Entertainment
Fashion model Peggy Moffitt has died
Peggy Moffitt, the L.A. fashion model whose Harlequin-like makeup and mime-inspired poses set her apart during the fashion free-for-all of the 1960s, has died at her home in Beverly Hills. She was 86.
Seemingly never out of vogue, Moffitt died Saturday from complications of dementia, her son, Christopher Claxton, told the New York Times.
As the muse of avant-garde designer Rudi Gernreich, she helped convey the futuristic themes of his collections with her unconventional style. She was known for her striking appearance, which included a mask-like white complexion, extended black lashes, black or bright colored eye shadows and an occasional sprinkling of daisies, teardrops or silver triangles on her cheeks.
Her haircut, a short geometric shape by Vidal Sassoon, added to her stylized look, which became an embodiment of the ’60s. She maintained the look long after her modeling career ended.
Moffitt caused a fashion sensation in 1964 when she posed in a topless swimsuit Gernreich designed. It was a racy variation on a schoolboy’s shorts, with suspenders rising between the cleavage. The suit was condemned by the Vatican, the Kremlin and the governments of the Netherlands, Denmark and Greece.
“I agreed to do it only when I finally believed that Rudi wasn’t exploiting me,” Moffitt said. “There really was a message and that message was ‘freedom.’”
Moffitt struck a shy schoolgirl pose before the camera as her husband, William Claxton, a well-known commercial photographer, took the picture in their living room. Several magazines requested something less revealing and Claxton took a second image, this time from the back. One or the other photograph appeared in newspapers and magazines around the world.
The following year, 1965, Moffitt posed in another bold Gernreich invention, a sheer “no-bra” with minimal structure that defied the padded underwear of the 1950s.
“In those days if a model was photographed in lingerie, that was it, she was definitely B-team,” Moffitt told the London Independent newspaper in an interview in 1992.
Richard Avedon, a top photographer for Vogue magazine, was hired to take the picture and Moffitt agreed to pose. “My teenage dream was to have a swimming pool and to work with Avedon every day,” she later confessed.
Her early modeling risks paid off. During Gernreich’s comet ride through fashion’s memorable decade, Moffitt was the free spirit at his side.
“Peggy Moffitt was the epitome of the muse,” said Patty Fox, a former fashion director for Saks Fifth Avenue. “Someone who not only inspired a certain designer but was identified with his work and became a lifelong friend.
“You can’t compare her to supermodels,” Fox said. “They are classically beautiful. She had a look. She created it and stayed with it, something more artificial than natural. She pushed it over the top.”
Moffitt’s distinctive appearance and manner made strong impressions.
“I was told I couldn’t model by every tacky editor and photographer in the world,” Moffitt told author Joel Lobenthal for his book “Radical Rags: Fashions of the Sixties.” Moffitt‘s answer was that she wanted to invent a new way of modeling that raised “the possibility of it being a new art form.”
In carefully planned fashion shows, she changed her attire to suggest first a “Japanese school girl,” then a “Chinese opera star,” among other roles.
“I entertained myself and the audience by regarding the collection as a play, with each outfit a new act or a new character,” Moffitt wrote in “The Rudi Gernreich Book,” which she and Claxton released in 1991. “That meant … drama, jokes, tension and slapstick. I really didn’t model the clothes so much as perform them.”
By the mid-1960s her face and Gernreich’s fashions were inseparable. “We were like Tweedledum and Tweedledee, Gilbert and Sullivan, ham and eggs,” she said. They hardly bothered to explain new ideas to each other. “We just knew,’’ Moffitt said. “We became one entity.”
Born in Los Angeles in 1937, the only child of film reviewer and writer Jack Moffitt, Moffitt traced her interest in extreme fashion and makeup to her high school years at the Marlborough School in Los Angeles. Students were required to wear uniforms and forbidden to wear lipstick. ‘’Perhaps therein lies the key to what came next,” she told the Independent in 1992.
