The Dillon Brothers: A Study in Hotness
June 16, 2006 3:49 AM   Subscribe

why is matt dillon so much better looking than kevin dillon?

look, for some people this contention may be up for debate. for thoe rest of us, however, it's clear matt dillon is way better looking than kevin dillon. how come? they both have good physiques, facial symmetry, and the same genetic stock. so what is it about matt that's way sexier?
posted by Hat Maui to Technology (28 answers total) 5 users marked this as a favorite
He's more popular.
posted by fire&wings at 3:55 AM on June 16, 2006

Matt has a better nose and browline.
posted by Alison at 4:22 AM on June 16, 2006

Your question intrigues me. Kevin Dillon has a snout-ish (too much nostril) nose, weird, beady eyes, and kind of a receding chin. He's not an ugly man, though. Not classically handsome or anything, but meh. I don't find Matt Dillon particularly good-looking either...he has a oddly-shaped head, and ugly ears. But of the two, Matt is definitely the one who swam in the more generous side of the gene pool.

Also, eyebrows. Matt's are much nicer than Kevin's. Eyebrows are really important.

I've always been way more flummoxed by the Dennis/Randy Quaid situation.
posted by iconomy at 4:23 AM on June 16, 2006

Kevin Dillon keeps his head too narrow. Until he cuts that out, I can't help him. He has to want to change.
posted by dong_resin at 4:24 AM on June 16, 2006

Consider also Jeff and Beau Bridges.
posted by davidmsc at 4:48 AM on June 16, 2006

Both their heads are too long, but Kevin's more so. Plus his beard is yucky. Neither are my cup of tea. This is very subjective.
posted by b33j at 4:51 AM on June 16, 2006

This could also be classified as the Tom Cruise/William Mapother question.
posted by MsMolly at 5:31 AM on June 16, 2006

except of course that matt and kevin dillon have the same parents, whereas cruise and mapother do not.
posted by Hat Maui at 5:37 AM on June 16, 2006

Did anybody mention symmetry yet?
posted by box at 5:54 AM on June 16, 2006

If they were twins, I could understand the question. But they aren't (or maybe they are, I have no idea). It isn't like they have the exact same features, yet one looks attractive with them the other doesn't.

Isn't it typical for one sibling to be attractive while the other one isn't? Look at Jessica Simpson and her sister. Or . . well, I can't think of another example. Each kid gets a different combination of features, it is just luck of the draw.
posted by necessitas at 6:12 AM on June 16, 2006

And, coincidentally, both Kylie and Danni Minogue look like fucking freaks.

In answer to your question, Matt Dillon is hotter simply by comparison. Two traffic accidents side by side and the other one is just less tragic.
posted by slimepuppy at 6:17 AM on June 16, 2006

Matt started his career as a bad-ass troubled teen who nailed Kristy McNichol. Kevin started his as a dorky bully who couldn't steal a girl from Andrew McCarthy - ANDREW McCARTHY! That kind of stigma can stick with a guy. Matt Damon could have suffered the same fate if he kept taking the same roles as the one he had in School Ties. How good looking an actor is has nothing to do with their actual looks and much more to do with the roles they play and their perception in public.
posted by any major dude at 6:53 AM on June 16, 2006

Where beauty was once an abstract idea about sausage smuggling passed down from the Greeks, it turns out that the Golden Ratio figures prominently into aesthetic appeal.

It's not just symmetrical features or clear skin. What matters also, at a fundamental level, is the ratio of cheek to eye height, the ratio of cheek width and height, the ratio of the nose width and height, etc. and that these overall ratios come close to this Golden Ratio.

If we look at pictures of Matt and Kevin Dillon, we might more precisely see why Matt is cuter:

Now let's take a look at Kevin:

Kevin's eyes, nose and mouth are more "squeezed" into the center of his face, his eyes are further apart from each other than normal, and he has a larger-than-usual chin.

On the other hand, Matt's features are fully balanced and proportional, from the distance of the eyes to the tips of the ears, the ratio of the width of the eyes to the width of the face, etc.

Frankly, the mathematics makes it blatantly obvious that Matt is a hotty, while Kevin is a stone-cold garden troll.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 6:54 AM on June 16, 2006 [3 favorites]


Matt has (in order of degree of difference) a much better jawline, better eyes, better brows, and better nose. Worse ears.
posted by callmejay at 7:12 AM on June 16, 2006

[a few comments removed, take it to metatalk or yahoo answers if you want to gab about celebrities]
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 7:24 AM on June 16, 2006

Taking the photos that I had linked to in my previous comment, and placing Kevin's features where Matt's were, and Matt's where Kevin's were, we see that balance and symmetry definitely play a part in attractiveness, but also that Matt just simply has better features to begin with. When Matt's features are placed exactly where Kevin's are, he is still better looking, and when Kevin's features are placed over Matt's, Kevin gets a definite upgrade. These are truly Frankensteinish photoshop jobs, but you get the idea. Even with the squished face, high forehead, and long chin, Matt is still better-looking. And now Kevin looks more like he's related to Ethan Hawke than Matt Dillon!

posted by iconomy at 7:58 AM on June 16, 2006 [1 favorite]

How good looking an actor is has nothing to do with their actual looks and much more to do with the roles they play and their perception in public.

I put a lot of stock in this idea as well. My wife is attracted to some fairly unconventionally (or not at all) attractive celebrities (Vince Vaughn, Kevin Spacey) because of their screen personas. Incidentally, Tom Cruise does nothing for her.
posted by Terminal Verbosity at 8:05 AM on June 16, 2006

Damn iconomy! I just saw Before Sunrise and thought the same thing! Kevin Dhillon == Young Ethan Hawk
posted by stratastar at 8:10 AM on June 16, 2006

I've hung out with Kevin Dillon a bit on the set of Entourage and he's really, really nice. I can't say the same for Matt. So, um, yeah.
posted by NationalKato at 8:48 AM on June 16, 2006

If Kevin had his lips plumped up and cut his hair much shorter on the sides he'd look better.

I think I just hurt myself.
posted by craniac at 8:56 AM on June 16, 2006

For the sisters version, Melissa Gilbert and Sara Gilbert. Yeah, adoption, I know, but still.
posted by marsha56 at 11:26 AM on June 16, 2006

so NK, you work on Entourage? what do you do?
posted by Hat Maui at 12:24 PM on June 16, 2006

How about Rob Lowe and Chad Lowe? What happened there???
posted by shemacg at 2:07 PM on June 16, 2006

I once read an interview with a photographer who said that Matt Dillon was the only person they'd ever shot who was equally good-looking from either side. So, yeah, symmetry.
posted by goo at 4:29 PM on June 16, 2006

Ben and Casey Affleck are another case.

But really, it's subjective. I'm sure there are people out there that find Kevin, Beau and Casey the more attractive sibling.

Personally, I find Sara more attractive than Melissa.
posted by deborah at 7:38 PM on June 16, 2006

Seconding goo's comment, and box's earlier about symmetry. Matt used to work out at a gym where I trained, first thing in the morning. That man looked handsome from every angle, and even at 6:00 AM (when I wasn't especially awake), it was annoyingly apparent.
posted by rob511 at 8:25 PM on June 16, 2006

why is matt dillon so much better looking than kevin dillon?
Good luck?
posted by zackdog at 9:04 PM on June 23, 2006

iconomy, you created the world's first artificial Timothy Hutton! Somewhere, Mary Tyler Moore strokes her lap cat with anticipation of the sadism to come....
posted by maryh at 3:58 AM on October 25, 2006

« Older Umgawa!   |   Florida Everglades Sunrise Newer »
This thread is closed to new comments.