Is La Cid the Marilyn Monroe of her generation, or the Gretchen Mol? She’s still hot, but seems to be glowing in the dying embers of her fire. It seems to be about minute fourteen for her as she approaches thirty and sees hot new fires flaring behind her. Sometimes the it girl, the next big thing, has the staying power to remain relevant, and sometimes she ends up in Hallmark Christmas movies, the elephant graveyard for faded starlets. One path leads to Jennifer Lawrence, the other to Rachael Leigh Cook.
Either way, Sweeney still looks as good as ever, and there’s no denying that chest.
I hope that she has many years left in her career. She is smart and has talents beyond the 2 big ones that are immediately apparent. The film/TV industry is admittedly obsessed with youth, especially for women, but some actresses these days are demonstrating a staying power into their later years, including a staying power in respect of their attractiveness/sexuality. Many of those actresses have been featured on this site. ‘In Praise of Older Women’ indeed!
A career will endure. But which career? Will she follow the Jennifer Lawrence trajectory or the Rachael Leigh Cook? Rachael is still working constantly, but most of us haven’t seen her in years, although she was once the next big thing. Gretchen Mol is an even more dramatic illustration. She was officially anointed as the next big thing by Vanity Fair and the Hollywood powers-that-be in the late 1990s. She is still making several movies every year, and she turned out to be a good character actress, but when was the last time you saw her in anything significant?
So which path will beckon to La Cid?
I suspect that her trajectory will be more like Jennifer Lawrence. Perhaps even bigger than Jennifer Lawrence if she can avoid getting cancelled by one side or the other in the ongoing political/cultural wars.
She tried a “serious” role in “Christy” where she played a boxer and did the whole months-of-prep, not-afraid-to-look-ugly routine. Some critics liked it (though they liked her co-star Ben Foster better) but it didn’t do great at the box office. Like a beautiful actress trying to do a Shakespeare soliloquy while the horndogs in the audience keep yelling “Take it off!”
I did notice her IMDB lists NINE upcoming projects, so the girl’s keeping busy. There’s even a re-make of “Barbarella” in there, so… high hopes.
It wasn’t that she failed. It’s just not what the audience wanted. Samuel L Jackson was brilliant as the classical pianist descending into dementia in The Caveman’s Valentine, but nobody wanted to see that. They wanted the tough, cocky smart-ass they loved. People still want and love HOT Sydney, not frumpy one. And she hasn’t yet earned the Theron exemption.
She should go for the full frontal art movie route. Lanthimos? Like Emma? Although, the talent is lacking in this case.
She is far from being Hollywood’s best actress, but she is also far from being “talentless,” as some people think. She has work that was highly praised by critics; she can definitely act. People confuse her willingness to do nude scenes and the fact that she is a busty blonde with being a bad actress—lumping her in with other hot blondes in Hollywood. That isn’t the case here.
I don’t think she has the face to be a leading lady. But she has enough acting range to do supporting roles. Maybe she ends up like an Alanna Ubach if she can get good roles that don’t involve huge breasts. Otherwise she will always be known as the girl with the big tits.
She’ll keep landing lead or co-lead roles as long as she remains popular—that’s just how Hollywood has always worked. Zendaya herself was never a great actress or anything like that; she’s just okay… But she’ll keep being a lead as long as she’s hot right now. Regardless of talent or “face to be a leading lady” and all that.