Uma Thurman – A “disconcerting beauty”
February 10, 2006 by Christina Jones
Filed under Beauty, Beauty News
You know, I have up until very recently NOT been a fan of Uma. I thought she was way bizarre, and not very attractive at all, but for some reason – maybe because she has been “elegant-ified” by Louis Vuitton and Tag Heuer – I have really been able to see what others have seen in her all along.
Photo: AP
She just looks much softer and less scary now to me for some reason. According to TheAge.com, France has just bestowed the high honor on Uma of “knight in the order of Arts and Letters,” which will put her down in French history as one of their most beloved actresses. What do you think of Uma?
Not a big fan of Uma, never have been really a huge fan, although I did like “The Truth About Cats and Dogs” and “Pulp Fiction”. I can respect uncoventional beauty as well as the next person, but she just seemed gangly and not fluid–I think this is really what got me, she just seemed to flop around all over the place–there are other models/actresses/whatever who are as tall, but I think carry themselves beautifully. To me, she is just not super-deluxe, or ultra-sexy. However, apparently lots of people do think so, and I know Quentin Tarantino views her as his muse…so everybody likes something different. I did read about France knighting her, which I guess is cool, but I’m just not so much on France these days… I did love “Dangerous Liasons, also. And I imagine she is probably a really cool person–her dad was the first Western Tibetan Buddhist monk, and is a teacher; her mom was a model, now a psychologist I think, and was married to Timothy Leary briefly (Salvador Dali introduced them), and was in Ciao, Manhattan with Edie Sedgwick (a Warhol flick)…so you know her parents are/were cool folks, and I imagine she is a really interesting human. But this is a great pic of her.
It is a good pic, eh? All of the pics I have seen of her since she started with Tag and Vuitton have been softer,prettier. I hope she is moving on from that tough bitch thing she had going.
Well, you know Tarantino was instrumental in that look, I am sure. And she does look softer and prettier, but I she isn’t in the top 25 of my great beauties. Boy, it’s a shame that Janice Dickinson has made such a production out of herself, and is nuts to boot, since she was so incredible gorgeous in the day. She is in my top 25 (but as she was in the late ’70s/early ’80s, not now). She was the hot model when I first stared reading Vogue, at about 12–so that would be ‘78.
And now, she is just plumb scary. Eek.
I agree. She has always struck me as odd looking. I think she looks better in this pic, but still, I don’t see what the big whopping deal is.