GOWN PICTURE CHAFES ACTOR.

Byline: Peter Hartlaub Daily News Staff Writer

Dustin Hoffman testified Tuesday that a glossy magazine's decision to put his head on a photo of a man in a Richard Tyler silk gown a la ``Tootsie'' wasn't funny, not even close.

In fact, the movie star said it made him look like a has-been, willing to exploit his Oscar-nominated role because he was washed up and needed the money.

Taking the witness stand in his lawsuit against the magazine, Hoffman pointed with disgust to a blowup of Los Angeles magazine's digitally altered photo that was part of a fashion layout.

``It's like a fish in the ocean. The sharks don't bother you unless they think you are wounded,'' Hoffman said.

``That to me signified a wounded career.''

His two hours of testimony highlighted the first day of the federal court trial.

Hoffman sued the magazine and its publisher in April 1997, just a few weeks after the ``Grand Illusions'' fashion layout appeared.

Hoffman claims the magazine ``trivialized'' his beloved ``Tootsie'' character by making readers believe he had re-created the role for an advertorial supplement.

On Tuesday, Hoffman told U.S. District Judge Dickran Tevrizian Jr. the magazine should pay him ``millions of dollars'' for the alleged damage to his reputation.

Later in the day, former Los Angeles magazine editor-in-chief Michael Caruso testified by videotape that the article was clearly meant to be ``humorous.''

Caruso pointed out that other celebrities were altered by computer to wear 1997 fashions in the layout, including several who have been dead for decades.

Hoffman's photo caption read, ``Dustin Hoffman isn't a drag in a butter-colored silk gown by Richard Tyler and Ralph Lauren heels.''

When asked if he was concerned about the actors' reaction to the spread, Caruso said: ``Not particularly. I sort of thought they would get a kick out of it.''

Hoffman clearly didn't.

He sued for violation of rights of privacy, claiming the magazine's decision to digitally alter his photo showed ``reckless disregard for the truth.''

Tevrizian already has refused to dismiss the lawsuit on First Amendment grounds, stating in court papers that the magazine has to prove its article had ``cultural and informational value'' beyond the mere exploitation of Hoffman's name.

Hoffman made it clear that he would never consent to a photo like the one that appeared in Los Angeles magazine.

``If I had seen that picture with another actor on the level of (Robert) DeNiro advertising bathrobes because he wore one in `Raging Bull,' it would signal something to me,'' Hoffman said. ``I would ask, Why would he do that? Does he need the money?''

The 61-year-old actor said it has become more important to protect his reputation because as time goes on the talent of actors is sometimes ``irrelevant'' during casting.

``I know the mind-set in this town, particularly in the last two years. . . . The most important thing is to get an audience in the very first weekend,'' he said.

Hoffman said actors create a negative image for themselves when they appear in commercials and on television.

``It's the perception that your career is in the decline. That you need the money. That you no longer have the opportunities that you had before.''

The lawsuit isn't Hoffman's first legal complaint against a member of the entertainment industry, or even his first involving ``Tootsie.''

Last year, the two-time Oscar winner filed a lawsuit against Columbia Pictures, claiming he is owed more than $1 million in proceeds from the 1982 comedy.

Hoffman was nominated for a best actor Academy Award for ``Tootsie'' and six other films. He won Oscars for two films that dealt with legal battles - ``Kramer vs. Kramer'' and ``Rain Man.''

CAPTION(S):

photo

PHOTO Dustin Hoffman

Not laughing