New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Lindsay Lohan - Page 27

post #781 of 989


Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve_Tk View Post

She's going to be awful by the time she's 35.

If she makes it that long.

post #782 of 989
It's like you're challenging me to post some pictures of Lindsey lookin' good this year... 



(which I would try to do if these darn Elit ads weren't slowing down my HTF browsing to a crawl....)

post #783 of 989
Lindsay enjoyed St. Bart's over New Years...








post #784 of 989
God, I can't even imagine how much this chick smokes.
post #785 of 989
She's an old hag and she's not even in her thirties yet.  Take a run, do some yoga, get some muscle tone.  Kids this is what a diet of no food, cigs and alcohol will get you.  lol
post #786 of 989
Smoking would have no discernable affect on her at this age.  Thats all lack of food and lack of activity. Even alcohol and heavy drug use wouldnt do that to her if she was just active and ate right.  Well unless we are talking meth.
post #787 of 989
 It is creepy and sad watching this girls decline.  It just reminds me so much of my friends daughter.  This girl was very attractive and healthy at 15.  She looked, in fact, a fair bit like Lindsay when she was younger and healthier.  Now, this girl is 17, has her first illegitimate kid, has been arrested for shoplifting and grand theft auto, has dropped out of high school, does nothing but party and get hideous tattoos and then takes hundreds (I mean HUNDREDS) of pictures of herself to post on Facebook.  She looks a lot like Lindsay again, but for all the wrong reasons.  She is a haggard, worn out, trampy looking wreck of a person who is still in massive denial and seems to seek out the worst decisions in life.  Very hard to watch her spiral down and now take a new life with her.

Sorry...off topic, but I just had to share and vent.
post #788 of 989
I find it baffling that some guys still find her hot.
post #789 of 989
I can't say I still find her hot but she does still look hot in certain photos. You don't see those photos very often but when i do see one I am still impressed.
post #790 of 989
I just watched Mean Girls, she looked fabulous in that movie. What a shame.

Not pretty anymore.
post #791 of 989
Herbie was probably the last film she was in decent shape (inside and out).
post #792 of 989
 This is somewhat old news, but I did not see it posted here:

http://www.tv.com/lindsay-lohan-takes-it-off-for-machete/webnews/33417.html



post #793 of 989


Quote:
Originally Posted by TonyD View Post

I just watched Mean Girls, she looked fabulous in that movie. What a shame.

Not pretty anymore.
 


+1  I was just about to write the SAME thing. She was muy caliente in MG..not so much now...

post #794 of 989
Wasn't she also muy underaged in MG?
post #795 of 989
She was 17 when they shot the movie.  Whether or not she was under aged depends on where they happened to be shooting at the time.  Most of the shooting locations were in and around Toronto, where the age of consent was 14 at the time.  (There was some debate awhile back about raising that to 16, but I'm not sure how that turned out.)  Some of the film was shot in New York, where the age of consent was 17.  She was only underage when they were filming in California, where the a-o-c is 18.  (The film was released in May 2004 and she turned 18 that July, so she was probably about a year under age when the cameras were rolling.  Not sure how "muy" that is.)

Regards,

Joe
post #796 of 989

post #797 of 989

post #798 of 989
Who among us would not motorboat those boobies?!
post #799 of 989


Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff Brooks View Post

Who among us would not motorboat those boobies?!

Me. She's repugnant.

post #800 of 989
John is such a downer if the conversation's not all about Anne Hathaway...
post #801 of 989
I'm over Anne.
post #802 of 989
And Lindsay too, apparently! 

Anne gotten too old for you?!? 

post #803 of 989


Quote:
Originally Posted by Inspector Hammer! View Post




Me. She's repugnant.
 
Count me in as well. She is not attractive at all.

post #804 of 989
Just because it is still fun to talk about her, I just saw this and thought I would share

post #805 of 989
Continuing her downward spiral into madness and humiliation, Lindsay has now filed suit against e-Trade for that Super Bowl add that feature a baby character called Lindsay, who was accused of being a "milkaholic".  Lohan claims that she is identified by a single name - like Cher, Oprah or Madonna - and that anyone watching the commercial would immediately think of her.  She found this portrayal of "herself" as a milkacholic so painful that she is seeking $100 million in damages. 

Every article I've read on this subject correctly states that she doesn't have a chance in hell of winning this thing - but all of them base this on the idea that "Lindsay" is hardly a unique name and that she can't prove they had her in mind.  (Someone has produced an early draft of the commercial's script, where the character is called "Deborah", but this is hardly proof that they didn't have Lohan in mind when they later changed the name.) 

I don't think this is e-Trade's strongest argument.  Lohan isn't claiming that they used her name or likeness without permission to endorse their product, which they clearly didn't.  (Baby Lindsay looks nothing like Lohan and in the context of the commercial the only baby who is endorsing e-Trade is the boy who does most of the talking.)  She's claiming "mental anguish" because the commercial made fun of her by portraying her as an addict.  Well, she has two problems there: 

1)  She is (or at least has been) an addict -  complete with stints in court-ordered recovery programs. The truth is an absolute defense in cases like this, at least in U.S. courts. 

2)  She is a public figure- and has worked hard to become one.  Under New York Times v. Sullivan, public figures have very few rights under libel law, much less an ability to complain when they've been mocked.  If your career involves having every detail in your life splashed across the tabloids, and you've profited from all the publicity, up to a point, you can't cry "foul" when someone sends up some aspect of your very public persona.  

I can't believe this hasn't been dismissed with prejudice and court sanctions against whatever lawyer was dumb enough to file this nonsense for her.

Regards,

Joe
post #806 of 989
Well, I'm convinced, from now on I want a quarter every time someone says the name 'John' in a movie or TV show.

Besides, what does she want a million for? Just to snort it up her nose or smoke it all away?

Also, $10.00 says she won't learn a damned thing from Corey Haim's passing.

Re: Anne, nah, I just liked her more when she was less known, her obscurity coupled with her beauty is what worked for me, now she's become like every other actress...plain.
post #807 of 989
I'd say I wanted to use the john, but I'm afraid I'd be sued. 

I hope she adds this company to her complaint:

equine-products-linseed-2793-2731_zoom.jpg
Otherwise, someone might think rubbing Lindsay on your body would give you a gleaming coat.

post #808 of 989
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greg_S_H View Post

Otherwise, someone might think rubbing Lindsay on your body would give you a gleaming coat.
 

Wow, I could go quite a few ways with this comment...but I'm not gonna! 
post #809 of 989
The obvious way for her to avoid such situations would be to exercise some control over her life.

But, that said, there's word today that she may have a little something behind her complaint.


post #810 of 989

Quote:
Originally posted by Joseph DeMartino:

Lohan claims that she is identified by a single name - like Cher, Oprah or Madonna - and that anyone watching the commercial would immediately think of her.

Well, they certainly will now.


New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: After Hours Lounge