|
JerkyFlea: March 2000 |
| Author: JerkyFlea |
|
Date: March 2000 |
The
Latest (cont')
Staying on the women and space theme, I
have some news on NATASHA HENSTRIDGE. As you may remember, around the middle of 1998,
everyone's favorite psychopathic alien hybrid in the "Species" movies cut her
just-below-the-shoulder blonde hair into a fairly short
crop. She also darkened it significantly, going to
what could best be described as a honey brown color (with
apologies to J.W. Dundee and HighFalls Brewery). I
believe it was done for a couple of movie roles to get
away from the sexy image she cultivated in "Species", though I can't remember for
sure. Anyway, she cut it short. Since then,
she's been growing it back out, as you can see from the
pictures below. As of the premiere of her new
movie "The Whole
Nine Yards" , her once
again very blonde locks fall a few inches below her
shoulder in a one-length, blunt cut.
  
Growing...
 
Now
FLEA'S CALL:
I hated the short cut because it made her look, well, manly.
It just wasn't feminine enough for her strong, angular features.
I did, however, like some of the transitional styles, especially the
shag and layered bob. The current style, while not bad, is
just sort of there. Don't get me wrong, Natasha has beautiful
hair and though the color IS a bit funky (it gets lighter toward the
roots, what's up with that?), this style is moderately attractive.
But, it just sounds wrong to say that a woman like Natasha has been
reduced to "moderately attractive".
vvv
A lot of time, energy,
and column space has been devoted to debating the
aesthetic value of LAUREN HOLLY's
nearly waist-length locks. Was her hair flattering
or overpowering? Was it real, partially real, or
extensions? Did it make her look younger, did she
need bangs, what the heck was she thinking with the heavy
black eyeliner, etc.. Well, Lauren has rendered all
of those arguments moot (except for the one about the
eyeliner). Yup, as you have already guessed and may
have even seen in the new Dixie Chicks' video for
"Goodbye Earl" that premiered at the Grammies,
she has cut her hair. It's now back to a style very
close to one she wore a couple of years ago: a lightly
long layered, just-above-shoulder-length shag with small
bang section. How's that for a description you
could never give to a stylist?
 
Before
 
After
FLEA'S CALL: Just to get this out of the way, the
style looks good...just as it did a couple of years ago
when she wore it. Also, if I'm not seeing things,
it looks as though it's been snipped even shorter and a
bit more layered within just a few days of the initial
cut. Still looks good (though I liked the longer
flip better), but cutting more that fast is just a bit
odd. Then again, I'm probably just seeing things. Anyway,
the question now remains: How much was actually cut and
how much was extensions? To be honest, I really
don't know. I thought there may be some extensions
in there for added thickness, but lengthwise (as I
chronicled when I initially reported on the style), the
average growth per month would have allowed her hair to
have gotten that long, if not very close. Plus,
there are several pics of her with her locks falling to
almost mid-back during the "growing"
period. Insert an exasperated sigh and confused
shrug here. At this point, I'm just waiting for
Bobby Ewing to stick his head out of the shower and tell
me none of this ever actually happened.
Natasha
Henstridge pictures courtesy Reuters; Lauren Holly pictures
courtesy InStyle, FashionDish, and Entertaiment
Weekly
Next Page >>> |