I understand what you're saying, Metallolives, but I don't think it applies to Lea Thompson. She has an expressive face and a subtle acting style -- she doesn't "chew scenery" and she emotes in a way that sneaks up on the other characters. How she has allowed herself to be presented, onscreen, has been similar; she always comes across as a natural beauty, who is just primped enough to look respectable but is not displayed as a production -- some diva or obvious bombshell.
She was an 80's "it girl" but was an interesting it girl, who had -- as presented to the male audience -- girlfriend or wife appeal, as well as sex appeal. I think it's harder to grow-up with "sexpot" status, than it is to be the "interesting girl", who the audience notices is beautiful, only after the character motivations have been established. Even in "Some Kind of Wonderful", Mary Stuart Masterson is presented more as the "sexy" character, although a trendy tomboy (possibly because an 80's audience had to be gently introduced to an unconventionally feminine, girl-the-guy-gets, over Thompson's character; a couple of years later, this wouldn't have had to be explained, as the "cool girl" ideal would flip in favor of the tomboy) and Thompson is the natural beauty, who catches an artist's eye. In most of her mainstream films, Thompson is not the obvious "hot girl", although she is beautiful; that would be Erika Eleniak, Kelly Preston or Claudia Wells.
reply
share