Which is also a far cry from this, which is an image last used when we last had a Ginnifer Goodwin-dedicated post, back in January of 2011:
And it goes without saying that she looks beautiful in all three of these photos—sans makeup, dressed up to the nines, and with long, flowing hair, but what’s your favorite Ginnifer Goodwin face? Me, I like them all. It’s a fortunate thing for a lady when she can go out without makeup on and look just as lovely as when she’s all done up. What’s your take?
September 25, 2012 at 7:30 am by Sarah
OK, so maybe she has a little of last night’s makeup left over, but we’ll still slap the “Stars Without Makeup” label on there, because there’s just something so cute and natural and appealing about Marion Cotillard. She’s gorgeous, and no amount of makeup (minimal or maximum) can detract from her appearance.
Here’s Marion in the trailer for one of her latest films, Rust and Bone:
Rust and Bone, if you’ll remember, was the film in which we got to see Marion’s fabulous, fabulous tits. Because if you haven’t seen them already, Marion Cotillard’s got some fabulous, fabulous tits. Click here for the NSFW shots of Marion Cotillard’s fabulous, fabulous tits. It’ll make your Thursday a happy one.
September 6, 2012 at 9:30 am by Sarah
So here’s Kelly Osbourne in an airport earlier this week “without makeup.” Again, of course. And I use the quotation marks because though she doesn’t have any “makeup” on, she definitely has some … I don’t know, some THING on her face that’s making her look kind of orange-y and Ooompa Loompa-ish. Or is it jaundice? I don’t know.
One thing is for sure—whatever she does have on her face, it clashes with her lilac hair *horrendously.
*Incidentally, when I typed ‘horrendously’, it seriously came out ‘horrendouchely’, which, of course, is not a real word, but I think I might start using it, because it’s so, so appropriate.
August 3, 2012 at 10:30 am by Sarah
[Image removed on request]
It’s Christina Aguilera! And her creepy, bloat-faced boyfriend, Matthew Rutler, who’s looking, dare I say it, a little worn out. Is Christina keeping him up late at night? Well I don’t know, but one thing is for certain—it’s not pancake makeup that’s keeping him up, whatever that means. It’s a thinly-veiled reference to the fact that Christina—oh my God—has left the building without her customary seventeen layers of acrylic and shimmer powder and polyurethane on, and we should celebrate that, really, because it’s like Christmas in that it happens maybe once a year (twice, if you’re one of those freaks who celebrate Christmas in July).
Can we also talk about how epic the singing competition shows are going to be this year? We’ve got Mariah Carey on ‘American Idol’, Christina Aguilera on ‘The Voice’, and Britney Spears on ‘X-Factor’. Which show do you think’s going to bring in the highest ratings? I mean, I don’t even watch these crap shows and I’m curious to know which of the three is going to blow the other two out of the water.
Who’s going to reign this year?
July 26, 2012 at 7:30 am by Sarah
Isn’t she just gorgeous, folks? And this face is still having sex with Garrett Hedlund. I mean, other parts of her probably are, too, but her face definitely is. Because Garrett Hedlund would be insane not to want to have sex with a face that looks like that—especially without any makeup, too. Simply divine.
Other than appearing out in public without any camouflage on, Kirsten has been busy busy busy promoting her new movie, ‘Bachelorette’. Which sounds like it’s going to be horrible, and also stars James Marsden, which pretty much solidifies any suspicions that this movie might be horrible. ‘Bachelorette’, from IMDB:
Three friends are asked to be bridesmaids at a wedding of a woman they used to ridicule back in high school.
So, in short, it sounds like ‘Bridesmaids’ meets ‘Young Adult‘, only suck. An old write-up in the Huffington Post claims that the movie is going to continue ushering in films (like ‘Bridesmaids’) that have a strong female cast, engaging in “raunchy comedy.” From the Huff Po:
Monday night, the comedy “Bachelorette” premiered at the Sundance Film Festival. Starring Kirsten Dunst, Lizzy Caplan and Isla Fisher as three women who are invited to the wedding of a girl they bullied in high school (Rebel Wilson), the film is a largely unapologetic look at a sex-filled pre-wedding weekend. It’s also one of a number of new films in a growing wave of flicks that feature women catching up to men in the raunch and realism departments.
“I was so pleased to read a script with multiple parts that I would want to play, as opposed to a script that almost goes as far as this one does,” Caplan told The Hollywood Reporter about her first reaction to the script. “You just don’t ever read stuff like this for girls, it’s always boys that get to be these characters.”
The film has drawn comparisons to “Bridesmaids,” the smash hit Kristen Wiig vehicle that also featured a talented female ensemble on a haphazard and often cringe-inducing pre-ceremony odyssey. It was a symbolic bit of happenstance that the “Bachelorette” premiere came on the eve of the announcement of the Academy Award nominations, which saw “Bridesmaids” earn nods for Best Original Screenplay for Wiig and co-writer Annie Mumolo, and Best Supporting Actress for Melissa McCarthy.
“People are just waking up to stuff that I think we knew all along, so thank god for that,” Caplan said, referring to the ability to produce — and market — quality female comedies that feature more debauchery than romance.
You can read the rest of the column at the page on Huffington, but if you’re in agreement with me, you won’t have to. See, ‘Bridesmaids’ was good. Yeah, it broke all sorts of female-led comedies’ molds. It was funny, and it was raunchy, and it was a rare movie in which the female leads weren’t sappy, simpering idiots, seeking love and acceptance from a man who doesn’t want them all that much to begin with. But do we need an entire genre of ‘Bridesmaids’? I don’t really think so. There is such thing as doing something to death, you know, and frankly, as much as I love Kirsten Dunst, she’s no Melissa McCarthy.
Here’s a clip to whet your appetite:
The movie hits theaters September 6th. Are you ready for (more of) this ish?
July 3, 2012 at 12:30 pm by Sarah
Remember how Emily told you guys in yesterday’s very last post that Kanye‘s controlling pretty much everything Kim’s doing with her look lately? Because it’s true, and he’s definitely rubbing off on her (and I mean that in every sense conceivable). See this photo? This is actually Kim Kardashian on her way to the gym without makeup, and For Real No Makeup, not “Teehee! No makeup!” like she blows her Twitter feed all up with.
Also, it’s been brought to my attention that—aww, poor baby—Kim’s not exactly comfortable in her own skin. Nope, during a recent interview, she claims that she’s not always comfortable. From People, Kim Kardashian when asked if she feels comfortable in her own skin:
“… No, I’m such a perfectionist. I don’t think I’m ever really comfortable.”
Which is, you know, a complete and utter departure from her People interview back in 2009, where she said she’s always comfortable in her own skin. Yeah, I don’t know either. From the 2009 interview:
“I realized I felt good. I wasn’t as insecure as I’ve always been. I’m comfortable in my own skin.”
I don’t know, friends. I mean, she just sounds so unsure. And that makes me feel unsure, too. Because the only thing that holds full with absolute certainty in this situation is that Kim Kardashian is a tool. And so is her boyfriend. Case closed.