Lauren Bacall is very sexy-ugly.
-
jayans_23 — 19 years ago(July 16, 2006 04:15 PM)
I've always thought her to be ugly. She was certainly not as beautiful as other women of that film era ( her younger years. But she is very confident that she is attractive so if she is comfortable with her looks, more power to her I guess.
-
Joe-321 — 19 years ago(July 27, 2006 06:55 PM)
You are correct about Betty at 81, She aged very well from 45 thru her 60's. I wished I do as well as her in 20 years!!
Have you checked it out?
http://www.bccga.com/Sci-Fi.htm
Serenity-Firefly -
wangchungvslopan — 19 years ago(August 16, 2006 12:09 AM)
Are you insane im am in my early 20's and i really wish time machines would hurry the hell on Because I mean Damn she was fine. Its those eyes that stopped me cold. I also prefered her with Dark colored hair. It was her staire. Just like in the lines of Sophia Loren, and Rita Hayworth. they were all stunning. I mean at least back then women could look drop dead sexy plus act. Now a days they cant have both of those traits without some kind of surgery be it brain or face. They Had class, finesse, at least they waited behind closed doors to let any dark secret happen instead of doing stupid stunts INLCUDING STUPID MOVIES like many of TOdays Female Sex Symbols do willingly. I mean come on Kate Beckinsale Damne Van HElsing, And the ones who are great actreses arent hot at all. Gwenth Paltro looks like a scarecrow
The women of yesterday looked damn good and also could act damn good -
MrsRobinson2251 — 19 years ago(August 17, 2006 03:16 PM)
I think she was sexy-ugly. There is a such thing, sort of like Barbra Streisandshe's ugly, but everything she does is sexy. Lauren Bacall isn't really UGLY, but she's not exactly a stunning beauty. She is, however, very sensual. The one thing about her that annoyed me a little is that she has that whole nostril-flaring thing going on when she speaks. After a while though, I found it to be a cute touch.
Of
course
we're living in sin.