Do you remember when movie stars were men and women, not crazy-haired boys and skinny, mumbling girls? Tyrone Power, William Holden, Humphrey Bogart, Richard Widmark and Robert Mitchum, among many others. Ava Gardner, Elizabeth Taylor, Ingrid Bergman, Marilyn Monroe and Sophia Loren. Real women, women who dressed the part and had some flesh on their bones.
Men and women who spoke clearly and didn’t mumble unintelligibly at each other. Stars who, even in their 20s, behaved and were perceived as true adults. The men wore suits and fedoras, and the women dressed in fitted suits and lovely dresses and not like my 12-year-old granddaughter. OK, so I’m an old fogey, but I miss those days, those stars. I don’t see any of the current shoot-em-ups, or the dystopian (whatever that is) movies currently in vogue. Mostly I see foreign films (subtitles are great for bad hearing, but to me the films are just better).
The only American movie I saw last year with “mature” content was “See You In My Dreams” with Blythe Danner and Sam Elliott. What a pure pleasure that was. It didn’t stick around long. It showed that older people could still live and love and partake in life. Plus, the characters spoke clearly and distinctly, as I think adults should. I’m tired of the mumbling the young and not-so-young have adopted in the past few years. In 2014 I saw “Still Alice” because the topic interested me and it had mature stars. The only one I couldn’t understand was the daughter, played by Kristen Stewart. Mumble, mumble. I’m not the only one of my pals who talks about this. Even the ones with pretty good hearing talk about it. What happened to enunciation?
It’s both funny and not so funny to pick up a magazine for women these days and read about beauty tips “for all ages.” Except those ages end by 50 or 55; it’s as if everyone else were dead or at the very least not worth talking about. Do we suddenly not care about how we look after a certain age? I don’t think so. Couldn’t we oldsters use some beauty tips too? Yes, I think so. At least we shouldn’t be ignored or treated as expendable. Or worse, non-existent.
Perhaps we really don’t exist in the minds of the young, or of the magazine editors. But here we are, most of us still caring at least a little bit that we look presentable when we step out of our homes.
Let me end with a pet peeve. I’m sure Starbucks makes a lot of money; otherwise, they wouldn’t be all over the place, in city after city. However, I do wonder how they manage to make this money when they allow people (overwhelmingly young) to sit at the tables and stools for hour after hour on their laptops with one cup of coffee in front of them, probably long gone cold. How many times have I spotted a Starbucks and thought “I’m going to get myself a coffee and sit for a while and rest my back?” Well, maybe not. As I said, finding an empty place to sit is nearly impossible at any hour in Starbucks. Wouldn’t it be nice if there were a time limit for those computer users who seem to have no home or office? Is this Starbucks’ unwritten policy (and why?), or is it young people with a sense of entitlement? Or am I a grouchy old lady? Could be all three, or none of the above. I am genuinely curious and open to what the answer might be. It seems senseless as business policy, and self-absorbed as personal behavior. Any thoughts, anyone?