Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Vintage Magazines' started by moussemaker, Aug 6, 2010.
scan from US Weekly, source thejjb.com
she looks stunning. but why she?????
I'm surprised! She looks so good, beautiful cover!
have to say that she looks really nice
Love the cover! I love Kim so I think I'm biased here. She looks so sensual on the cover.
Uhm, Eva Mendes? Well Kim, really looks spectacularly beautiful here!
So beautiful and yet so worthless. The cover is appealing, but I can't help but wish it was someone other than her...
Beautiful. Looks more like a may or june cover though.
"A head for business and a bod for sin"
I'm surprised by the choice but it's a good cover, aesthetically speaking. I'll leave it at that. Love the tagline though. "Head for business, bod for sin". Sounds like a cheesy Mills & Boon lololol.
that's really pretty...and not completely covered with text!!
I love it. And Kim isn't overused on covers (aside from things like US Weekly and Star) so I don't mind that it's her.
She looks really pretty and natural
Not a fan whatsoever, but Kim looks beautiful. A little too much text around her, but still very nice! Thanks for posting, moussemaker!
She actually looks really pretty and romantic on the cover. But that doesn't answer the question of WHY she's on that cover.
go KIM!!! she is completely stylish & a true icon of pop culture in our current hollywood obsessed age. glad she got the cover. she deserves it.
Monica Bellucci isdatchu
She looks so good and natural
That is one of the best characterizations of her!
Well there's a lot of text around her head but not her boobs , I guess the Allure people are smart enough to know that uncluttered boobs sell better than trying to squeeze the entire table of contents on the cover.
Can she just not go away, what a waste of a cover