The Bottom Line
Did Columbia studios alter
Hello! magazine is reporting that the posters advertising the new romantic comedy "Gigli" feature an altered version of J.Lo's bottom, which has been dramatically downsized.
The 'zine features a full report on the backside in question, showing an image of the poster featuring a trimmed-down version of her famous bottom and even a boost to her boobs. They also show a "real life" shot, which clearly shows a smaller-on-top J.Lo with a definitely bigger bum.
So was she behind the reduction of her behind? Or was it the marketing geniuses that had their way with her image? While some reports claim that the actress is bound to be furious (a spokesman for the star has said, "I'm absolutely shocked. Who would ever think this could possibly happen in Hollywood?") others claim that it was J.Lo herself who was unhappy with her appearance on the posters.
A source who saw the before and after shots revealed: "Columbia's marketing division airbrushed her butt to make it smaller and pumped up her chest." And another movie insider confirmed: "Jennifer was unhappy with the photo and asked for it to be retouched."
But wait, there's more! According to one of my favorite rumor hounds, E!Online's Ted Casablanca, the latest dirt on J.Lo is that she may be preggers. How convenient. The tabloid fodder is just in time for a slew of Ben and Jen's 31 Flavors film releases. But despite the fact that the diva (who can strike terror in the hearts of hotel staffers) was spotted recently shopping at a Baby Gap in Las Vegas, Ted thinks the rumors of her having a bun in the oven are false. I guess in a few months we'll know. Let's face it -- they may be able to trim a few inches off her derriere, but hiding a baby is a tougher act.
1 post • Page 1 of 1
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests