had a hair loss nightmare

[s.a.f]

Bruce should be thankfull he didn't have to loose all hair that early and had the time to establish his name. otherwise he wouldn't have a carrer in the film buissiness. he should praise the lord every waking day for the rest of his life.

Err he was already balding when he got on tv and noticibly so when he made his 1st movie. :whistle:

http://filmdaze.files.wordpress.com/201 ... ehard.jpeg

This is a NW1????

 

[slipy]

didn't loose it that early meaning he wasn't severely balding in his early 20's like seb or hpm. sure he had hair loss. but his case wasn't a rapid one as he held on to Norwood 2,5 - 3 teritorry for years and apparently general public was willing to tolerate that level of hair loss. not sure how it'd be these days.

 

[s.a.f]

He was'nt famous either in his early 20's and yeah no bald/balding guy could ever possibly become famous these days could they?

- (well apart from Jason Statham, Patrick Wilson ect)

I guess the 90's must've had a severe shotage of actors so Hollywood was forced to employ a few balding guys.

 

[slipy]

im not saying you're obliged to have a perfect Norwood 1.
for example Jude Law circa 1999 - 2007. now it's worse but he's still seen as A list , because he has long since established his name as such.

the degree of hair loss is of importance when youre just an upcomer.

 

[seb]

Imagine Freddy Kruger with hair....just wouldnt work would it.