Dear Albert Williams:
In response to the Reader's Guide to Arts and Entertainment Friday, September 22, 2000 article on Claudia Jennings I have the following comments:
If you didn't like what she did with her life why write about her at all?
Roger Ebert has written about her without all the sermonizing middle-class morality and pandering to feminists going on.
Did the fact she was young and beautiful cause you to write about her--if it is you are as bad as all the people you have a problem with.
I can understand the parents and family having a problem with all this--not wanting to talk to anyone, embarrassed, etc.
But, what's so wrong with B movies? All it means is not as much money, big stars as an A-list movie, plus it is the lower-case, independent part of a double bill or double feature. That's all, really.
The strange thing is you wouldn't believe how true and accurate these B flicks can be, are, or were--not that far off as people like to think. Just people--situations--group of the public not in the mainstream for subject.
Unholly Rollers, for example, was Claudia Jennings bold, feisty, not taking crap from anybody--a working-class woman who takes a chance and gets seduced by being a star--it goes to her head. It's really a woman's picture--she acts kind of feminist--by what they stand for.
But, first you can't stereotype these movies or filter them through a funnel of middle-class judgment and taste, either. Also, why can't movies just be fun and entertainment either as these movies usually are.
Wow, posing for Playboy, can't we grow up, we are in the 21st century after all? Can't a woman like her body and want to show it and we're OK with that. Without this whole virgin/whore kind of deal going on.
I notice there's some sexy pix accompanying the article which just contributes to the whole hypocrisy of the presentation.
Just as some of us will continue to enjoy Ed Wood films, Roger Corman, Russ Meyer, and the like--we will continue to like Claudia Jennings films--they're fun, she is beautiful, gets naked, and they're not that bad. They are just different. I thought this was the alternative press. The take on Claudia Jennings, nudity, Playboy, B movies, and the like was way worse than the regular mainstream media.
I don't think she made any mistakes. Some actresses have mixed it up and been successful. Some are great with a score of nudity in many films behind them like Jennifer Jason Leigh who just happens to be one of the best in the acting profession in the United States--male or female. It's the prejudice of this which has held her from getting an Academy Award I believe.
Anybody ever hear about being objective. Can't A-list and B movies both have their place? A-list movies can be the worst phony crap in the world--fake, smarmy romance, witless comedies, boring action, dull, insipid, stupid, and just not interesting. Bs take chances and go for it.
The real concern of women and their bodies is what causes breast cancer and how to prevent it, dangers of and fake need for cosmetic surgery, bulimia, and faking up pictures so people in these professions don't look real.
Clauda Jennings made no mistake. Look how well she treated people. A-listers probably are not that generous, usually stay within their circle only. Speaks well of B-crowd life (that way). No, nothing to be ashamed of--only people who judge her like you seem to.