Worst Airbrushed Celebs of 2007 ... So Far
When Harry Potter and his grown-up gang hit theaters earlier this year, Warner Bros. released a second, 3-D version of the flick to IMAX theaters which included a 20-minute extended finale. But that's not all Warner Bros. added. On the left, the above image shows the actors as they appeared on the movie poster for the original cut of the movie, while the right side shows how Emma Watson appeared on the poster for the IMAX version. My my, how Hermione has grown!
Watson's plumped chest lit message boards ablaze Internet-wide, primarily due to her young age (17), and the fact that audiences had watched her grow up on screen. Warner Bros. never commented on Boobgate, though this rather lengthy denial/explanation appeared on a random blog and claims that this resulted from the practice of using two different cameras to simultaneously film for IMAX.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Terry Matlen @ Sep 2nd 2007 9:48AM
It's one thing to enhance an adult celeb's body (which is still pathetic to me), but to do this to a young lady not even 18 is really sickening. Shame on Warner Bros!
http://www.addconsults.com
http://www.myADDstore.com
natosha @ Sep 2nd 2007 9:50AM
I dont see a differnce, just a scoop in her belly..thats all it takes..not making the boob bigger, but scooping her stomach
JimFallRiver @ Sep 2nd 2007 11:50AM
It Just looks like a different photo, her hair is different her stomach is sucked in a little more its really no big deal. So I don't understant what the problem is shes just standing in a different position.
bigamej3 @ Sep 2nd 2007 12:52PM
yea, i agree with natosha. they just dug a chunk out of the stomach. either way, boobs happen. id like to see that meeting where some guy said "i think what this 17 yr old girl needs bigger boobs!" then chris hansen walks in....
ChunkyMonky @ Sep 2nd 2007 1:13PM
I agree with Jimfallriver its justa different photo. Maybe they did airbrush it but is doesnt look like it to me I think shes just standing in a different position.
jbritzibabe13 @ Sep 2nd 2007 11:45PM
you know, it would really make me mad if i was an actress and they supposedly made my chest bigger and then people were talking about it AND POSTING IT ON THE INTERNET....why does it even matter, anyway???? she doesn't look much different!!
Jossy @ Sep 2nd 2007 11:50PM
SAME PHOTO, JUST CUT BACK A BIT ON THE UPPER STOMACH WHICH THEN MAKES THE BREAST LOOK BIGGER. AS FOR HER AGE, BIG DEAL. WHEN I WAS 17, I HAD HUGE BREASTS...TOOK AFTER MY MOM. ALSO, FEMALE'S THAT HAVE TINY ONES CAN USE PUSH UP BRAS THAT MAKE THEM LOOK BIGGER. A BREAST IS JUST A HUNK OF BODY FAT, WHY MAKE SUCH A BIG DEAL OUT OF THEM? NEVER COULD UNDERSTAND IT. YEAH, YOUNG GUY'S ALWAYS COULDN'T GET THEIR EYES OFF OF MY CHEST AND STILL TODAY THEY ARE DOING IT ALONG WITH MEN INTO THEIR 90'S. SO SILLY.
SB @ Sep 3rd 2007 12:39AM
Perhaps we also need to remember different cultures' perspectives. In the UK, the legal age of consent (and all that goes with it) was raised to 16 yrs old in 1885. So in that culture, the shape of a 17 yr old's body is nothing to balk about. The fact that your own culture's legal age is 18 doesn't make it more or less sickening. It's simply a different expectation. (But, quite right that Watson complained about the change!)
Rogduckett @ Sep 4th 2007 8:31AM
Aw, c'mon, Jossy ... you NEVER EVER stared at or commented on a male's tight rear?
Rog
SKW @ Sep 4th 2007 10:02AM
This is normal. Compare the USA and UK covers of the 2004 movie King Arthur. Kiera Knightly, who is very flat normally and is such on the UK cover, has become at least a C cup on the US cover. She said something about both men and women not wanting to see women with smaller than a C cup on magazines and such. I can see that. Doesn't make it right, though.
eva @ Sep 4th 2007 1:48PM
it looks the same
travelersquest @ Sep 4th 2007 9:21PM
I found it rather interesting that most people only noticed Ms. Watson's chest was changed, not that her hair was different as well as some slight changes to the shading around her face.
christine @ Sep 4th 2007 9:41PM
haha bigamej3 is right where the hell is chris hansen?
aissedei @ Sep 4th 2007 10:21PM
I'm gonna say that they most likely reduced the size of her breast for the one picture. The whole idea is that they were playing characters that were younger than their true age. In the book they should have only been about 14 or 15 and they wanted them to look younger... no older.
Tes @ Sep 4th 2007 11:23PM
Well heck, I think we should all just be implanted with tracking devices so Big Brother knows where we are at all times, 24/7.
UNKNOWN @ Sep 5th 2007 3:18AM
2 DIFFERENT PHOTOS PERIOD. IN THE PHOTO ON THE RIGHT HER UPPER TORSO IS JUST ROTATED SLIGHTLY MORE CLOCKWISE MAKING HER BREAST AND TUMMY APPEAR "BRUSHED" WHEN IN FACT IT ISN'T. LOOK AT SHOULDER TO NECK LINE IN EACH PHOTO TO SEE WHAT I AM TALKING ABOUT. SORRY NO CONSPIRICY HERE.
ShortSchoolBus @ Sep 5th 2007 6:15AM
She needed some cleavage anyway to distract from those caterpillar eyebrows. She'll have implants soon enough. Then she will rank with the rest of the celebrity Frankenboobies.
wanda @ Sep 6th 2007 12:45AM
Soooooooooooo, who cares?
wanda @ Sep 6th 2007 12:46AM
Soooooooooooo, who cares??
SummerBreezez252 @ Sep 6th 2007 8:33PM
you know? it just seems that one was just a poster that was made, as in painted or something...the other looks like a photo....though i still don't understand why emma is the only one who looks completely photoshopped(or whatever you want to call it)in the left picture..