Thefrenchy
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 13, 2006
- Messages
- 11,802
- Reaction score
- 659
That first picture made me so uncomfortable.
At least in Terry Richardsons pictures, the women are objectified but are portrayed as powerful and in control.
It's just sad that Lohan would agree to be part of this 'concept'. Clearly, she has no sense of dignity.
At least in Terry Richardsons pictures, the women are objectified but are portrayed as powerful and in control. This editorial however fails to pull this Richardson tongue-in-cheek aesthetic off and Lohan is left objectified and humiliated (at least from my own point of view).
What do you think? Does this shoot work in Lohan's favour or does it objectify her?
1. kate moss never did a threesome photoshoot. when she shot with johnny depp on the bed (by annie liebovitz) she was naked and he was fully clothed. it looked gorgeous, not trashy.
3. conclusion: we will never see lindsay again. thank you jebus.
LINDSAY IS A GODDAMN GENIUS!
Genius is the word I use to describe Lindsay. The same way people love Gisele and the Obamas and love when they have covers... I absolutely HATE them all but many people love them. I love Lindsay and love her on covers. I think she produces some of the best images and, for me personally, some of the most iconic images I have ever seen. I know she hasn't been the sanest person in her past few years but photogenically, she's amazing.Genius is not the word i would use to describe Lindsay , considering what her life has been like for the past couple of years...
What exactly is genius about her getting photographed looking trashy, wasted, haggered and completely unattractive ....
Ha. I love you Lindsay isn't going anywhere anytime soon... As a matter of fact, she will soon be in Purple, so she really isn't going anywhereThe magazine or photographer never mentioned them recreating that shoot. So I don't know why you're even comparing the two shoots
I think this issue just proves her relevancy and how we're going to see A LOT more of her