said...

Testing 99 -- You've got to check your facts. Shia (Hebrew for "gift from god") has a Jewish mother, was raised Jewish, and had a Bar Mitzvah. Scarlett Johansson is half-Jewish. Sean Penn is half-Jewish, and a red-diaper baby to boot, though he was raised secularly. (I don't disagree that he looks and acts like a weasel, though I'd also venture that he's a very good actor.) And as far as who runs the studios, who the powerful producers and directors are, I don't have time to make a comprehensive list now, but I definitely don't get the impression that the Chosen have vacated the premises.

James Kabala said...

I care more about the moral content of Parker's work than her physical appearance. If she appeared in worthwhile stuff I would consider it admirable that she made it on talent instead of looks (did anyone ever say Judi Dench was a great beauty?), but I think a lot of the backlash here against her is based not on her looks but on the distastefulness of the Sex and the City phenomenon.

Parker began her career playing a nerd, by the way: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Square_Pegs

Anonymous said...

Scarlett Johansson is not so bad looking, and her mother is Jewish.

beowulf said...

Testing99,

That last comment was very interesting. Glad someone is tracking the often-neglected hot young actress issue (thanks for the Alona Tol link).

Is funny that the only TV ads that appeal to male sensibilities are beer commercials.

Lucius Vorenus said...

William: I don't think The Professional was "pedophilic"...

Cf:

994LTP_Natalie_Portman_018.jpg
994LTP_Natalie_Portman_030.jpg
994LTP_Natalie_Portman_037.jpg
994LTP_Natalie_Portman_039.jpg
994LTP_Natalie_Portman_047.jpg
994LTP_Natalie_Portman_050.jpg
994LTP_Natalie_Portman_067.jpg
994LTP_Natalie_Portman_072.jpg
994LTP_Natalie_Portman_076.jpg
994LTP_Natalie_Portman_087.jpg
994LTP_Natalie_Portman_088.jpg
994LTP_Natalie_Portman_089.jpg

The prosecution rests its case, your Honor.

The International Jew said...

A contributing factor to Jewish dominance in Hollywood might be that the Torah was quite likely the first example of widely circulated media, with distribution going back 2500 years in Asia, Africa, and Europe.

William said...

Murdoch is Jewish

He is?

[Keith] Murdoch [Rupert's father] was born in Melbourne in 1885, son of Rev Patrick John Murdoch and Annie, née Brown.

[Elisabeth] Murdoch [Rupert's mother] was born Elisabeth Joy Greene in Melbourne to an Irish Protestant father and an upper-class Jewish mother from England.

(The later description of her maternal ancestry, however, seems to suggest her mother wasn't Jewish, either. Don't know about the discrepancy, and don't really care.)

Rupert is therefore 1/4th Jewish (by ethnicity, at least).

William said...

Scarlett Johansson is not so bad looking, and her mother is Jewish.

I already mentioned that. My right-handed picture of Johannson is linked to above.

Otherwise all this Jewvenalia is growing tiresome.

Dennis Dale said...

Sarah Michelle Gellar is a sexless drone. She'd make a good transition for a homosexual pedophile trying to go straight.
Speaking of that, the "pedophelia" of The Professional is irrelevant to its value as a work of cinematic art (and was hardly sub-texual in the first place--the girl's budding sexuality was frankly acknowledged as an unsettling aspect of her relationship to Jean Reno's stunted man-child--what the F-- are we afraid of here?),
Do not judge art by any moral standard, do not look to it to be moral or enforce admirable values. This is, ironically, a moral dead end, leading ultimately to the destruction of art and expression. Art must be allowed to be amoral--immoral even.

Take one penultimate example of insipid, trite work, "Law and Order" or any similar television program; these shows observe a rigorously enforced value system that is highly conventional and "liberal" by today's standards, endlessly reproducing the cliches and signifiers of a prevailing orthodoxy. This is the source of the revulsion any discriminating viewer feels while watching them tell that same, tired tale yet again. The Nazis, with their campaigns against "degenerate" art, and the Soviets with their sponsorship of social realist works could have learned a thing or two from these people.

We are nearly unanimous in accepting the principle that art should not be given free reign but should reinforce norms and convention, but merely lament the substance of those norms. Call it what you will, endorse it, but don't call it art, and don't pretend you're in favor of artistic freedom.

