Get your fill of sci-fi, science, and mockery of stupid ideas
http://stardestroyer.dyndns-home.com/
OMFG I'm not the first to mention her!!!Peregrin Toker wrote:Nanako Matsushima: (best known as Reiko, the main character of Ringu)
Can't you see the way plastic surgery has wrecked her totally? Chain smoking probably hasn't helped either...Stormbringer wrote:Ghastly? Are you on crack? Granted a couple of those pictures are not particularly flattering but she's still a fine looking woman, especially at her age. I'd do her in a heart beat.Peregrin Toker wrote:If you mean Nicole Kidman as she looked when she was younger, you might have a point. Today, though, she looks pretty damn ghastly.
I don't understand it either... with natural redheads being so rare and natural blondes so common (well, in Denmark at leastStofsk wrote:I don't think she's ghastly, but I do wonder why she dyed her hair blond. Fucking hell, there's NOTHING wrong with redheads.
), then why would any natural redhead bleach her hair like that?Oh my God... it's a skinny female Dick Cheney!!salm wrote:kidman is gruesome. check out her eyes in the pictures in which she´s smiling. cover her mouth with your finger. the eyes don´t look like she´s smiling. the eyes look like they want to rip you off.
she´s got the eyes of a politician.
Peregrin Toker wrote:She wouldn't be that pretty in that Chanel commercial if an army of make-up artist hadn't dolled her up beyond recognition.
Yeah, that probably applies to most of the people mentioned here... however, here, we have pictures of her in full make-up where she still looks hideous in spite of it. That implies that something is wrong.Crown wrote:Peregrin Toker wrote:She wouldn't be that pretty in that Chanel commercial if an army of make-up artist hadn't dolled her up beyond recognition.
HAhhahahahhahahahahahhahahahaha!
In a thread about movie stars I found that statement to be highly ironic!
Sure, this is the one I know about; 43MB *right click save as. It's 2mins long, the pic quality is good, but the sound quality isn't too crash hot.Peregrin Toker wrote:Yeah, that probably applies to most of the people mentioned here... however, here, we have pictures of her in full make-up where she still looks hideous in spite of it. That implies that something is wrong.
Anyway, is there anywhere that commercial is up for download?
My god, she's got a bad picture or two. Personally, aside from that first one she doesn't look bad, just normal for a woman her age. As for the last one, have some jackass jam a camera in your face and we'll see how well you photograph. I still think she's a fine looking woman.Peregrin Toker wrote:Can't you see the way plastic surgery has wrecked her totally? Chain smoking probably hasn't helped either...
<Snip>
She's certainly not the most beautiful actress around - Uma Thurman and Amanda Tapping are both roughly the same age as Ms. Kidman and much prettier.
Darth Wong wrote:To elfdart: so you're one of those Internet geeks who dismissively puts down the appearance of women because they don't look exactly the same 10 to 15 years later, eh? Grow up. I'm sick of posing jackoffs on the Internet who have these incredibly lofty standards for womens' appearances. Everyone who deviates even slightly from your standard is immediately classified as a walking disaster
Try reading what I wrote before flaming me in such a moronic manner. I said that even after losing weight, she still looked good. As I wrote before, I don't think it's aging. Monica Bellucci is several years older, for example. But Connelly did lose a lot of weight to the point where she was looking unhealthy and quite a few people thought she got a breast reduction operation. Her own publicist admitted she had lost a lot of weight and insisted she was putting some back on. So it's not just my opinion, but also the opinion of the interviewer for Vanity Fair. So I guess they're just "Internet geeks" and "posing jackoffs". You putz.Darth Wong wrote:To elfdart: so you're one of those Internet geeks who dismissively puts down the appearance of women because they don't look exactly the same 10 to 15 years later, eh? Grow up. I'm sick of posing jackoffs on the Internet who have these incredibly lofty standards for womens' appearances. Everyone who deviates even slightly from your standard is immediately classified as a walking disaster
Um, Mike, if you're referring to the Nicole Kidman discussion, that Peregrin Toker. If you're referring to Jennifer Connelly, I said virtually the exact same thing about her. She didn't just look thin, she seriously looked like she'd developed an eating disorder or was on cocaine. There's a difference between "she's thinner than I prefer; I liked her better before she lost the weight", which is where she is now that's she's gained some of it back, and "she looks like she has an intestinal parisite", which is where she was.Darth Wong wrote:To elfdart: so you're one of those Internet geeks who dismissively puts down the appearance of women because they don't look exactly the same 10 to 15 years later, eh? Grow up. I'm sick of posing jackoffs on the Internet who have these incredibly lofty standards for womens' appearances. Everyone who deviates even slightly from your standard is immediately classified as a walking disaster
Oh wow, so people in the most superficial business in the world said she lost weight, and this validates your claim that you're not being over-critical? Puh-lease. Don't be a fucking idiot. Have you ever seen what people with real eating disorders look like?Elfdart wrote:Try reading what I wrote before flaming me in such a moronic manner. I said that even after losing weight, she still looked good. As I wrote before, I don't think it's aging. Monica Bellucci is several years older, for example. But Connelly did lose a lot of weight to the point where she was looking unhealthy and quite a few people thought she got a breast reduction operation. Her own publicist admitted she had lost a lot of weight and insisted she was putting some back on. So it's not just my opinion, but also the opinion of the interviewer for Vanity Fair. So I guess they're just "Internet geeks" and "posing jackoffs". You putz.Darth Wong wrote:To elfdart: so you're one of those Internet geeks who dismissively puts down the appearance of women because they don't look exactly the same 10 to 15 years later, eh? Grow up. I'm sick of posing jackoffs on the Internet who have these incredibly lofty standards for womens' appearances. Everyone who deviates even slightly from your standard is immediately classified as a walking disaster
Yes, but Elfdart is doing the same thing.Stormbringer wrote:Psst, don't you mean Peregrin Toker?Darth Wong wrote:To elfdart: so you're one of those Internet geeks who dismissively puts down the appearance of women because they don't look exactly the same 10 to 15 years later, eh? Grow up. I'm sick of posing jackoffs on the Internet who have these incredibly lofty standards for womens' appearances. Everyone who deviates even slightly from your standard is immediately classified as a walking disaster
His critisism was fairly moderate. Not over the top, unlike you at the moment.Darth Wong wrote:Oh wow, so people in the most superficial business in the world said she lost weight, and this validates your claim that you're not being over-critical?
Did he say she was comparable to a person with a real eating disorder? Even if he did, I'm sure it wasn't serious.Puh-lease. Don't be a fucking idiot. Have you ever seen what people with real eating disorders look like?
Because in the olden days, they used plastic for titty implants.Vympel wrote: Why's it called plastic surgery anyway?