Printable View
The second picture probably offers the best possible example. It's not photo retouched (as far as I can tell) since it looks like a screencap from a television show or something like that. They usually don't retouch those.Quote:
Originally Posted by Melissaur
Dunno if this is a good picture but uh, something like this:
http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b9...pics-front.jpg
I don't think she looks all that bad. I'd hit it.
ehhhh... she looks aiiiiiight... but those tattoos are smurfing trashy and haggard as :bou::bou::bou::bou:!
I think Cheryl Cole is very pretty indeed, although I'd still prefer Kimberley Walsh. And if you're looking at any girl group singer anywhere, I'd preer Una Healy. Mmmm.
Yeah I've always thought that Kimberly Walsh was one of the better looking members from Girls Aloud.
http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d1.../normal_39.jpg
Googling pictures is fun. :cool:
And also, there are a lot of pictures of Cheryl Cole that haven't been photo retouched, I just happened to pick 2 that were. :p But if you look at photos of her from the X Factor, they haven't been changed and she always looked amazing on there.
Nah, I'd say that Kimberly is the least attractive out of them all
It's okay, man, we can't all have taste.
That was low Daniel...REALLLLL LOW.
No, on The X-Factor she looks like she's slapped on a ton of make-up with a trowel. The only saving grace is that she hasn't yet done a Dannii Minogue and Botoxed her face into oblivion.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chloe.
I don't think we'll ever see any well-known woman appear on TV with no make-up on. And it's not like she does it herself, she'll have people putting it on for her, so if it ever looks bad it's not exactly her fault. ;) I think I know girls that wear more make-up everyday then she does anyway. :jess:
I really don't like how Cheryl Cole looked on the X-factor and I really could never understand it when people said she was attractive. Really don't think she needs to slap so much make up on.
I don't understand the hype about Megan Fox either, really very confusing
I really have to agree with Cheryl Cole being over rated. Sure, I understand that everyone has their own opinion but I just can't see anything there myself. 'Course my opinion is perhaps a little biased as I really can't stand her, she irritates me to no end! >.< But I really don't find her attractive in the slightest =/
I don't understand all the attention Megan Fox gets either (Much like a lot of people xD), I guess she is slightly sexy at times but really anyone can bend over a car in short shorts.
It might be worth noting that yes, I do think she is over rated, but no, I don't think she's ugly. If she wasn't famous then I'm sure at least 90% of people who would see her walking down the street would note that she is a looker. Not incredible, but very very far from "not attractive". I couldn't say the same for Ms. Jolie.
I think it's the exact opposite, I think people overrate the looks of the likes of Cheryl Cole because they're famous. Besides, I don't think many people here have said their choices are outright ugly (maybe they have, but I can't be fussed now to re-read all the posts), they've just said they don't think they're all that great looking.Quote:
Originally Posted by Loony BoB
Well, when she auditioned for Popstars (ie, when she just walked in off the street), all the judges were going on about how gorgeous she was after she left the room (and just looking at her, yeah, she was, too xD). And she was winning beauty contests before she got into the competition, too.
Fun point thought, of course she's overrated because she's famous - every famous person is overrated because they're famous, aren't they? I mean, if I was a big shot actor, I'd expect girls out there to swoon over me despite my average looks. Okay, okay, I'm kidding. I'm not average, I'm awesome. ;)
The thing is, Cheryl Cole looks human. Megan Fox wouldn't look out of place in Madam Tussauds.