Posted on 05/05/2006 11:49:46 AM PDT by gopwinsin04
68-Year-Old Jane Fonda Is New Face of L'Oreal
Jane Fonda is the surprise new face of L'Oreal, heading a lucrative advertising campaign at the age of 68.
The star joins a glittering list of celebrity spokesmodels including Scarlett Johansson and Penelope Cruz after signing to front L'Oreal Paris anti-ageing treatment.
The $700,000 contract will see Fonda endorse the face cream on billboards and magazines, and the actress - who is a vocal critic of cosmetic surgery - insists she is perfect for the role.
She says, "Somebody's got to give a face to getting old. I'm going to try and organize other women in my profession and my friends to say no to the duck lips and getting rid of the wrinkles. I've just traveled through Sweden and Finland, looking at faces that were real ... as opposed to, in Hollywood, (where) everybody is starting to looking alike."
(Excerpt) Read more at starpulse.com ...
I won't be purchasing L'Oreal products any time soon.
Revlon (a direct competitor of L'Oreal's) uses Susan Sarandon and Julianne Moore for the Age Defying (mature) makeup. Sarandon's face looks really awful, so I don't see how it helps advertise a makeup product. I was really disappointed when I saw Revlon's ad; a decade ago they used to have prettier models who simply advertised the products without bringing so much political baggage.
Estee Lauder is more expensive than L'Oreal and is more of a competitor with Lancome (L'Oreal-owned).
Cover Girl is cheaper, and I dislike all of their products, but they have Christie Brinkley model their Advanced Radiance (mature) makeup line.
Tokyo Rose wishes she had a gig like this...
At least Jane will look stuning on the gibbet.
Jane can have all the face lifts in the world, but it doesn't do a thing for her ugly insides.
This explains it: our "friends" zee French hired her.
lmao! I'd be all for that...
Taken in January of this year.
Yikes! what an absurd choice, that's SCARY! That makes **two** reasons why l'oreal will not be put in our shopping cart. I wonder how their sales have been doing since this, I'll have to look that up.
I'm looking for information about the cancellation of jane's April 3, 2006 show at the Van Wezel in Sarasota [ advertised at http://www.vanwezel.org/media/pressRelease.cfm?preID=297 ] .
Acc. Swift Vets site [ http://www.swiftvets.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=165174&sid=1551e29b04432a5767184c2123539416 ], it was cancelled due to lack of interest rather than "family obligations" that jane gave as the reason. I'm looking for local confirmation. Supposedly only a fraction of the seats were sold (40 out of 1,000+? 1,600?)
OW! hurts, it hurts us; it bites us, it does!!
This choice just does not make sense. Look at this:
"The $700,000 contract will see Fonda endorse the face cream on billboards and magazines, and the actress - who is a vocal critic of cosmetic surgery - insists she is perfect for the role.
She says, "Somebody's got to give a face to getting old. I'm going to try and organize other women in my profession and my friends to say no to the duck lips and getting rid of the wrinkles."
So which is it? Fight the wrinkles, be it with surgery or l'oreal face cream? or age 'gracefully', and "just say NO to getting rid of wrinkles"? l'oreal better pin her down, she's not too adept at this. Someone's job needs to be on the line with this.
Stock trend: http://uk.finance.yahoo.com/q/tt?s=OR.PA
L'Oreal Cosmetics are good. They're going to go downhill with Fonda's picture plastered on their products.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.