Wednesday, October 9, 2013

Love Fest: Julia Roberts in Pretty Woman

The "hooker look" of the 90s' is relatively tame compared to nowadays.

Pretty Woman (1990) is one of those films you can watch every three or so years and still fall in love with the same way you did the first time you saw it. I do love it.

Except, I may have one problem with it, and I'm not entirely sure how I feel about it either.

Every time I watch that scene where Vivian (a.k.a. Julia Roberts) walks into the boutique on Rodeo Drive, with the bitchy saleswoman, I get very angry. Just because she looks cheap, doesn't mean she is cheap. She looked very stylish, although her dress may have been a little risque for the time, but that doesn't mean she doesn't have taste.

People may have had that mentality back in the early 90s. But what about now?

If Vivian had stepped into that very same boutique twenty three years later, she would have been considered very stylish, although perhaps slightly risque (maybe not for L.A. though). However, had she stepped in wearing a full-on sweatsuit with matching sweatpants and hoodie, paired with sneakers, she would have been given the same treatment as before. 

Is a "lazy look" this decades "hooker look"? 

I'm glad we've moved past judging scantily-clad women to judging lazily dressed women. It's fine to dress a little slutty, but if you want to be taken seriously in a high-end clothing store, don't look like you're going to the gym.

P.S. Nowadays, if you dress really "rich", it means you're probably not. 

No comments:

Post a Comment

Was it stylish for you?