Roots gracing the cover of In Style magazine is an international thing, I guess. I previously bitched about the US Uma Thurman Cover. But at least with Uma, it was only the roots that bothered me. Here's what is wrong with this cover:
1) They choose the fugliest person on the planet to helm their cover. I'd like to know what magazine editor's convention Dr. Sunken Tits slept her way through. First she gets on Blackwell's best dressed list (wa huh?), and then after Elizabethtown and Wimbledon flopped, she's still getting magazine covers.
2) They didn't airbrush out the roots the same way they airbrushed the rest of her features, so she could look remarkably human.
3) Is her hair supposed to look like a wrung up rag draped across her head? It has no shape and erratic texture. If this is their idea of "Glam Hair in a Hurry" - I hope they aren't going anywhere nicer than the supermarket.
4) Including the bitch on the cover, they have 69 Great Bags in this issue.
After the seeing the p-razzi photos over the past few weeks of Dunst, Blackwell is definitely kicking the crap out of himself. It would be great if he could print a recant.
Posted by: Sharp Lily | January 30, 2006 at 07:59 PM
I always wonder about this...they call themselves professionals, they are celebrities...everyday people should not be noticing these obvious flaws. A damn shame.
Posted by: Tania | January 30, 2006 at 08:14 PM
"They choose the fugliest person on the planet to helm their cover."
To the person who writes this garbage:
Are you blind or just unbelievably stupid?
I find it amusing that you have to undermine other peoples' appearances to compensate for what is probably just pure envy. I bet you've got a face not even a mother would love.
Kirsten Dunst is absolutely gorgeous and millions of girls would probably KILL to look half as pretty.
And roots are cool. So THERE!
Posted by: Sarah | February 21, 2007 at 06:33 AM
Goodness I thought I was the only one who noticed those sunken boobs. And the teeth.
Posted by: JJ | June 17, 2007 at 07:09 AM
YOURE A BITCH
Posted by: hi | April 20, 2009 at 10:41 PM
Good grief, "fugliest"? Kirsten Dunst is beautiful.
It's a damn shame that you have a platform to spew hatred from, even if it's a only a shit blog that nobody likes.
Pathetic.
Posted by: Jen | June 15, 2009 at 02:11 AM
That's great In Style Magazine. She look so pretty in this post. Thank you for sharing this.
Posted by: HAIR EXTENSION | October 22, 2010 at 04:39 AM
hahaha what can I say about kirsten... I guess magazines usually made wrong choise, getting a photo of some "celebrities" that for me are just stupid people that like to be famous and act in public how the society tell them to, very sad...
Posted by: buy generic cialis | April 06, 2011 at 09:14 AM