In the Battle of the Sci-fi Babes, you guys decided Tricia Helfer was the better beauty by a few votes over Jeri Ryan. I agree that was a tough one. They're both such sacred sci-fi cows, it's an excruciating job for any sci-fi fan to have to choose between them.
Here's another potentially difficult choice to make. Everyone who knows me knows I'm a sucker for the English hotties. That accent, that attitude - for Anglophiles like me, there are very few who compare. That's a big part of why I enjoy Kate Winslet and Rachel Weisz as much as I do. You can also include them in any list of famous MILFs, hottest Oscar winners, beautiful blondes, gorgeous brunettes, coolest husbands and so forth. These two ladies each have a ton of stuff in their favor. It's gonna be a tough choice to make. But let's try anyway. So what say ye on the subject of these two English hotties? Keep a stiff upper lip and vote below.
To be honest, I never really thought much of Rachel back in her earlier CHAIN REACTION or THE MUMMY days. She was cute, but not much more than that, at least in my view. Then she showed up in ENEMY AT THE GATES and was somehow reborn in my eyes. I'm not sure what happened there. Maybe she just needed a little more time to appreciate in value. Whatever it was, I've been a sucker for her beauty ever since.
On the other hand, I found Kate completely rapturous right away. I first saw her in HEAVENLY CREATURES and couldn't take my eyes off her sweet face - especially when she was making out with her girlfriend in bed. Then later it became even harder to keep my eyes off her when she seemed determined to get naked in practically every movie she made. Sweet face, okay with lesbianism, always naked - that's like cupid's arrow right in my heart.
Rachel and Kate have different things happening with their body styles, but I like them both the same. Rachel is perhaps a little more petite than Kate, but not to the point of being skinny. She's got some meat on her, with an especially sweet butt that's very nicely shaped. She's also okay with showing it off when the role calls for it - yet another aspect I appreciate about her body. Overall, I guess you could say I'm very appreciative of Rachel's body.
Kate's always had a little thicker build, though that's not going to be an impediment to my love for any hottie body - quite the contrary. I mean, was anyone not excited as hell when she finally stripped down in TITANIC? That's going to go down as one of the best semi-nude scenes in history, right? You can't shit on the body of a hottie who's ranked that high in movie nude scenes. Not that I would anyway. My girl Kate has everything in proportions I enjoy. Nuff said.
Rachel's hotness is implied by the very sight of her beautiful face and great body, but also in the vulnerability she has on screen. Her characters are often mixes of strength and vulnerability, standing tall on their own but also in need of their men. There's something compelling about how she plays that kind of woman. She reaches down to something innate in the male of our species. I'd love to look after Rachel. Too bad she's already got James Bond to do that for her. Tough to compete with that kind of protection.
Kate's also got sufficient hotness in the face and body area to establish herself as hot. Kate's extra oomph of hotness comes from her spirited nature on screen. She often plays the firebrand, refusing to be seen as less than or cast aside by anyone. I appreciate that kind of feistiness. She reminds me of a redhead in that sense, which is probably why she played Rose so well in TITANIC. Too bad she's content to stick with her natural blonde hair.
It's tough to make a call on the career side for these two. They've both got a ton of films I've enjoyed. They both have an Oscar and they're both celebrated actresses. As far as what they've done and what they can do, I wouldn't care to call either one superior over the other. However, the Academy has made much more of Kate's performances than Rachel's. That might not be much of a distinction, but it's something.
Kate's got 5 Oscar noms, 3 of those in lead actress roles. She's also got an Oscar win for a lead actress role. That's nothing to scoff at. You might think using award totals as a basis for judging a career might seem superficial, particularly with the biased way most of these award academies work. You might be right. Being so closely matched as actresses, with such great movies to their name, I can't think of another way to distinguish them from each other.
Difficult one here. I hate to say or do anything that goes against either of these lovely ladies. In the end, I'm going with Kate thanks mostly to her beloved status at awards shows. That's a very minor distinction though. In truth, I'm smitten with both these ladies fairly equally.