Lohan apes Monroe, all nude and stuff.

shivaswrath · Feb 20, 2008

CanadianMe said:
She looks horrid, see no redeeming quality in those photos whats so ever, she look horrible, her body is not camera friendly and either is her face in those photos. The Camera does not love her the same as it did for Monroe. What a sham just to get publicity.

'
thank you! I thought I was the only one that noticed that, ICK!

Big Mike · Feb 20, 2008

And it's easy to copy another photographer's work (in this case rather badly) but it's quite a different matter to have the idea in the first place

Wasn't it the same photographer that shot Monroe in the first place.

Personally, I don't mind the images. Sure, Lohan is no Marylin...but she's not chopped liver. She may not look like she appears to look in movies and videos and she doesn't look like the anorexic models in magazines. She looks like a normal girl, and I for one, applaud that. With all the fakery and false body images that we are bombarded with on a daily basis...it's refreshing to see something that isn't so false.

I'm not a fan of Lohan's...what with her 'child star gone awry' lifestyle...but she is far from ugly or horrid.

MyaLover · Feb 20, 2008

Nobody can recreate the sexuality, the innocence, and the spirit that Marilyn had. Thats something you cant recreate and in my opinion Lindsay is trying too hard and the photos dont work.

JerryPH · Feb 20, 2008

There was but one Monroe, and there never will be again. Lohan giving her "tribute" I find not really worthy. Her trying to compare herself to Monroe is a joke at best.

Monroe was a woman... Lohan is a poor excuse for a junkie, a person way lost and she has NO draw for me at all.

I find nothing attractive about her.

Hertz van Rental · Feb 20, 2008

Big Mike said:
Wasn't it the same photographer that shot Monroe in the first place.

Good grief! You are right.
Stern was born in 1930 so he'd be 78. Which could explain it.

Big Mike · Feb 20, 2008

Her trying to compare herself to Monroe is a joke at best.

Was it her idea? Probably not.
Still, she agreed to it and went through with it.

JerryPH · Feb 20, 2008

Big Mike said:
Was it her idea? Probably not.
Still, she agreed to it and went through with it.

Yes I sincerely think it was, though I have NO way to prove it.

I doubt it was the idea of a 78 year old photographer to choose an alcoholic and junkie to redo a shoot such as that.

Monroe set a standard that Lohan tried to match, and IMHO failed.

RMThompson · Feb 20, 2008

First of, it WAS Bert Stern's idea to recreate the shoot. He thinks that while Lindsay is blasted in the media, she is much deeper than they portray. If anyone would've taken the time to read a little bit about it, they would've seen this.

Second, I find it amazing how many people can bash her openly on this forum which is supposed to be about creativity and sharing. If it wasn't Lindsay Lohan would any of you called her "pointless" "horrible" or "horrid". If it was a model that one of us worked with, no one would comment on her social life.

Now I am not naive enough to say that her being a personality doesn't play into this at all, surely she deserves some of the negative publicity, but I think it's great how she hasn't had a boob job (you can tell because when she gets REALLY skinny they go down), and hasn't bleached all those freckles off. Sure she gets glammed up in the movies, but to me she's REAL. She's a better role model then Britney or Paris, and is truly a talented actress.

However she is NO Marlyn Monroe, because there will never be anyone who is that again. No one who captures the heart of America so wholly, and no one who can mean "sex" and "America" at the same time so strongly.

Still, the photos are good.

lifeafter2am · Feb 20, 2008

RMThompson said:
.......She's a better role model then Britney or Paris, ......

Not really saying much here....

ghpham · Feb 21, 2008

If he likes Lohan so much, he should have just did the photoshoot of Lohan as herself. It's pointless to dress her up as someone she's obviously is not.

JerryPH · Feb 21, 2008

Irrespective of who the first model was and who the second model was, when the first pics came out oh so many years ago, they set a standard and attained a level of success in the artistic world for very specific reasons.

Just because someone (even if it is the same artist), clones the style and idea and changes the focus of who is painted will not make it another success. If Davinci painted the Mona Lisa, and it instantly became the success it is today, back then... and then he painted another identical version but this time it was the face of someone less attractive, he would be devaluing his first work as well as the second work... and possibly all his works in a way by tarnising his image to some extent.

The pictures are purposely placed one after another, it is meant as a direct comparison, becuase it is a blatant retry of a pictorial poses, positions and props with another woman.

There are woman WAY better suited to be photographically captured other than Lohan for this goal, whom my opinion, displays a standard of womanhood that is as low in appeal as Monroe's pictures brought to new heights.

Photographically, its a type of recreation. I think we can all agree to that. If I was a famous photographer, why would I need to recreate a set of shots that I had previously taken and had great success with, again with a subject that lacks the physical and sensual qualities of the first subject? Why demean the value of my first work?

xfloggingkylex · Feb 21, 2008

MyaLover said:
Nobody can recreate the sexuality, the innocence, and the spirit that Marilyn had. Thats something you cant recreate and in my opinion Lindsay is trying too hard and the photos dont work.

Innocence? Marilyn died 6 weeks after her photo shoot from a drug overdose. She was hardly innocent and I think the Lindsay version is a good parallel of Hollywood, as mentioned above.