Of course, the other recent example of Hollywood’s penchant of placing young actresses in the “mother” role is when Angelina Jolie played Colin Farrell’s mother in the movie Alexander a few years back. Granted, Jolie is stunningly beautiful and a gift from the gods. I get that the director (Oliver Stone) wanted to not only get folks to the theater (men) but exploit the good looks of the youthful, half-naked (Jolie) — but come on! She’s just one year older than Farrell. She took her casting in stride and described working with the notoriously difficult Stone as “a pleasure.” Given that Jolie, already mother to six, never seems to age, she seems to have this role down pat. I guess when you look that good onscreen, you may as well flaunt it while you’ve got it.
I suppose that’s what it comes down to. Maybe many of these actresses take these roles because, perhaps, they are terrified that if they don’t, they won’t work again. This is what they are being offered so they take it, like Thompson did back in the day, for the boost it can give them; or like Ryder, to get back in the game. Jolie was reportedly “thrilled to be cast” in an Oliver Stone movie, even if it was in the mother role, even if she was barely older than Rosario Dawson, who played Farrell’s wife, for the opportunity to work with him and the exposure it offered her. (That the movie was widely panned clearly hasn't hurt any of their careers, particularly hers.)
Hard to believe, incredible really, that Jolie has to worry about ageism. If that’s the case, are all young, beautiful actresses older than, say, 25 doomed to be relegated to the mother role before they hit 30?
No wonder they all end up having (shhh!) plastic surgery every other month. But that’s another article…