I Stand Corrected


One man. Two boys. Twelve kids.

Related Post Roulette

31 Responses

  1. Rod Engelsman says:

    I’m pretty sure the operational principle here is hotness rather than age.Report

  2. Burt Likko says:

    That’s your type, eh?

    …Yeah, I can dig it.Report

    • Kazzy in reply to Burt Likko says:


      Which makes my attraction to Zazzy unexpected. Pale skin, red hair… Scandinavian looking. The odd thing about it is that I was never really into red heads but now they always turn my head. Women really are witches.Report

      • Glyph in reply to Kazzy says:

        Yeah, the gal pictured is def. my type (my wife loves to tell people that on one of our first meetings I told her in no uncertain terms that I was a “brunettes” man), but I ended up with a statuesque blonde.

        I tell people, it’s like if you always wanted a Ferrari, but knew you’d probably never get one, then one day you wake up and someone just left you a Lamborghini in your front yard.

        If you have any brains, you just run with that – only a fool would ask questions or look back.Report

  3. NewDealer says:

    Wow. She is smoking.

    Her name is Paul? Is it short for Pauline?Report

    • Kazzy in reply to NewDealer says:

      Paula, sorry. That was a type. Corrected it.

      I originally noticed her as one of the CSU agents on a L&O episode. She’s done some other things but nothing huge. Even her role in the H&K movies is fairly limited: her character is an important one but she has limited screen time. But, yea, she is very attractive and I was shocked to find out how old she was. I would have pegged her to be closer to my age, if not younger (I’m 29). I guess this just goes back to my complete inability to judge women’s ages.Report

      • NewDealer in reply to Kazzy says:

        Your type is also a typo 😉

        To be fair she probably spends a long time working out and eating right. She probably devotes more time to working out than most people can. She might be naturally youthful. Plus it is Hollywood so I would not be surprised if she has had work done.Report

  4. zic says:


    Now let’s discuss the men over 40 who are hot. And those who aren’t because they’ve got pot bellies, lost their hair, or have turkey necks. And remember; those flaws are must be their most important qualities; their accomplishments, their grace, their tribulations are of no accord.Report

    • Kazzy in reply to zic says:

      If you want me to make a list of male actors who I would rather not look at, I’m more than happy to. The ability for men to be unattractive in Hollywood far outpaces that same opportunity for women.Report

      • zic in reply to Kazzy says:

        I’m just struggling with post bemoaning the ageism against women in Hollywood, (which would theoretically extend to the ageism women face in general,) in a post featuring a very hot atypical woman and much chatter about hotness in general.

        I get that’s how guys are wired, and I like guys, I’m not complaining. But the irony sort of boggles. And I always think the most attractive people are those who wear their lives on their faces and bodies; work shapes us, bearing children and parenting shapes us. Gray hairs and wrinkles and stretch marks and saggy breasts and bulging hips are badges of lives lived, hopefully well. I think them beautiful, and I’m always suspicious of people who look to picture perfect; it’s as if they’re trying to hide from themselves.

        But we all know that I’m prone to odd ideas. I do commend you for at least challenging the notion that women over certain ages are no longer sexy. Thank you for that. We don’t turn into nuns at 40, 50 or even 80. Just ask anyone who’s ever worked in a nursing home.Report

        • Kazzy in reply to zic says:

          Hey Zic,

          I apologize for writing a couple one-offs on a topic that deserves a more full and thoughtful treatment. I don’t know that I’m the guy to write it, but figured I’d point things out as I go along.

          In summation, my thoughts are this:

          In H&G, the filmmakers cast actors who are 15 years apart in age and look to be even further than that to play like-aged siblings. My hunch is that they wanted a big name star and got that in Renner. At that point, the Gretel role was less important so they went with a hot young actress likely because she was A) hot and B) cheap and said, “To hell with even pretending to make this movie internally consistent.” Hot and/or cheap* outweighed taking a silly film even the least bit serious.

          In H&K, a movie series started several years ago, the hired Paula Garces to play the cute 20-something neighbor of a couple 20-something guys (the actors were all in their late 20’s or early 30’s but they all looked the part). So, her attractiveness was somewhat important to the role, though they could have gone in a lot of different directions with her look and personality and still written her as the object of one of the character’s eyes. When the movie was a hit, they made two sequels that followed the characters along, with the internal timeline a bit hazy; we are now somewhere in the future, at least 3 years but probably closer to 5, a little less than what has passed in real time. Garces has a more pronounced role now, is still very attractive, and they stuck with her and continued to present her as an attractive woman, despite her being now into her late 30’s. They could have swapped her out for another actress without anyone really caring or could have included her character but not still presented her as sexy (she is actually presented as far sexier in this film than the first one, if memory serves).

          So, to me, the two movies show two different, though not opposite approaches, to casting actresses. One seemed more interest in putting out eye candy (male and female) regardless of what it did to the story while another didn’t.

          Is H&K a huge step forward? No… there is tons of stuff in the movie series that are pretty offensive, to women and others. But after railing against an industry for treating any actress over 30 like an “ugly hag”, I thought it fair to give credit where credit is due and acknowledge a film series that continued to cast an actress into her late 30’s as the sexy girlfriend/wife, even if she doesn’t necessarily look like she’s in her late 30’s (she does look a hell of a lot older than Arturer/Gretel).

