| shes just not wearing crazy lash extensions and pancake countouring and now we think that is 'natural' b/c she's less than Kardashian-level |
It’s because she has called it her no-makeup look. |
I agree. She looks gorgeous in both photos, but in the purple dress, I had to “find her face.” All I saw was purple and then I had to look closely for her features. |
| She thinks she's proving something, but all she's doing is proving she can look terrible. As someone in their 50s, although younger than Pamela, she's depressing me instead of inspiring me. She looks haggard and she doesn't have to. That purple isn't her color, btw. |
Agree. I think the purple looks so much better on her. This light blue is terrible, imho. |
Thank you! So sick of all the fawning over her not wearing makeup. She certainly can do as she wishes, but to claim she looks *fantastic!!* with no makeup is just silly. Of course she doesn't. She looks as we all do - tired, pale, old. A small amount of makeup would do wonders here because she is a very pretty woman. But she's looking like an aged crone decades too early. It depresses me, too. |
| My jaw dropped to discover these are pictures of Pamela Anderson. I’d have guessed it is a Swedish actress who I’d never heard of. |
Absolutely. That is a great color but doesn’t look good on her and makes her face disappear. Makeup would help but not enough. |
+1 She looks like a small red state Senator at the WHCD. |
DP. Everytime someone says how great she looks, I feel like I’m trapped in the children’s book, The Emperor has no clothes. |
I don’t find Pamela inspiring or depressing. But I do appreciate the reminder that good aging is not limited to people with $$$ or tons of beauty in their youth. |