At 17, she worked after school at Jax, a Rodeo Drive boutique that carried designer brand clothes including some by Gernreich. But she planned to be an actress, not a fashion model. She graduated from school and went to New York City, where she studied acting at the Neighborhood Playhouse for two years. Back in Los Angeles she got small parts in several movies, including “You’re Never Too Young” with Jerry Lewis in 1955 and “The Birds and the Bees” with David Niven and Mitzi Gaynor in 1956.
She met Claxton when he was on assignment photographing an actor friend of hers. They were engaged within a few months and married within the year.
Gernreich, Moffitt and Claxton worked to create fashion photographs that were instantly identified with Gernreich’s designs. One of the best known shows Moffitt wearing a stretch knit swimsuit with fencer’s visor and tall boots. In another she wears a mini-dress with clear vinyl stripes that expose bits of her midriff and thigh. The white seamless background in the photos kept the attention on Gernreich’s creations and Moffitt’s evocative poses.
She continued testing new ways to mix fashion and theater. “I’ve got 47 seconds to knock them into Peggy-land,” Moffitt told The Times in 1967. She had recently modeled in a fashion show that ended with her playing mad Ophelia from Shakespeare’s “Hamlet.” Dressed in a mini-wedding dress by Gernreich, she entered mumbling and staring and ended by screaming as she ran out of the room. “I’m a Method actress at heart,” she explained.
Her modeling style didn’t set trends but Twiggy, London’s waif-like teenage supermodel, credited Moffitt with influencing her. “She taught me how much more a model puts into her work than just a pretty face,” Twiggy wrote in “Twiggy: An Autobiography.” “She consciously controlled the sort of shape she presented to the camera.”
Moffitt admitted her close association with Gernreich came with its limitations. “People thought we were joined at the hip,” she told the Independent in 1992. “It was essential to separate from time to time.”
In the mid-1960s Moffitt and Claxton began spending more time in Europe than Los Angeles. He had photography assignments in London and Paris. She modeled and got a small part in “Blow Up,” the 1966 film classic about the British modeling scene, directed by Michelangelo Antonioni.
In the early 1970s they returned to Los Angeles where their only child, Christopher, was born. Moffitt is survived by her son. Claxton died in 2008.
She continued working with Gernreich. That, and her distinctive appearance, limited her options. When Gernreich died in 1985, Moffitt quit the fashion scene.
Decades after she first posed in Gernreich’s styles, the A-line minidresses of that time made a fashion comeback. Moffitt said in interviews that she hoped to find investment partners, reproduce Gernreich’s designs and put her name on the label with his.
“I said to the trademark office that my physicality is representative of Rudi in the way that Mickey Mouse represents Walt Disney,” she explained in a 1998 interview with Vanity Fair magazine.
Even late in life, Moffitt never stopped wearing Gernreich’s designs. She owned more than 300 pieces, some of which were featured in 2012’s “The Total Look,” an exhibition at the Museum of Contemporary Art at the Pacific Design Center, which explored her creative collaboration with Gernreich.
She owned the legal rights to all of the late designer’s creations and had hoped to relaunch the Gernreich brand.
“That I am still wearing his clothes 50 years later is as good a recommendation for someone’s talent as any,” she told The Times in 2013. “The times have changed, but his clothes still hold up for the way we live today.”
Movie Reviews
Movie Review: Travolta’s “Propeller: One-Way Night Coach” is One for the Ages — All Ages
Back in the good ol’days — the ’90s — John Travolta would love to get off the topic of “Michael,” “Pulp Fiction” or “Get Shorty” in interviews with film journalists like me and regale us with how utterly besotted he had been with his first flying experience, how that drove his passion for piloting and buying planes and airfield-adjacent luxury houses.
He didn’t even seem to mind having to move house when this or that development balked at him flying his Boeing 707 out of there on the way to locations.
Travolta would tell any journalist who asked that he was writing a kid-friendly book, “Propeller: One Way Night Coach,” based on his first flights as a child in old propeller driven airliners — cheap red-eye overnight treks with too many connections for your average jet age traveller to tolerate.
I remember picking up the book when it came out later in the ’90s — at an airport gift shop — and thinking “Well, that’s as cute as I figured.”
And now, decades later and trapped in the B-movie hell of his post “Gotti” career, Travolta’s turned that cute book into the most delightful, fanciful and colorful bon bon of a movie.
