Page 1 of 1
Scarlett in Feb. Esquire Magazine
Posted: Tue Feb 22, 2005 2:33 pm
by Suntory
The photos are delicious!!!! A lot in B&W but just scrumptious!!!
Here is the article:
http://www.scarlettjohansson.org/articles/esquire05.php
Ah here we go, photos:
http://www.esquire.com/women/gallery/05 ... frame.html
Enjoy!
Posted: Tue Feb 22, 2005 2:55 pm
by jml98
Posted: Wed Feb 23, 2005 12:21 am
by Just Like Honey...
It's kind of sad that she gave into that kind of sexually suggestive photography crap...
Then again, people will do anything if you hand them enough money.
I must remind myself as well as everyone else that Scarlett isnt Charlotte.
But I sure wish she was..
Scarlett wrote:"I don't have half the fetishes I've read I have"
LOL
Posted: Wed Feb 23, 2005 11:38 am
by Suntory
Just Like Honey... wrote:It's kind of sad that she gave into that kind of sexually suggestive photography crap...
You're right, what was I thinking?! It was the testoserone talking!
From an artistic point of view it is very good photography.
Scarlett is compared to Marilyn Monroe and didn't Monroe do similer
kinds of photography posing as well? I think I would rather see her do this
than Playboy. I hope when she hits 40 she doesn't do playboy like all
the other starlets who do it to get back into show biz.
Posted: Wed Feb 23, 2005 5:03 pm
by jml98
Just Like Honey... wrote:It's kind of sad that she gave into that kind of sexually suggestive photography crap...
on one hand, i do agree with you, and i think that everyone in this forum, at least to some degree, would like her to be charlotte, myself included...
on the other hand...have u SEEN the pics!??
but thats just the guy in me talking ....
Posted: Thu Feb 24, 2005 5:16 pm
by jm
"[quote:c3637b3b41="jml98"][quote:c3637b3b41="Just Like Honey..."]It's kind of sad that she gave into that kind of sexually suggestive photography crap...[/quote:c3637b3b41]
on one hand, i do agree with you, and i think that everyone in this forum, at least to some degree, would like her to be charlotte, myself included...[/quote:c3637b3b41]
What the hell was a young Hollywood actress thinking, letting some rascal take sexy pictures of her? I just hope it doesn't hurt her career.
Please don't say "everyone...would like her to be charlotte". What on earth are you talking about?
We are seriously running out of things to talk about!"
Posted: Thu Feb 24, 2005 10:19 pm
by jml98
ok...so maybe it was a hasty generalization....haha
Posted: Fri Feb 25, 2005 12:42 am
by Just Like Honey...
johnmonkey wrote:I just hope it doesn't hurt her career.
It sure won't hurt her career... that kind of thing is what the mainstream media is looking for these days...
Oh well, at least most of the photos were in good taste, but of course they have to throw in a bit of subtle sleaze for the reason mentioned above.
Re: Scarlett in Esquire
Posted: Sat Mar 05, 2005 12:59 am
by phillygalinutah
Hi, I've been away from the LIT board (not intentionally). I started anew supervisory job in Jan, and was on vacation last week.
Oh, so some of you think the Esquire photos are delicious
While my husband and I waited for our flights in LAX last weekend, I stopped in a magazine store, and spied a black and white cover of Scarlett and her hair color was black. I forget the magazine name, but it was a local LA magazine. Inside there were 8 or 10 B&W various poses of Scarlett exposing her "dark, sultry side". It was a very different racy look, but my hubby gave her photos the male seal of approval.
Maybe someone lives in the LA area, and has seen it.
Posted: Fri Mar 18, 2005 11:01 pm
by The Shoegazer
Just Like Honey... wrote:It's kind of sad that she gave into that kind of sexually suggestive photography crap...
Then again, people will do anything if you hand them enough money.
I must remind myself as well as everyone else that Scarlett isnt Charlotte.
But I sure wish she was..
Scarlett wrote:"I don't have half the fetishes I've read I have"
LOL
Well, sorry to say but sex sells. More so now than before and it IS sad that some actresses are the complete opposites of who they play in the movies. Many will agree that she was more beautiful in LiT because she had that humbleness and some things I can't pinpoint quite yet that made us fall in love with her. Don't get me wrong, she is still very talented and beautiful actress but true. Its better than playboy. I guess us LiT fans are outnumbered by those 'other' teenage and middle-aged fans who will run out to purchase the magazine just because she showed a bit more flesh. Thats kinda sad but what can you do. She is a big girl now . I admit, those are sexy pictures but I feel the likes of her and Anna Faris don't belong in those magazines.