to think Barbra Streisand could never have become a superstar had she been born in born in 1982?

[bibbitybobbityyhat]

Instead of 1942?

Just watched most of Funny Girl today. Barbra Streisand was an enormous box office star. She had a large nose, natural boobs and was at least a modern UK size 10/possibly 12.

There is no way she could have survived in today's Hollywood and we would never have heard of her.

What a travesty.

Mick Jagger was beautiful. He is still a very good looking 70-something.

Does it really matter?

It's probably true, but a bloody shame! Because she was (and still is), I think stunningly beautiful, just not in the boring, bland conventional way that you see so much of now and more importantly, a great talent.

Lol at "Streisand hated her big arse btw" thank you for sharing your insider knowledge.

Who are our A list celebrities at under 30 now? None of them are as "large" or imperfect as Barb, with the very notable exception of Adele.

Theres more to being a star than being able to sing.

Nonsense

Don't lose any sleep over Imagined wrongs

Totally disagree.

She had something indefinable, an inner star quality that would have made it whatever the era. And her voice... well... it could melt chocolate. I have no worries tht Barbra would have been a star whenever she was born.

I often think similar when we watch old (70s, 80s) episodes of Top of the Pops. Lot of those bands looked like bloody geography teachers or something...just so many of the acts were ordinary-looking people, with unkempt beards and wonky teeth and frizzy hair. And there's something good about it...like, they're there because they wrote a song and enough people liked it to get it in the charts. Everything seems so plasticky now, groomed and plucked and buffed beyond their already near-perfection and almost heading towards the Uncanny Valley

I disagree.

Look at Amy Winehouse, Adele, Elle King, Florence Welch, Ellie Goulding - all of them have been successful recording artists despite looking far removed from the media perceived ideal of attractiveness.

Can't stand Streisand or her colossal ego.

I get what you're saying Estrella but she's still the leading lady (silly term I know) who gets the man. She got Robert Redford in The Way We Were!

Idina Menzel is a huge Broadway star, good-looking but far from cookie-cutter. PP have already mentioned Amy Winehouse: gorgeous in my eyes (tragically not in hers) but not a teen catalogue model face. When pure singing talent matters, that's all that matters, though I agree a lot of the charts/media focus is on whether you look "sexy" in a video (though by God Amy looked electric in "Rehab").

I blame the Madonna effect, though not her personally! Many female pop stars are modelesque dancers rather than singers now. Though the really big stars can sing: Miley Cyrus and Beyoncé certainly can. But I wonder if they looked like Martha Reeves or Dusty Springfield (both perfectly fine looking women, with voices far beyond what we hear most of the time now) they would have had the same industry money behind them.

Another PP said old stars couldn't sing - they didn't have autotune! That's really them on recordings. Which tells you how ridiculously good Dionne Warwick, Dusty, Patsy Cline, Gladys Knight et al really were. Oh gosh I am a pop music bore, sorry.

Just had to google Ellie Goulding. She looks the epitome of mainstream to me, perhaps I'm missing something.

Ditto Florence (although I know who she is without looking her up!).

The Madonna Effect what strong woman can do when they put their mind to it.Yes you are right thats really awful.

I fucking love Madonna,without her a lot of the female singers woudnt be able to get through.
She done it herself and i fucking love her,she is my idol.

I love Madonna too! Just that after her, the music industry seems to have decided that dancers were the best bet, hence J-Lo (who doesn't sing, as far as I can hear).

I said "the Madonna effect" deliberately because I think it's an instance of the money seeing something great and putting funding into other things with some similarities but not the core quality. So Madonna was great, but the people who got backing in the hopes of another Madonna mostly didn't have anything like her imagination, spirit or nous.

Oh i agree 100% about not having her style/nous or psychic abilities.But stars dont come along often.So her,Streisand and MJ are 1 in a million.

I have always thought she was beautiful as a young woman, especially her eyes. Truly beautiful to me. Beauty is in the eye and whatnot...

I also think she'd have made it whenever.

I almost fainted when I saw her live

Lol at "Streisand hated her big arse btw" thank you for sharing your insider knowledge.

It's not my insider knowledge bibbity. It's from an interview I read of the late Jackie Collins ages ago. She didn't name names but it was pretty obvious who she was talking about.

Perhaps you weren't around at the time

Anyway, as I said in the rest of my post that you ignored: Striesand is supremely talented and a self confessed diva.

So what's not to like: big bum or not?

Does Bette Midler count? She seems similar to the big BS.

I think she might've had a better chance being born in 1992.

I was born in 1982 and have always been a bit fat, very obviously 'Jewish' looking IYSWIM, worn glasses etc. I'm certain that I would have more confidence in my appearance as a 20yo now than I did when I was 20 in 2002.

When I was at high school the most horrible insulting thing a bully could do was call you gay (or a 'Lezza' at my particular school ). Six years later when my sister was at the same school there were people coming out left right and centre and no one batted an eyelid. Same school, same redneck country town, only six years later.

I think there is a lot of truth to what you are saying, with some notable female, exceptions. Amy Winehouse, Adele, Paloma Faith, Shirley Bassey, Tina Turner, Bette Midler.

Men on the other hand have Been making it famous despite their looks, David Bowie (I've always had a thing for him!) mick Jagger, Elvis, to name a few. Same goes for male actors. They were all incredible performers though and you could not take your eyes off them. Same goes for the women mentioned above.

I don't think it's ever been easy to "make it" but people are slowly beginning to realise it's not just how you look.

Ive always felt aswell that the music exec underestimated the girls who would be buying the music and just assumed that they would only buy songs from pretty girls, whereas boys just listen to the song so will buy anything if it sounds good.

Maybe they were right in the 90s when it was the age of girl bands but I don't think that's the case today.

I don't think it's ever been easy to "make it" but people are slowly beginning to realise it's not just how you look.

I do hope so Jean. There are some really talentless autotune performers out there who seem to be feted just for how they look and what they wear, with barely a nod to their singing abilities.

Gone are the days of Janis Joplin, carole king, dusty, aretha, Barbra, Nina Simone, Dionne Warwick, Ella Fitzgerald, Etta James and the late great Whitney Houston.

We have to tolerate Cheryl whateverhernameis, Lily Allen, JessieJ, Katy Perry, Justin Bieber, Will.Iam, Kanye and Britney. God help us. All of them couldn't hold a note and rely on autotune.

At least we have Adele who can actually sing. Loved her with James Cordon in Carpool Karaoke, that girl has a powerful rich voice with no help!

Hmmm I'm not sure.

I think Babs Streisand is insanely beautiful and lots of men lusted after her back in the day. She had a killer body. But yes bigger than most.

There are still 'imperfect' stars around today - Lady GaGa has natural boobs and a big hooter and is not 'done'. Jess Glyn is ordinary looking. Ella Henderson hasn't been Bionic Womaned and is a size 12. They both have voices you just cannot replicate with autotune or any other techno hokus pokus.

All not both.