This article was born from two roots, one internal and one external. The intern, here, from the newsroom, was to see her name in another similar article, but about the Duchess of Sussex, Meghan Markle. There they talked about those women who look almost unchanged despite the years and do not need to refound their beauty, look renewed and jovial at forty with an appearance of that age, another type of more stately beauty, perhaps.
Nothing of that. They look beautiful and youthful almost like when they were just that, young, and not full-fledged women. The other is external. The recent relaunch of “Revancha” by Netflix, which breaks it these days on the platform. Although the film is already from 2015, that is to say that its years have passed, it made us go to the most recent archives and there it is: Rachel McAdams is practically the same. No matter what year you choose the image from, she is more or less always like this.
Have you seen “Disenchanted”? Doesn’t Amy Adams look older now? Well, that doesn’t happen with Rachel, who had already made an impact on us in “Game Night”: the woman is still regal and doing the same nonsense with which she made us fall in love with when we were young. If in the last photos you have seen some wrinkles -she is human, after all-, of course, a little base in the make up and all that disappears.
Where did Rachel look best? In the mythical “Diary of a Passion”? In the cloying “Vows of Love”? In the recent Dr.Strange one, where, of course, Rachel looks twenty, like always? The scribe plays it: beyond the dubious quality of the film, the boys who could best interpret her beauty were those of the “Night Flight” team. There the McAdams looked simply shiny. They’re mixed up, see if you can make any big distinctions: Rachel through the years, which have little or no impact on her.