“One Way Night Coach” is a child’s fantasy of flight and flying the way it used to be — with pristine, uncrowded, futuristic airports, an early ’60s era of jets and prop planes with over-uniformed stewardesses in white gloves, the days “Back before every Joe Sweatsock could wedge himself behind a lunch tray and jet off to Raleigh-Durham,” as Sideshow Bob memorably sneered on “The Simpsons’.”
It’s a fictionalized account of Travolta’s childhood about an only child (at least two Travolta siblings have bit parts in this movie) of a never-made-it/never-will actress/single-mom (Kelly Eviston-Quinnett) who indulges her aviation-obsessed eight-year-old with a cheap cross-country overnight flight.
Little Jeff (Clark Shotwell) will revel in almost every Idlewild to Pittsburgh to Dayton to Chicago to Kansas City to Denver and Los Angeles minute. He strolls into the cockpit to meet pilots, charms the stewardesses and checks out the sleeping bunks on the TWA Lockheed Super Constellation, loving even the delays if not the Chicken Cordon Bleu he’s offered on legs of the journey that offer a meal.
And as he’s an observant child, he comments (Travolta narrates) on his 50ish mother’s vamping and posing, her choice of cigarettes (Newports) and drinks, the solo traveling men whose attention she pursues and earns.
“I was her best audience,” adult Jeff remembers of the mother who’d read him plays as bedtime stories and delusionally hopes that this trip to Los Angeles might be her “big break” even though she’s pushing 50.
“Hollywood called,” she’d explain about their overnight cheap flight arrangements to ticket agents and crew. “They told me to take the next flight!”
At every turn, Jeff meets or sees kindness — stewardesses who indulge his many questions and bump them up to first class on the mostly-empty planes, a captain who fixes his toy model of a Constellation, a mentally ill flyer who flips out but is calmed by a flight attendant who isn’t overworked and frazzled in jet-powered tin-can jammed with Joe and Jane Sweatsocks who think nothing of traveling in their pajamas.
Normally, I cringe at pictures this reliant on voice-over narration. I recoil from stars who populate their picture with Sandler etc. offspring. But “Propeller” is unfailingly sweet and never cloying.
Sure, it’s fictionalized. But if you’ve followed Travolta’s life and career, a lot of him is in this — his raptoruous engagement with flying, an indulged child who developed a taste for fine food and creature comforts, a mother who was his guiding star as an actor.
I get why there are less adoring reviews than mine floating around “Propeller.” It’s unfailingly sweet. Mom’s man-hunting is seriously dated. This TWA tale is decorated with Gershwin’s majestic “Rhapsody in Blue” — United Airlines’ signature tune. And Travolta’s been around long enough for recent generations to come up and not feel a connection to the “Saturday Night Fever/Get Shorty” star whose career has fallen off and life has been visited by too much tragedy.
But I’d hate to be seated next to anybody who doesn’t appreciate this adorable, pristine and nearly perfect aviation fantasy on any flight, much less an overnight one.
Rating: TV-PG
Cast: Clark Shotwell, Kelly Eviston-Quinnett, Ellen Travolta, Ella Beau Travolta, Olga Hoffmann and John Travolta.
Credits: Scripted and directed by John Travolta, based on his book. An Apple TV+ release.
Running time: 1:01
Entertainment
After ‘Barbie’ success, Mattel looks to He-Man for another box-office lift
Three years ago, Mattel Inc. struck box-office gold — or rather, pink — with the billion-dollar success of “Barbie.”
In its first return to theaters since the female-forward phenomenon, the El Segundo toymaker is turning to the brawny He-Man for another box-office lift.
Its latest film, “Masters of the Universe,” opens this weekend, as Mattel looks to build on that previous success and continue extending its signature toy brands into the entertainment arena.
“The movie is very much in tune with culture,” said Mattel Chief Executive Ynon Kreiz. “Everything is much more contemporary relative to what was created more than 40 years ago, but it’s still very true to the origin story and to the DNA of the brand.”
