Reply With Quote
Old enough for me.
She looks good to me. On the cover with no make-up or air brushing.
I'd hit it!
Old enough for me.
I think she actually has makeup on in the cover. The pics inside the mag are the ones that are supposedly no makeup...
There's certainly isn't a large amount of photoshopping on the cover shot. Makeup of no, or even very little, it's damn hard to look at yourself in a closeup shot and not demand photoshopping to be done. Credit to her, to an extent. Pretty brave.
lets hope she didnt go all natural
You are right Kori. I do like less make-up on all women. Kuddos to her.
When the lights go out...who cares...I'm sure she is sexual napalm. She'd make me explode.lets hope she didnt go all natural
probably smells like one too
Ooooo...oooooo....that smell!!
I call bull .
Less makeup? Sure.
No makeup? No.
I'd still tear it up.
The softer, less make up look suits her well.
I remember that photoshoot Jamie Lee Curtis did years back when she debunked the make up and airbrushing. She wore her own underwear---granny panties, and the gown they were shooting her in was duct-taped closed in the back
She looks fine and I'll admit that I look like a corpse without makeup.
Col. Bill Kilgore don't give a about makeup. Oh, and another thing, CHARLIE DON'T SURF!
Looks better without all the makeup and airbrush bull .
She's a natural beauty, and looks better when playing that to advantage by using little makeup in neutral/fresh tones (peaches, pinks, glosses, browns). I'm glad someone pointed out the inner pictures, because I was gonna say she's definitely wearing at least mascara in the cover picture . . .
i'm sure she's wearing makeup that makes her look like she's not wearing makeup...
I actually saw her up close when she came to my base to do a promo/Q&A with the troops after the release of Dukes of Hazzard (Stiffler and Johnny Knoxville were there too).
I gotta say after seeing her up close...I wasn't that impressed. It's hard to explain, but I just didn't realize how pe e she was. She's 5'2 tops and maybe weighs 95lbs. It sort of put her usually big features (you know what I'm saying) into perspective and the outcome was a bit disappointing.
Don't get me wrong, she's still a beautiful girl. But, I was definitely surprised by what I saw...or more aptly, didn't see.
Pe e and with a nice rack is great.
Wasn't really impressed by the rack actually, which is kind of my point. Her dad said they were DDs, but I seriously doubt it.
Natural look is waayyy better than all the make up.
totally agree.. i've always insisted on dating girls that look good without make up, it's much better when you wake up attracted to them rather than waiting an hour and a half
She absolutely has make-up on. She has the same type of skin I do. I'd die to have my face look like that "without make-up on."
I cannot remember what magazine it was, maybe Kori can help me out, a few years back, that had celebs pose in it "without make-up" it was total BS. They just made them look like they didn't have make-up on. Because Jessica Simpson does not look like Kim does without make-up on.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
