Once Upon a Time in Hollywood

Soooooooo...

I was thinking about Grace Kelly the other night (don't remember why) and it's probably because I just finished (okay, almost finished, it wound up missing a piece) this awesome Cinderella puzzle, but it hit me like a ton of bricks: if Disney had decided to make a live action version of his Cinderella, nobody else would have worked.  Grace Kelly was Cinderella.

Then my train of thought jumped tracks to what if each Disney princess/heroine could have been portrayed by an actress from classic Hollywood?  (Probably because I'm so addicted to Once Upon a Time and there currently seems to be such a huge interest in doing live action versions of fairy tales.)  Naturally, the next stop on that train track was deciding who would have worked for who.  I ran these by Indy and here's the verdict:

Snow White (Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs 1937)

    Merle Oberon

She's a 30's actress, on the early side of classic Hollywood, but that seems entirely appropriate for Snow White.

Cinderella (Cinderella 1950)

We've already been over this. Grace Kelly, the end.

Not only does she fit perfectly, but her career launched the same year Cinderella appeared on the screens: 1950 (she was just 20 when she started).  She's one of Hollywood's most famous classic actresses, but she only acted for six years before marrying Rainier III, Prince of Monaco in 1956.

But she still managed to win and Academy Award for Best Actress.

Alice (Alice in Wonderland 1951)

 

This one took me a little while.  I finally decided on Jane Powell.

  

She has those great big blue eyes.  Coincidentally, she was born the same year as Grace Kelly.  And I grew up watching Seven Brides for Seven Brothers.  So I'm partial.

Aurora (Sleeping Beauty 1959)

 

When I found this one, it clicked perfectly.  At least in my oh-so-humble opinion.

Shirley Jones

 

Her voice is naturally incredible (as Aurora's is supposed to be).  She never had any vocal training before she auditioned for Rodgers & Hammerstein which landed her a small role that led directly to them asking her to take the lead in Oklahoma! only a year later.

Ariel (The Little Mermaid 1989)

 

This one was kinda hard.  I settled on Judy Garland.  Her big eyes sold me.

Like I said, the big eyes sold me.  And she would also have to have a good, yet young sounding voice.

Belle (Beauty and the Beast 1991)

 

Belle was hard because she's my favorite.  That made me want to pair her with Audrey Hepburn because Audrey Hepburn was also my childhood favorite.  But I think Audrey actually looks like one of the other leading ladies as you will see and it just didn't feel right.  So I went with Natalie Wood because she has the fuller cheekbones and because she seemed to play more Belle-type characters.

I never really realized that Natalie Wood died even younger than Grace Kelly.  She drowned the year before Grace Kelly's accident but she was nine years younger than Grace.  

Jasmine (Aladdin 1992)

  

Sophia Loren.  Yeah, she's Italian but I think she would have been one awesome Jasmine back in her golden Hollywood years.

I almost wonder if it wasn't Sophia Loren the animators were picturing when they drew Jasmine...

Esmeralda (The Hunchback of Notre Dame 1996)

This was one where I came across a picture of Esmeralda and went, "Huh.  Liz Taylor's the only one that would work for that."

Megara (Hercules 1997)

Another hard one just because I love Meg.  But after discussing it with Indy, we decided Lauren Bacall was the best match.

Even though Barbara Stanwyck served as the inspiration for Meg, Lauren Bacall seems like a better embodiment.  She has the lower husky voice, very similar eyes, and the attitude, something carried over from her own character into the characters she portrayed (she was reportedly pretty difficult at times).  Perfect.

Mulan (Mulan 1998)

This one was hard since, let's face it, there were not very many well-known Asian actresses during the 1930's, 40's, & 50's.  I had to dig a little, but I came up with this adorably beautiful actress, Maylia Fong.

Yeah, I really can't tell you anything about her, but isn't she adorable???

Jane (Tarzan 1999)

People will probably think I'm crazy, but this is who I would have Audrey Hepburn play.  Being attracted to an ape-raised man and becoming Queen of the Jungle really doesn't seem like Audrey Hepburn, I know, but Jane as a cartoon looks like a cartoon Audrey to me.  So shoot me, I don't really care if you can't see it.

Tiana (The Princess and the Frog 2009)

Also hard, but really I think Dorothy Dandridge would be a great Tiana.  Better match looks-wise than Lena Horne, who was my first thought.

Rapunzel (Tangled 2010)

This one was kind of hard.  I finally picked Debbie Reynolds.  She's got the rounder face and she's cute like Rapunzel.

Aaaaaand that's the peek into my brain for the week, and probably month or two or six.

Also, don't even mention that I left out Poke-my-hinus.  Biggest mistake Disney ever made. 

Why did we give up quality?

A post from my sister (I-L) got me thinking something I have thought over and over before.  Why don't we take more pride in the quality of our appearances and the products of our time?  It didn't help that I have some family members visiting Europe right now and sending pictures of beautiful old cathedrals.  Clothing and buildings used to be incredible works of art.  The vast majority of clothing nowadays, meh.