The new film arrives at a pivotal time for Mattel, which is facing pressure from investors to grow its business. The maker of Hot Wheels, American Girl and Uno has recently confronted a challenging market for toys, beset by tariffs on goods produced overseas and weaker-than-expected demand for Barbie dolls and Fisher-Price preschool products.
Amid uncertainty in the toy market and the fallout from tariffs, Mattel’s net income dropped 25% to $398 million in 2025. And since the company announced disappointing holiday sales totals in February, its stock has dropped more than 30%, closing at $14.34 on Wednesday.
“Masters of the Universe” toys at Mattel headquarters in El Segundo.
(Myung J. Chun / Los Angeles Times)
The share price slide prompted investor Southeastern Asset Management to send a letter last month to Mattel leadership suggesting the toy maker should sell itself and go private. Southeastern manages about 4% of the company’s stock on behalf of its clients.
“The frustration among investors has been the fact that if you look at the business from 2021 through 2025 and even this year … the business really hasn’t grown,” said Eric Handler, a Roth Capital senior media and entertainment analyst, referring to Mattel. “This is a company that needed something fresh in the portfolio, and there’s a wide range of investments being made, of which ‘Masters of the Universe’ is one part.”
Kreiz pushed back on the idea that the company is not growing. In the fourth quarter of 2025, net sales were up 7% to $1.8 billion, though the result was not as strong as the company expected.
Mattel has spent $1.2 billion in the last three years to buy back shares, with an additional $1.5-billion share repurchase planned for the next three years.
“We’re investing in our own stock because we believe it is undervalued,” he told The Times in an interview at his office, which has floor-to-ceiling windows that give an expansive view of El Segundo. “We absolutely agree that the share price doesn’t reflect the progress that we’ve achieved over the last few years financially, operationally, our place in culture, the strength of our brands, and the continued expansion of the business. And more importantly, the potential that we have down the road.”
“Masters of the Universe” is a key variable in that equation.
Ynon Kreiz, chief executive of Mattel.
(Myung J. Chun / Los Angeles Times)
The movie, which had a budget of roughly $170 million, is expected to bring in $25 million to $35 million in the U.S. and Canada during its debut weekend. That’s a far cry from the $162-million opening haul of “Barbie,” but box-office analysts say that film captured the cultural zeitgeist in a way that’s hard to replicate.
The ‘80s-era “Masters of the Universe” is “a property that was famous with a certain group of fans, but it hasn’t had much of a pop culture presence,” said Shawn Robbins, who directs movie analytics at Fandango and founded the forecasting site Box Office Theory. The movie has notched a respectable 74% approval rating from critics on aggregator Rotten Tomatoes.
“There’s been so many callbacks to nostalgic franchises,” he said. “Some people are always on board for them, and maybe the positive reviews bring people in who were on the fence. But people are also ready for something fresh and new and exciting.”
Kreiz said he’s often asked how the company will match the success of “Barbie.”
“The answer is, we don’t need to match ‘Barbie’s’ success for movies to have a meaningful economic impact on the company,” he said. “Not every movie will be ‘Barbie.’ If we create quality content that people want to watch and create quality experiences that people are engaged with, good things happen, and these brands will resonate and will be here for years to come.”
While theatrical revenue is important, the measure of success for “Masters of the Universe” could also include its eventual reception on streaming platforms and, of course, toy sales, analysts said.
There are hundreds of products tied to the movie, from collectible action figures of Nicholas Galitzine’s He-Man and Camila Mendes’ Teela, to branded Uno decks, Legos, clothing and skateboards.
Skeletor from “Masters of the Universe.”
(Myung J. Chun / Los Angeles Times)
“For us, it’s a huge win already,” said Robbie Brenner, president of Mattel Studios and chief content officer, who also served as a producer on the film. “We have reinvigorated and relaunched this brand that has been around for decades … and done it in a way with just the best-in-class toys. Obviously that’s our bread and butter. And then to have made an epic, incredible movie … is a huge win.”
While Mattel does not yet have sales totals for its “Masters of the Universe” toys, executives said during an earnings call in late April that product sales were “growing double digits” amid strong customer demand, particularly from adults.
