Some say it was a 60's style but it was also a Victorian look.
-
Tomatish — 10 years ago(April 27, 2015 12:28 PM)
The middle parting, the bangs, and the volume are all very reminiscent of the 60s, even if the hairstyle is not technically a 60s hairstyle.
http://ww3.hdnux.com/photos/24/76/23/5498102/5/628x471.jpg
http://www.manners.nl/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/Manners-Brigitte-Bardot-24.jpg -
MycroftHolmes — 10 years ago(April 27, 2015 03:53 PM)
Her hairstyle was also very reminiscent of the period she was portraying. A woman running a farm in the 19th century. When she went to town she had her hair done up in the style you would see in pictures, otherwise it was just let go. Like this period drawing.
http://hoocher.com/Jean_Francois_Millet/19th_CenturyFrench_Young_Woman_(Catherine_Lemaire).jpg
What we got here is failure to communicate! -
Tomatish — 10 years ago(April 29, 2015 05:38 AM)
First of all, the drawing does not look like a woman running a farm, rather a woman who works in a farm.
Besides, Christie's hair was loose, not put up or even braided. For Fanny Robbins, an employee in the farm, it's passable. But for the mistress of the farm, no.
ETA: Not to forget the volume. In some scenes it is quite obvious that a teasing comb and hairspray had been at work. -
MycroftHolmes — 10 years ago(April 29, 2015 06:40 AM)
The drawing looks quite a bit like Julie's at times during the film. Julie was often working at the farm. She was a hands on boss. And yes, they probably styled her hair since they were making a movie.
What we got here is failure to communicate! -
MycroftHolmes — 10 years ago(August 12, 2015 10:39 AM)
Do you mean in the course of the film? It looked different when it was all curled up fancy to go to market. A little darker. I thought it just had some kind of product in it.
What we got here is failure to communicate!
.jpg){kind=link}