Photoshopping Meryl Streep: I Mean, Really?
I found this photograph after clicking on a VanityFair.com link that read: “Click here to see a slide show of Brigitte Lacombe’s portraits of Meryl Streep.” So, you get a series of photographs that Lacombe has taken of Streep over the years. The first one was taken in 1979. The most recent one is the one you see here and was taken in October. The package comes as part of an online-only teaser for a cover story on Streep, which graces the January issue of the magazine. As Streep states in the piece, she’s experiencing a rare thing for women over 40 in Hollywood: a major comeback. “It’s incredible,” Streep crows proudly. “I’m 60, and I’m playing the romantic lead in romantic comedies!” So, what do they do with her? Why, they airbrush her to death, of course. After the jump, compare the Vanity Fair Streep with the real one, sans Photoshop.I understand Photoshopping. I really do. But I just don’t get the point here. Increasingly, it seems like women who really don’t need to be Photoshopped to death are getting altered into unrecognizable oblivion. Take the latest cover of W magazine featuring Jennifer Garner, for example.
Below is a shot of Meryl Streep on the red carpet that was taken right around the same time the Vanity Fair shot was taken. At 60, she’s got some crow’s-feet, but, for the love of God, I think she looks pretty fabulous. Can someone make this crazy Photoshopping stop? It’s passed the point of totally ridiculous. [Vanity Fair]