the woman could ACT. She had talent. More, in my opinion, than Meryl Streep (who never lets you forget she's "acting").

you forgot to mention the woman could ACT

From the article: She was a good actress, as her turns in "Extremities" and "The Burning Bed" proved.

Did you just assume they wouldn't mention it since her image is not one of a good actress?

She was not a good actress, The measure of a good actress to some extent...THe effort other talented people will go to work with that person.

She held her own in female victim roles in THE BURNING BED and EXTREMITIES. Who of us didn't feel that she was playing what she knew.

The only other memorable part she had was in the Robert Duval Movie THE APOSTLE...It was a little part and she was adequate.

It is always mysterious and sad when people pass away...but there is no need to inflate the achievements of people. Denigration Meryl Streep to aggrandize Farrah Fawcett is especially nutty.

Farrah's real genius wasn't her big hair or her small titties - or, god forbid, her medicore acting - it was selling the sexy, 70s cokewhore look to middle America. But you fawning kids are probably too young to understand the cultural context here.

And now she's dead.

TOOT TOOT!

(not that we'd wish the same for Megan Fox)

re: "She was a good actress, as her turns in "Extremities" and "The Burning Bed" proved."

About time we stop being embarassed by the 70s. Charlie's Angels was fun. You wanted to act out the action you saw. She was radiant, and inspirin--THERE.

If she hadn't done "Extremities" and "Burning Bed," would you have said, "sure, her radiance and evident love of live in Charlie's Angels charmed a nation into wanting to emulate her, into faling in love with her, but it's too bad she never had a chance to do anything which evidenced her higher/better qualities?"

"Beautiful woman dies". She wasn't perfect, so what, she had an interesting life, had love, money, fame, and success, she became a mother, made good and bad decisions, was decent actress in various roles, made the newbie mistake of thinking success in one area, is transferable to many at the height of one's career, though she survived it. She became a cultural icon of female attractiveness, when one could still achieve it (be allowed it) some what naturally, a simple smile and soft wavy hair, with out the now common place of, over quaffing, multiple plastic surgeries and excessive air brushing. She died a bit too young really, but she is at peace now at any rate. Isn’t that “good enough”?

Best Wishes Farrah. And to the loved ones who knew her best and shall miss her in their lives most, more than those of us who only saw her and didn‘t really know her, but as an icon of beauty, at a moment in time.

The irony of the later Farah is that in her early celebrity, she represented a lighthearted, upbeat sexual image. And make no mistake: in the days of her glory, she wasn't an actress, she wasn't a comedienne. She was a sex symbol. She was, indeed, the sex symbol. As such she seemed to simply dismiss the tough-as-nails, sarcastic, gritty angst ridden qualities of the early 70s, when sex was synonymous with you-pays-your-money-you-takes-your-chances porn, and brough back something of the 1960's healthy-optimistic approach to sex, yet without coming across as a hippy.

I don't agree that she was glamorous. Her style was too earthy for that. Even that mop hair looked so natural, with its tossled, casual quality, though obviously it is not nature that creates such curls.

I don't agree that she was much of an actres, either. She wasn't bad at all. She developed her niche in later years, though I too always got the uncomfortable feeling she was playing herself.

But more than many, many celebrities she had that special magnetism. that star quality that makes you want to look at and know someone, which is very different from giving a great performance, or even being traditionally beautiful, for that matter. She wasn't Streep. She wasn't Monrone. She seemed to create the era she defined: the late 70's easy-going permissiveness. She was one-of-a-kind. Simply put, she was Farah.

My young son was more likely to revere Farrah Fawcett (Angels, pinup poster) than I. But I did respect her work in Burning Bed (and surprisingly not mentioned yet) Small Sacrifices.

Watching her documentary recently, I realized that she was extremely courageous and honest. I applaud her for creating a moving documentary which (as I believe) she hoped would be informational for others. At the end of the movie, I knew she was entering end-days. Fond memory and my best hopes for her in the here-after.

How many people facing what she was facing would choose to spend the time or energy she did filming her struggle with disease? I think she did it just out of a desire to be relevant at the end of her life and to inform. Those seem like awfully good and true motives.

... the author manages to make a tragic event all about her.

Oh, well. It's not such a big deal for all that - her image was that of a shiny, giddy character, so why not have a shiny, giddy obit?

Sad to see the lady go.

Thank you and God Bless.

your last 15 mins are up...Michael Jackson just died and you'll be forgotten quickly...Too bad!!!

Which is kind of the period at the end of the sentence summarizing the last 20 years of her life.

I don't think Walter Cronkite's going to get more than a passing mention.

Those rock hard nipples in her swimsuit photo.

A painful horrific death, and yet people find it necessary to resort to typical blog trash-talk and and poor attempts at humor. Figures.

I was never really a fan, but as I said, a woman has died. RIP