          There’s tons of room left to go. When the female equivalent of Tommy Lee Jones emerges, maybe we can start talking about reaching the mountain top.Report

  5. Mike Schilling says:

    She was also, notably, a cop in The Shield (yet another smoking hottie that Dutch pursued while denying he was doing that, guaranteeing she’d spurn him.).

    But I think is is less enlightenment on Hollywood’s part that the fact that the films have been made so far apart. In the original, Cho was 32, Penn 27, and Garces 30.Report

    • Kazzy in reply to Mike Schilling says:

      A significant period of time passed between the 2nd and 3rd films. The titular characters acknowledge not having seen each other in 2 years and Harold and his wife were trying to get pregnant for at least 3. Three years passed between filming, but obviously more time was supposed to have had elapsed. The first two were supposed to happen within the same time frame, but were made 4 years apart. So, yea, the timeline, as it usually is in Hollywood, was screwy.Report

      • Mike Schilling in reply to Kazzy says:

        I think you see my point, though. They didn’t hold open auditions and hire a 38-year old. They continued to cast the same actress because she still looks amazing.Report

        • Kazzy in reply to Mike Schilling says:

          Yes. But they didn’t treat her like they had to hide her under a parka because she was north of 35.

          I realize it is a lot more complex than I am making it out to be. But H&G did a shitty job casting and I think H&K did a much better one.Report

          • Mike Schilling in reply to Kazzy says:

            Well, look at her. Nothing I can see that needs hiding.Report

            • Kazzy in reply to Mike Schilling says:

              Exactly. So if the producers of H&G cared about having characters who were like-age siblings that were somewhat believable and they were committed to casting Jenner, why not find someone like Garces for the role?Report

              • Mike Schilling in reply to Kazzy says:

                I’m with Todd. If they always cast someone who looks 22 to play a 35-year-old, I don’t see why it matters that she really is 35. It’s like, if they change a character who was black in the book to white to get a bigger audience, I don’t really care if the white-looking actor has a black great-grandmother.Report

    • Worth pointing out is that in The Shield, she played a rookie cop and Dutch’s interest in her seemed kinda inappropriate due to her young age. I’d had no idea she was older than I am, so I don’t think we can point to her as an example of Hollywood doing something right in that regard.Report

      • Mike Schilling in reply to Will Truman says:

        So, when she arrived on The Shield, Jay Karnes was 43 (and looked it), while Garces was 32 but looked about 25. A bit creepy, and made more so by his “I’ll be your mentor — at first” M.O. (You’re probably aware of this, but the pretty lawyer who asks Dutch out in the very last episode is his real-life wife.)Report

  6. Tod Kelly says:


    I’m not sure I get the complaint that Hollywood should cast older, more talented actresses and stop hiring them based on their youth, and then pointing to that picture as a way that Hollywood is doing it right.Report

    • Kazzy in reply to Tod Kelly says:

      In H&G, they hired actors 15 years apart in age to play like-age siblings, presumably because they wanted a sexy Gretel and couldn’t find anyone closer to Renner’s age to play opposite.

      In H&K, they hired similarly aged actors to play similarly aged characters. That the actors may be playing younger characters isn’t really relevant.

      The apparent argument in favor of Gretel’s casting was that there didn’t exist actresses closer to Renner’s age who were sexy. I hold up Paula Garces as an example of just that.Report

      • Tod Kelly in reply to Kazzy says:

        So your problem isn’t that Hollywood only hires women that look like they’re early 20s, it’s that Hollywood won’t hire older actresses that could pass for early twenties?Report

        • Kazzy in reply to Tod Kelly says:

          Well, I suppose my criticism of H&G is predicated on what age the characters are supposed to be. Are they supposed to be Renner’s age? Or are they supposed to be Arturer’s age? Because they look very, very far apart in age.

          If they’re supposed to be in their 20’s, then Renner was a bad casting job.
          If they’re supposed to be in there 30’s or 40’s, than Arturer was a bad casting job.

          My hunch is they simply said, “Find some hot people.” Which is pretty bad on another level.Report

      • Pinky in reply to Kazzy says:

        I’m confused…Harold and Gretel? Wait, was that why they had the munchies?Report

      • Pinky in reply to Kazzy says:

        Arturer and Garces look somewhat similar. I think if you look like that, you can pretty much show up on a movie set and they’ll write the character around you. “What’s that, you want to play Superman’s dad? Quick, someone fire Brando.”Report

  7. b-psycho says:

    She does look great. Though I imagine it’s relatively clean livin’ to thank for not prematurely aging. Compare her to Lindsay Lohan, who is 26…then click back to Ms Garces for some eye bleach.

    Hollywood does have its advantages, but combination of genetics and not picking up a coke habit go a long way. For another example, take Salma Hayek: she’s 46, I’m 30, and if you have to ask if I would passionately boink her brains out if I were so offered you need a CAT scan.Report

  8. Kolohe says:

    I was kinda surprised to find out the other day that Zooey Deschanel was 33.Report