(aside: once the Nazis sought to display what they found as the most egregious examples of confiscated degenerate work in one place; they were embarassed when the show was a huge hit--people were lining up around the block while across town a show of officially sanctioned work was going ignored--we of course can do them better than that, our officially spurned work never sees the light of day, due to the actions of a severely self-regulating culture that needs no prompting by the State).

Nowadays you can assault certain straw-man institutions with impunity (and a good deal of critical leeway): "patriarchy"; "racism"; "sexism"; ad nauseum, and you can present sympathetic portrayals of various antisocial types: pedophiles, murderers, drunks and drug addicts, etc. This is a good thing, and must be allowed nonetheless. But it obscures the fact that, for all our admirable freedom of expression, the culture is still in the business of rigorously enforcing a quasi-religious moral order.

But if your work even hints at racism, sexism, xenophobia, etc, it is denounced on aesthetic grounds. Mainstream critics almost uniformly misunderstand art and obliviously take marching orders from a central orthodoxy. Artistic freedom has never really existed anywhere (except perhaps among the ancients). So waste your time not on divining the moral value of art. It is, I daresay, immoral.

One last thing: can we just accept that Jews built our remarkable film and television industries, and we owe them a huge debt? Doesn't this reinforce everything that Steve and other lonely honest voices have been telling us about the myth of universal human equality? (It is ironic how that same industry then goes on to propound "anti-racist" mythology)
It's curious how "race-realism" only goes so far for some, before race-resentment and its attendant conspiratorial fantasies take over.

Truth said...

"Scarlett Johansson is half-Jewish."

Wow, I didn't know that! Half the nebbish jewish execs in Hollywood must be scheming on that right now.

Being a jew in a flaxen-haired Nebraska shiksa's body, Scarlet has to be the most popular woman in Hollywood since Cindy Margolis.

Anonymous said...

Its not directors and actors you need to look at; its the producers, agents, studio heads etc. A certain ethnic/religious group seems to be very prominent.

tommy said...

Murdoch is Jewish

Are you sure about that? Rupert Murdoch? The guy is a staunch supporter of Israel, but to the best of my knowledge, he isn't Jewish. He is Australian of Scottish extraction.

Anonymous said...

Saudi prince Al-Waleed bin Talal said in an interview with Charlie Rose that he had about a 6-7% stake in Murdoch's News Corp.

Anonymous said...

Dennis Dale: "It's curious how "race-realism" only goes so far for some, before race-resentment and its attendant conspiratorial fantasies take over."

Er, quite thats the whole problem right there, just like seems to have happened everywhere multiple ethnic groups live together? You could argue a caste system works to allot groups to their specialist strengths without resentment but I dont really believe that either.

Anonymous said...

"Saudi prince Al-Waleed bin Talal said in an interview with Charlie Rose that he had about a 6-7% stake in Murdoch's News Corp."

So, he bought some stock? Its not a controlling share.

Chester said...

The Saudi royal family is actually Jewish:

http://www.fortunecity.com/boozers/bridge/632/history.html

Shi'ite Islam is actually a Jewish plot:

cytations.blogspot.com

You can really find everything you need to know on the internet, if you just put your mind to it.

JohnShade said...

Dennis Dale said: "Sarah Michelle Gellar is a sexless drone. She'd make a good transition for a homosexual pedophile trying to go straight"

LOL.

The series of posts outing dumb gentiles and other non-Jews as Jews is also LOL.

This is the only funny comment thread I can remember encountering on this blog or any other.

William said...

The series of posts outing dumb gentiles and other non-Jews as Jews is also LOL.

Which "dumb gentiles" were "outed" as Jews? Rupert Murdoch?

From Wiki: "LaBeouf bought his own two-bedroom house at the age of 18,[7] lives in Burbank, California...drives a Nissan Maxima"

Funny what they mention on Wikipedia. I used to own an early 90s Nissan Maxima. Drove it 'til it croaked. And even though my car now is considerably nicer, I loved that little car. The visibility was amazing - hardly a single blind spot - and the cab was just right.

JMR said...

Since I discovered the Indian film industry a few years ago, I have pretty much given up watching American movies. "Bollywood" has much better looking actresses than Hollywood. The Indian actresses make their American counterparts look pale by comparison (pun intended).

Now we know why the ancient Aryans invaded India - they were looking for more attractive women.