<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title><![CDATA[Same happened to Brie Larson after]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto"><em>Archived from the IMDb Discussion Forums — Naomi Watts</em></p>
<hr />
<p dir="auto"><strong>batbhai</strong> — <em>9 years ago(September 28, 2016 01:00 AM)</em></p>
<p dir="auto">Same happened to Brie Larson after<br />
Don Jon<br />
.<br />
She still dazzles in<br />
Adore<br />
(a.k.a.Two Mothers)<br />
BTW,<br />
to her!</p>
]]></description><link>https://filmglance.com/discuss/topic/143410/same-happened-to-brie-larson-after</link><generator>RSS for Node</generator><lastBuildDate>Wed, 13 May 2026 22:04:16 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://filmglance.com/discuss/topic/143410.rss" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><pubDate>Sun, 19 Apr 2026 23:03:52 GMT</pubDate><ttl>60</ttl><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to Same happened to Brie Larson after on Sun, 19 Apr 2026 23:04:00 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto"><strong>wiebejammen</strong> — <em>9 years ago(January 17, 2017 01:22 PM)</em></p>
<p dir="auto">So. You should give her credit for not indulging in fillers and Botox, etc. and end up looking like Meg Ryan and Courtney Cox and about a zillion others who look awful as a result.<br />
What do you got on? Loafers? You don't slaughter animals in loafers!</p>
]]></description><link>https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1233131</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1233131</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[fgadmin]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 19 Apr 2026 23:04:00 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to Same happened to Brie Larson after on Sun, 19 Apr 2026 23:03:58 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto"><strong>FirstBlood1982</strong> — <em>9 years ago(October 16, 2016 06:35 AM)</em></p>
<p dir="auto">That's not a very flattering shot of her, but other than that pic, she looked great that night.<br />
+++by His wounds we are healed. - Isaiah 53:5+++</p>
]]></description><link>https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1233130</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1233130</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[fgadmin]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 19 Apr 2026 23:03:58 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to Same happened to Brie Larson after on Sun, 19 Apr 2026 23:03:56 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto"><strong>hanjiefeng</strong> — <em>9 years ago(October 15, 2016 05:16 PM)</em></p>
<p dir="auto">Look at this photo of her carefully from early 2016 when she was 47 (link below). She has about the right amount of crows feet for a white woman of her age. BUT, her lower face (jaw line, chin up to mouth and down to neck plus the neck itself) seems to have melted. She's lost a lot of soft tissue in that area which is more common in mid 50s and beyond women. I bet she has had some procedure, one that actually ages people prematurely. An example would be ultherapy or one of the other radio frequency treatments which is popular in Hollywood as something to tighten the neck. Actually what it does in the medium term (say 6-9 months out) is destroy fat and fibre tissue ultimately leading to a much more haggard appearance. It seems many Hollywood stars make poor choices when deciding what sort of cosmetic procedures to undergo.<br />
<a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-3469309/Naomi-Watts-displays-natural-beauty-2016-Oscars-red-carpet-Hollywood-partner-Liev-Schreiber-s-film-Spotlight-wins-Best-Picture.html" rel="nofollow ugc">http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-3469309/Naomi-Watts-displays-natural-beauty-2016-Oscars-red-carpet-Hollywood-partner-Liev-Schreiber-s-film-Spotlight-wins-Best-Picture.html</a></p>
]]></description><link>https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1233129</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1233129</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[fgadmin]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 19 Apr 2026 23:03:56 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to Same happened to Brie Larson after on Sun, 19 Apr 2026 23:03:55 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto"><strong>hanjiefeng</strong> — <em>9 years ago(October 15, 2016 01:30 PM)</em></p>
<p dir="auto">Look at this photo of her carefully from early 2016 when she was 47 (link below).  She has about the right amount of crows feet for a white woman of her age.  BUT, her lower face (jaw line, chin up to mouth and down to neck plus the neck itself) seems to have melted.  She's lost a lot of soft tissue in that area which is more common in mid 50s and beyond women.  I bet she has had some procedure, one that actually ages people prematurely.  An example would be ultherapy or one of the other radio frequency treatments which is popular in Hollywood as something to tighten the neck.  Actually what it does in the medium term (say 6-9 months out) is destroy fat and fibre tissue ultimately leading to a much more haggard appearance.  It seems many Hollywood stars make poor choices when deciding what sort of cosmetic procedures to undergo.<br />
<a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-3469309/Naomi-Watts-displays-natural-beauty-2016-Oscars-red-carpet-Hollywood-partner-Liev-Schreiber-s-film-Spotlight-wins-Best-Picture.html" rel="nofollow ugc">http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-3469309/Naomi-Watts-displays-natural-beauty-2016-Oscars-red-carpet-Hollywood-partner-Liev-Schreiber-s-film-Spotlight-wins-Best-Picture.html</a></p>
]]></description><link>https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1233128</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1233128</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[fgadmin]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 19 Apr 2026 23:03:55 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to Same happened to Brie Larson after on Sun, 19 Apr 2026 23:03:54 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto"><strong>lyrahowl-01933</strong> — <em>9 years ago(September 28, 2016 04:01 AM)</em></p>
<p dir="auto">She's in her late 40s. She can't look 25 forever. And it's always better to age gracefully than to try to fake being young.</p>
]]></description><link>https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1233127</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1233127</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[fgadmin]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 19 Apr 2026 23:03:54 GMT</pubDate></item></channel></rss>