As the ninth season of CSI ...
Question: As the ninth season of
CSI approaches, I can't help but fear a new year of Marg Helgenberger's ridiculous wardrobe. In a recent interview, I heard her bemoan the fact that she didn't have Julia Roberts' career. Well, that would be because Julia, 9 years her junior, has only dressed like Catherine Willows in two roles: a hooker in
Pretty Woman and a woman constantly ridiculed for her cleavage in
Erin Brockovich. Why are we supposed to believe that a forensic scientist would be able to walk around a garbage dump looking for clues with perfectly coiffed and styled hair, the make-up of a showgirl, cleavage-squeezing tops, high-heeled boots and jeans so tight that walking looks difficult? I can't help but feel disappointed that the message Marg seems to be sending is that you can be a post-40s actress and land a great, professional role, but only if you still dress like you're 25 and heading to a club. Why can't we all take a page from Helen Mirren who was wild and sexual in her "prime" a couple of decades ago, yet now manages to look classic, sexy and radiant without showing off all of her assets in one go? As a girl still in her 20s, I find it disheartening that this isn't the message that
CSI's only remaining female lead is putting forward. Why does it seem like television, and this character in particular, is intent on telling us that a middle-aged woman on TV has to look like a Real Housewife of Orange County? Rather than being sexy or empowering, it just feels desperate and sad.
Answer: Ouch! I agree the styling of Catherine Willows verges on the ludicrous many weeks, but how is this different than the parade of babe-licious DAs on the various
Law & Order franchises or the spectacle (to name another for instance) of
CSI: NY's Melina Kanakaredes strolling through crime scenes with that mane of hair untamed? None of these shows or characters aims for the realism of Helen Mirren's classic
Prime Suspect franchise. Why single her out, and so personally? Although admittedly it's hard to disagree.
