Elizabeth Taylor by David Downton for ROUGE Winter 2011

[Honey]

Elizabeth Taylor by David Downton for ROUGE Winter 2011

[rollo]

It's all nice except the second pic. Old Liz doesn't really look iconic. I hadn't realised until recently that Liz had a (good) nose job.

[azoria]

Liz from 50 years ago. By the 1960's her looks were gone.

[Sylkyn]

We will have to agree to disagree on that one. I believe she started going to hell during the 80s, when she was married to John Warner. She ballooned and looked awful. I think she was gorgeous during the 60s.

[HWBL]

Nah, the looks started sliding downhill in the late sixties.
Here's Liz between 1961 and 1972:

[azoria]

1965 – July



Cat on a Hot Tin Roof, 1958


Seven years difference. From gorgeous to what-the-hell-happend.

[Kathie_Moffett]

1965 – July



Cat on a Hot Tin Roof, 1958


Seven years difference. From gorgeous to what-the-hell-happend.

Simply from the hair and styling alone I would say that pic with her in red was from much later, NOT 1965. It's how she looked back at some point in the early 80s-early 90s, when I used to see my Mom's "People" mags and such often. Not her fat period w/Warner, but before or after that.

This pic is definitely mid-60s--it says it's from 1965 and I believe it. She doesn't look very different. She always had issues with weight, though, and extra pounds always show up quicker on very small women like Liz.

ETA if you have doubts check out any pics from "The Sandpiper", a film she did in '65. I am sure she did really regret all the tanning....amazing how many freckles she had!

[Sylkyn]

I think she looks fantastic in the 60's-70's. Yes, she over-tanned, but so did everyone back then. Still looks lovely to me.

[azoria]

Edit: this photo is 1966.



I found this photo here: Celebrity Insights Blog » Blog Archive » Academy Award Winners

I believe it. She looked like crap by the mid 60's. It was over.

[Sylkyn]

It might say that, but I truly don't think that photo is from that era. Regardless, I think she looks good. But yes, I am a fantard.

[HWBL]

^1964, aged 32 with Richard Burton


1968, aged 36


1969, aged 37


^Liz in 1970 aged 38


1972, aged 40


1977, aged 45


1979, aged 47

^1981, aged 49

[azoria]

That is Valley of the Dolls right there. Ouch.


1969, aged 37

I passed 37 a long time ago. I've never looked this bad.

It's the pills. The pharmaceuticals. That is one drugged out chick.
But she was so beautiful in the 1950's~~It just didn't last~~

The fleeting ephemera of youthful beauty we see in so many celebrities on this site, anchoring your self worth to your looks is clearly a self-destructive mistake as youth and beauty are so short lived. People who don't develop personality and world skills are doomed to early obsolescence. How many examples do we need?

Need I list a countdown of current near thirty-something celebrity women who are headed for imminent obscurity without a paddle, who have lived heretofore on their looks? It's a death trap.

[HWBL]

That is Valley of the Dolls right there. Ouch.


1969, aged 37

I passed 37 a long time ago. I've never looked this bad.

It's the pills. The pharmaceuticals. That is one drugged out chick.
But she was so beautiful in the 1950's~~It just didn't last~~

The fleeting ephemera of youthful beauty we see in so many celebrities on this site, anchoring your self worth to your looks is clearly a self-destructive mistake as youth and beauty are so short lived. People who don't develop personality and world skills are doomed to early obsolescence. How many examples do we need?

Need I list a countdown of current near thirty-something celebrity women who are headed for imminent obscurity without a paddle, who have lived heretofore on their looks? It's a death trap.

Can you believe she was playing a LAS VEGAS CHORUS GIRL in the movie that picture is a still from? A bad and boring movie with Warren Beatty, who is 5 years younger than Taylor, but in the movie was supposed to be 5 years older (now you can understand why that role was originally meant for equally older than his age looking Frank Sinatra, who was actually 17 years older than Taylor).

[Kathie_Moffett]

It might say that, but I truly don't think that photo is from that era. Regardless, I think she looks good. But yes, I am a fantard.

Yeah--the date refers to when she won the Oscar, not the photo, which is undated. Looks like her around the time of her marriage to that handyman, actually--I just looked at some pics of them. Now THAT was so weird and funny. Nobody can say that Liz didn't do exactly as she pleased most of the time.

I agree her looks went downhill, but no woman (no matter how much PS she has or how much she deludes herself) ever maintains that late 20s to mid 30s beauty pinnacle for long. That's just life. I don't really see Liz as a good example of someone who lived for her looks or defined herself by them. Others did that for her but it doesn't mean she bought into it. I'm not a fantard etc. nor do I know much about her, but she really seems to have had a surprisingly tough, willful, individualistic personality. Despite her tabloid notoriety, for instance, I think she always had a genuine private life; note how she kept her children out of the spotlight. And she had causes (and friends) she truly believed in and was immensely loyal to no matter what, things that obviously gave her life more meaning than obsessing about her looks.

Marilyn Monroe is a better (and sadder) example of someone who may have felt that her life was less worth living once she began to lose her beauty and her sexual allure.

Either way, it's true that Liz definitely put too many chemicals into her system. Wasn't she one of the girl stars (like Judy Garland) who struggled for the rest of her life with the addictions the studios helped her acquire? I know they gave the starlets all sorts of nasty drugs to control their weight, etc. Given all that, and her drinking, weight issues, tanning, etc., actually I'd say her face held up very well. I think her beauty (after her 20s anyway) is quite overhyped; but she did have very unusual, striking features. Very few people look anything like Liz.

(Only one I can think of is that actress whose name I can never recall--she was on "Twin Peaks".)

I was sort of surprised Liz lived as long as she did. Testament to her stubborn love of life, I guess.

[rollo]

As well as the pills and painkillers, one HELL of a lot of booze and smoking went down. Don't know if she was into anything else but I'm guessing her diet was poor and her exercising non-existent as she was frequently in bed or in a wheelchair.

Those looks could have lasted - look at Sophia Loren whatever you may think of her now (and yes, she had ps.)

I refuse to subscribe to the belief that a woman loses her looks in her 30s and 40s in the normal scheme of things. She absolutely does not.