I know there's a billion factors.  The blurred distinction between classes and necessity for functional clothing on a daily basis.  The introduction of automobiles and their continual downsizing slowly banished hats from the list of proper social dress (and thanks a lot Kennedy for being the first president to not wear a hat during your inaugural address).  The emergence of ready-made clothing.  Blah blah blah.

Everything today is made to be disposable.  Instead of creating landmarks to last centuries, we use cheap materials to build structures that may or may not even appear impressive or appealing.  It's like we stopped trying.  We don't even bother to wear out clothes most of the time.  Instead, we just get tired of them or they don't look brand-new anymore so we donate them to the nearest thrift store.  There is no kind of effort that goes into making them, acquiring them, or maintaining them, so who cares?  In our economy it seems to make more sense to me to invest in fewer, but better made items that would inspire careful preservation and perhaps alteration and updates through the years.  But of course, that would likely require home sewing and clothing construction to once again become at least as cost-effective as buying clothes ready-made, instead of more costly in both time and supplies.

I dream.

Thanks Denton

Lately I almost really miss Denton.  I spent a significant chunk of my life there - the significance being drawn more from the formative stage of my life than from actual years spent.  It's probably due in part to all the extra time I spend thinking about my sisters lately, combined with the ever-decreasing temperatures of The North.

But then I think of places like Beth Marie's, which is the cutest little old fashioned ice cream/soda shop ever.  They don't make 'em like that any more.  Let alone with German Chocolate Cake ice cream.  And New York Sub Hub.  And Recycled Books, Eureka park, Naranja smoothies, Piggly Wiggly, and even Fry Street (I definitely miss that most on Halloween).

Then there's the giant anatomically-correct jackalope that I used to pass regularly on my way home.  It's a barbeque-smokin', beer-pourin' thing I imagine.  But the best part is that I passed it parked in someone's driveway.  Thanks Denton, that made me smile every time.

Only two, only two... and Happy Veteran's Day

I can't wrap my head around being two instead of three.  I have always had two sisters to consider - always thought of things in three.  There are still three of us, yes, but for the rest of this here mortality I'm going to be stopping myself after every stinking time I'm like, "oh, and then Rach and Natti..."  Wait a minute, I guess I don't need to buy one for Natti.  Guess I don't need to make one for Natti.  Guess I can't send one to Natti.  It's downright inconvenient.  Oy.

On a lighter note, I helped conduct some of the songs at our elementary's Veteran's Day program today and while I was sitting, I happened to glance to a side and notice a butt.  Someone's younger (probably 3-year-old) sibling had managed to totally de-pants himself and was rolling around on the floor with his trousers around his ankles, lettin' it all hang out.  Well that's one way to celebrate freedom, kid.

Natti's Notes

Being Sunday, it seems a good time to post the spiritual thoughts left behind by Natti.  When my dad opened her desktop, he found a stack of blue electronic post-it notes.  Each one contained quotes/spiritual thoughts from general authorities of the Church, most of them from the most recent General Conference.  Here they are, typos and all (which indicate she almost certainly typed them in instead of copying and pasting):

I testify to you that our Father in Heaven loves His children. He loves
us. He loves you. When necessary the Lord will even carry you over
obstacles as you seek His peace with a broken heart and a contrite spirit.
Often He speaks to us in ways that we can hear only with our heart. To
better hear His voice, it would be wise to turn down the volume control of
the worldly noise in our lives. If we ignore or block out the promptings
of the Spirit for whatever reason, they become less noticeable until we
cannot hear them at all. Let us learn to hearken to the promptings of the
Spirit and then be eager to heed them.

if you ever doubt that you mean something to God:
1. he loves the humble and meek
2. he trusts the fulness of his gospel to be proclaimed by the weak and
simple
3.  no matter where you live, or how humble your circumstances, or how
limited your abilities...you are not invisible to Him.  He loves you and
knows your heart.
4.  what you see and experience now is not what forever will be.  you will
not feel loneliness, sorrow, or pain for forever.  He will neither forget
nor forsake.  If you but hold on...one day you will experience the
promises "eye hath not seen nor ear heard nor have entered into the heart
of man the things which God hath prepared for those that love Him.  

“Your prayers have entered into the ears of the Lord … and are recorded
with this seal and testament—the Lord hath sworn and decreed that they
shall be granted.

“Therefore, he giveth this promise unto you, with an immutable covenant
that they shall be fulfilled; and all things wherewith you have been
afflicted shall work together for your good, and to my name’s glory, saith
the Lord.” 

 
Let them seek for wisdom instead of power, and they will have all the
power they have wisdom to exercise.

The holy ghost satisfies and fills up every longing of the human heart and
ever vacuum.  when i am filled with that spirit, my soul is satisfied.  

The Lord so declared: “I will go before your face. I will be on your right
hand and on your left, and my Spirit shall be in your hearts, and mine
angels round about you, to bear you up.” 6 What a promise! When we are
faithful, He and His angels will help us.  

 
If you are carrying some burden, forget it, let it alone. Do a lot of
forgiving and a little repenting, and you will be visited by the Spirit of
the Holy Ghost and confirmed by the testimony that you did not know
existed. You will be watched over and blessed—you and yours.