Review: True Beauty
January 13, 2009
I’m two episodes into ABC’s “True Beauty” and I’m beginning to think that the show’s hosts are just as ugly on the inside as some of the contestants. I’m not sure why I’m surprised, considering the show is the brainchild of Ashton Kutcher and Tyra Banks– two people born to make you feel ugly.
But we’re all supposed to think Vanessa Minnillo, Cheryl Tiegs (I thought Janice Dickinson was the first Supermodel– does Tyra really hate Janice THAT much that she wants to rob her of that title? DRAMA), and Nolé Marin are all legitimiately beautiful on the inside that they’re adequate judges of these other contestants?
If you ask me, Vanessa, Cheryl, and Nolé should probably be contestants themselves. The only way I would have found this show “believable” (in the way that any superficial reality show can be believable) is if they had thrown in a judge who was known for their philanthropy and genuine heart. Instead, we were given three judges who are all superficially beautiful and essentially are no better than anyone else on the show. The words “pot” “kettle” and “black” definitely come to mind whilst watching.
Don’t get me wrong– the show can be entertaining, but it’s not because the contestants are actually learning anything. Even when they’re disqualified for being ugly on the inside, the contestants don’t “get it” and argue with the judges decision– proving that the show makes no impact on their lives.
The challenges devised are superficial at best– contrived and shallow, they don’t develop a sense of inner beauty, but instead merely touch on socially accepted standards of beauty– like donating money to a charity. If the show was truly interested in finding out who was a “True Beauty” they would send the contestants to a soup kitchen in couture gowns and challenge them to work the kitchen, keep the dress/garment clean, and make a friend. Contestants would maintain their superficial attributes because they’d be decked out in couture, but they’d also learn what it’s like to help another, and would be forced to foster a legitimate connection with someone they probably wouldn’t have connected with.
In the end, I know the show is going to stay on it’s current course: fake people judged by even faker celebrities. All I can hope for is that at the end, Ashton Kutcher will jump out and yell that the judges got Punk’d and really they’re the most superficial of the bunch.
Hey, now that would be good TV.
Entry Filed under: Fashion, What I'm Watching, culture. Tags: ABC, ashton kutcher, beauty, celebrity, cheryl tiegs, culture, Fashion, janice dickinson, nole marin, superficial, television, true beauty, Tyra Banks, ugly.
2 Comments Add your own
Leave a Comment
Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <pre> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
Trackback this post | Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed
1.
coffee | January 18, 2009 at 7:37 pm
the premise of True Beauty proves yet again that Ashton Kutcher is an entertainment genius
2.
Melissa Daniels | January 18, 2009 at 7:43 pm
Thanks for your comment, coffee, but I disagree: I think the show is relatively lukewarm and actually is kind of cliche and contradictory. It might be entertaining because the people are so utterly superficial, but you can get that on almost any other form of reality programming. What should have been different about this show (and what WOULD have made it unique and thoroughly entertaining) is if the judges were actually credible sources of “beauty.” The irony of it all is the fact that they, themselves, are ironic– they’re only superficially beautiful and none of them have illustrated that they’re capable of “true beauty”– which would have made the show more valuable, and, entertaining.
Though, I will admit, if you’re bored and there’s nothing else on TV, it’s better than watching a repeat of something else.
-Melissa