When Kreiz was named CEO in 2018, he saw the potential for Mattel to expand beyond toys. In an entertainment landscape dominated by known franchises and intellectual property, the former TV and media executive wanted to leverage the company’s IP in new ways to attract consumers.
Hence, Mattel has expanded into real-world experiences such as a Barbie pop-up at Coachella or a traveling Hot Wheels monster truck show. In February, the company fully acquired Mattel163 mobile game studio after buying out a stake held by Chinese tech firm NetEase. The studio has released games based on Uno, Skip-Bo and other Mattel intellectual property.
And on the film and television front, the Mattel Studios division now has 51 people — most of whom are based in El Segundo — focused on projects across platforms.
After “Masters of the Universe,” Mattel Studios plans to release a “Matchbox” streaming movie in October. The division has more than a dozen films in development that have been announced, including an American Girl movie with Paramount, Polly Pocket with Amazon MGM Studios, as well as a live-action Magic 8 Ball series from M. Night Shyamalan.
“The journey for the company was to evolve from being a toy manufacturer that was making items to become an IP company that is managing franchises,” Kreiz said. “It’s not that we’re not creating toys — it’s obviously a big part of our business — but the opportunity is to expand so much more than the physical product.”
“Masters of the Universe” was in development for years at several different studios before it was picked up by Amazon MGM.
That partnership stemmed from Mattel’s work on the “Barbie” movie with Courtenay Valenti, then president of production and development at Warner Bros. Pictures who is now head of film at Amazon MGM.
“Masters of the Universe” felt like a good property for Mattel to bet on because of its nostalgia factor and deep bench of colorful characters, from the green tiger Battle Cat to the heavily armored Ram Man and ever meme-able Skeletor, which the company hopes will attract new audiences, Brenner said.
The movie is directed by Travis Knight — chief executive of stop-motion studio Laika who also led the 2018 “Transformers” spin-off “Bumblebee” — who Brenner said “nailed” the narrative’s tone. (It didn’t hurt that Knight was already a fan of the franchise and had sported the He-Man haircut as a child.)
“It’s a property that’s kind of out there,” said Brenner, who grew up watching He-Man and his twin sister She-Ra. “It’s got all these crazy characters. But just riding that line between what is funny and kind of irreverent and then kind of heartfelt, that is a very hard thing to put in a blender and to get right.”
Movie Reviews
Movie Review: Paul Rudd and Nick Jonas hit the right notes in ‘Power Ballad’
Let’s just say that the wedding band has never occupied the most exalted rung of the ladder in music.
Playing “September” and “Celebration” is often what’s most required. As one member of the Bride and the Groove, the band at the center of John Carney’s new film, puts it: They’re not rock stars. They’re human jukeboxes.
But in “Power Ballad,” a wedding band singer and pop star cross paths. For one night, all of the stratification of the music world falls away. “Power Ballad” starts like a fairy tale.
Since 2007’s “Once,” the Irish writer-director has focused his films on the redemptive capacity of music. Carney, who was once a bassist for the Frames, knows from experience. From “Sing Street” to “Flora and Son,” he has made unabashedly earnest tales where a song, or just picking up an instrument, changes lives.
This can, undoubtedly, lead Carney into sentimental territory. Lucky for him, his chosen subject — music — is more worthy of sentiment than almost anything else. Yet the song doesn’t quite remain the same in “Power Ballad,” a movie that begins with the gentle sweetness Carney is known for, but detours into something more discordant.
Rick (Paul Rudd) is an American musician who gave up on his once-promising rock band’s future to instead live with his wife (Marcella Plunkett) and teenage daughter (a spunky, underused Beth Fallon) in Dublin. His former group was called Octagon, a perfect former band name if there ever were one.
But for years, Rick has fronted the Bride and the Groove. It’s an unromantic day job (or rather a night one) that hasn’t entirely sapped his belief in his own songwriting. During an encore at one wedding, he plays an original tune and is mentally transported to an arena full of swaying fans. When he snaps out of it, he’s staring at an empty dance floor and faces that say: That wasn’t Kool & the Gang.
