• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Wow Jennifer Aniston Is Now Not Attractive To Me...

S

SVT Cobra

Lifer
Like it matters, but i was in barns and Noble last night and I see on this magazine her...It is on the new issue of GQ...she has no top and really loose but really short jeans sitting down, half lying, with just her arm covering her. you can go google it, but do not post pics of it here it will probably get the thread locked....


Anyway it looks extremely unnatural and she looks disgustingly skinny, and the tight jean shorts that are probably size 0 are extrmely loose on her....

I was reading another magazine cover in Wal-Mart later and it jus said Jennifer Aniston's Breakout Cover, The Cover That Stunned The World, I guess because its so close to nudity, but I think it did just the opposite for me...

Seriously go google it before you make any posts about stfu you n00b you don't have a chance with her anyway so who are you to judge her....Well i can still judge her as a guy who looks at magazines and her small body/torso with other disproportional things are very unappealing...I almost feel sorry for her because she was always very good looking before...

Edit: pics...its an MSNBC article so it can't be that bad...
Text
 
Originally posted by: Son of a N00b
Originally posted by: Cooler
um pics?
Click to expand...

um did you read the thread I just posted two seconds ago...I cannot, certain threads last night were locked with pics much more "apropriate" then this...
Click to expand...
thanks for info
 
I googled it, I don't think it's disgusting, I don't think it's her most flattering picture but it's definately not bad.
The pose is a bit awkward because it looks like she's trying to stir the soup with her shorts on, it just makes it look like her hands fade to nothing.
I don't think it's a bad picture of her, but it could be better.

Plus you have to factor in that this is GQ magazine. It's their job to make people look good. They probably use a little liquify tool on her tummy, among other Photoshopping that they did to that picture. Don't lose your faith in the hotness of Jennifer Aniston



<--- Advertising Photography Major.
 
Originally posted by: hpkeeper
I googled it, I don't think it's disgusting, I don't think it's her most flattering picture but it's definately not bad.
The pose is a bit awkward because it looks like she's trying to stir the soup with her shorts on, it just makes it look like her hands fade to nothing.
I don't think it's a bad picture of her, but it could be better.

Plus you have to factor in that this is GQ magazine. It's their job to make people look good. They probably use a little liquify tool on her tummy, among other Photoshopping that they did to that picture. Don't lose your faith in the hotness of Jennifer Aniston



<--- Advertising Photography Major.
Click to expand...

oh thank god, because right now the more you look at it the worse it gets, it looks like two odd sized bubbles sticking out of a toothpick...
 
Her Rolling Stone photos back in the late 90's when Friends first went big were much, much better.
 
Originally posted by: HotChic
She looks like an abused farm kid hiding from daddy...
Click to expand...
How would you know what ones of those looked like? I have to tell you that when I try to picture that the last thing that comes to my mind is that image of Jen.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top