- Awards
- 11
Go look at pictures of Jayne (i.e. type on Google Images, "Jayne Mansfield 1956" and compare it to when you search "Jayne Mansfield 1964"), and you can see how much her look changed over her thirteen years in Hollywood. There was once a collage of "Jayne through the years" on a website, and I might take the time to hunt it down in the next day or two.Was a different Jayne Mansfield acting in the 50s and 60s?
Dumpy? Slatternly/ Rotund?
Denigrating observations about Hair, Makeup, Wardrobe and figure?
I don't understand
In the mid-to-late-50s, she was quite beautiful. Her face and body were quite good then, but .....
Her "repeated pregnancies" (as one writer words it) contributed to her fluctuating weight and, by extension, the deterioration of contract with Fox, who gradually stopped viewing her as star material.Jayne was a bit heavier in the 60s -- she had been repeatedly pregnant after all -- but it was far more to do with her fashions. Her hair, makeup and wardrobe in the mid to late 60s was very unflattering to a woman of her shape.
Jayne's wardrobe choices in the 1960s weren't terribly flattering to her. Her daughter, Jayne Marie, said she'd sent her to the stores to pick out all the clothes she'd wear so she could wear them. In short, the '60s fashion trends just didn't lend themselves too well to Mansfield's body type.
I wish Jayne had the foresight or the intention to move into character parts as Dors did. Jayne really should have done so as early as the late-50s when the leading roles for her began to dry up. It might've sustained her and made her more serviceable at Fox, who could've used her in sexy supporting roles.She often looked slatternly; Diana Dors too, but she leaned into it and became a character actress.
The issue was Mansfield had sandwiched herself into a specific image, and her desperation for stardom would have been her pride before her fall.