At another wedding at at a castle, the band is asked to let a friend of the newlyweds sit in. They reluctantly agree, and are surprised to see the very popular boy band veteran, Danny (Nick Jonas), step on stage. He sings Stevie Wonder’s “I Wish,” and it’s great. Though Rick had just dismissed Danny’s music as “manufactured content for young, excitable teens,” he discovers Danny is a genuine musician.
But, later that night, something even more remarkable transpires. Rick bumps into Danny, and the two quickly hit it off. They begin jamming together and sharing songs that need work. They are both so jazzed by their unlikely collaboration that they play into the next morning.
The actual moment of artistic creation, and the craft it requires, is something the movies almost always skip over. But capturing collaborative juices flowing is exactly what Carney excels at. You can feel his joy in it. So it’s fitting that one of the unfinished songs Rick plays for Danny, “How to Write a Song (Without You),” is about creative invention.
It’s here when you wonder where “Power Ballad” is headed. Is this, for Rick, the beginning of a beautiful friendship? Will they turn into the next great songwriting duo, lifting Rick out of weddings and proving to the world that Danny is more than a boy-band pretty face?
That is very possibly the movie Carney might have made a decade ago. But “Power Ballad,” which he co-wrote with Peter McDonald (who also co-stars as a band member), shifts six months ahead in time. Rick is standing in a shopping mall when the familiar lyrics of “How to Write a Song” softly float through the stores. He stands dumbfounded in the gleaming halls of commerce, a befuddlement that slowly turns into outrage the bigger and bigger Danny’s smash hit grows.
“Power Ballad” loses some of its steam in its second half, which follows Rick’s struggle for justice. Making things considerably harder is that he can find no recorded demo of the song. His family and his band don’t even really believe him.
But even as the movie struggles to sustain its opening refrain, Carney’s film is always riffing on ideas of authenticity and aspiration in music. That Jonas is, himself, a former boy band star who has at times gone it alone, lends the movie a direct connection to contemporary music, where tussles over authorship are increasingly common.
Jonas has been good in other films (notably the “Jumanji” movies), but this is his most ambitious and convincing performance to date. It’s a testament to the movie that Danny’s theft isn’t a purely villainous act. He gives the song a bridge and the vocal power to take it to another level. He’s under mounting pressure from his label to deliver a hit. An executive (Jack Reynor) wants “Danny 2.0” but has little faith he can supply it.
But it’s an even more well-tailored role for Rudd. He memorably and very goofily played a bassist in the 2009 comedy “I Love You, Man.” But while he sings well, it’s not his musical chops that lift the performance. It’s more that Rick, a contented family man with unrealized rock-star dreams, gives the exceptionally genial Rudd more notes to play as an actor. Rudd makes for a very likeable everyman out to convince the world he is capable of a beautiful song.
And that’s the abiding belief of Carney’s. No matter all the struggles, the artistic injustices, the corporate hegemony, he still believes that if you make something truly soulful, it will break through. It will claw its way to the surface, and move people. It’s undoubtedly gotten harder since “Once,” this movie seems to admit. The world is against you. But what one person can offer, a ballad or otherwise, still has power. Fairy tale or not, that’s worth believing in.
“Power Ballad,” a Lionsgate release in theaters Friday, is rated R by the Motion Picture Association for “language throughout and some drug use.” Running time: 108 minutes. Three stars out of four.
-
Los Angeles, Ca17 minutes agoOvernight military training brings loud flash bangs, simulated gunfire to quiet Pasadena neighborhood
-
Detroit, MI39 minutes agoDetroit Lions add UDFA rookie WR during OTAs
-
San Francisco, CA47 minutes agoHow to watch San Francisco Giants vs. Milwaukee Brewers
-
Dallas, TX54 minutes ago3 different Cowboys 53-man roster projections pinpoint contested roster spots
-
Miami, FL57 minutes agoJeff Hafley suggests Miami Dolphins entertain Malik Willis Tush Push
-
Boston, MA1 hour agoKaren Read sues the police agencies that investigated her Boston police boyfriend’s death
-
Denver, CO1 hour agoPedestrian dies after hit by car on southbound E-470, Aurora police say
-
Seattle, WA1 hour agoSeattle paying $2.6M to settle sexual harassment lawsuit filed by four female SPD officers – MyNorthwest.com