Options
Andy Murray and Kim Sears - Burberry's new mixed doubles team
FusionFury
Posts: 14,121
Forum Member
✭✭
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2362774/MOS-DIARY-Andy-Murray-Kim-Sears--Burberrys-new-mixed-doubles-team.html
Fair play to them cashing on his Wimbledon success.
Fair play to them cashing on his Wimbledon success.
0
Comments
Being 'good looking' isn't always a pre-requisite.
He's not becoming a model! It's a branding exercise, and Andy & Kim presumably fit whatever this new Burberry campaign is. It's nothing to do with him being a model, it's about what he represents.
Good luck to them, why not.
I'm sorry but if the Mail was reporting a story about Marion Bartoli becoming a model for Burberry instead, they'd be without question referring to her as "full-figured" and "curvaceous", not "pretty" or "attractive" anyway.
The double standards are unreal.
GQ didn't mind putting him on the cover.
http://blog.aglamslam.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/article-2332057-1A08E53B000005DC-364_634x812-11.jpg
To be fair, nobody will be looking at Andy
That photo is so airbrushed it does not even look like Andy . So they did a hell of a lot of editing before they let him grace that front cover .
No more airbrushing than they do with female celebrities......
Looks more like Joey from EastEnders lol!
Even air brushed he can't manage to look good-looking! He looks like a character from The Simpsons with overbite.
I have to agree :eek: His face looks like its been chiselled.
Gosh! Surely not! Magazine airbrushes pictures? I demand it is closed down immediately!!!! :rolleyes::D
Kim is classed as an English Rose
Best of luck to them...
Lol i agree. And so much for we are "private" individuals. Just cash in the relationship like the rest.
Which will be why American Vogue used him way back in 2010.
Both seem really keen that they are not a celeb couple, and that Kim does her own thing, so that goes against it. They both seem to like Burberry, and have been seen wearing their stuff, so I wouldn't be surprised if they get sent a lot- of free stuff. This just sounds like one of those stories that get written when a person is big news, so the papers latch onto half-baked ideas that they know they won't get sued for.
There is airbrushed and then that. It just looks totally fake as its too "airbrushed" - everything natural has been sucked out of the photo.
It's Vogue. Of course it's not natural.
She paints portraits of posh people's pets. I've read that they sell for about £1500. Since she knows a lot of rich people, her family is also not exactly poor,I think she has a nice little earner there. But her main job is clearly being a wag.
Of course that very sucessful model really looks like this:
http://emilydaviesviscom.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/katemoss-rimmel110916110811.jpeg?w=396&h=264
And this is?
http://cdn.stylefrizz.com/img/kate-moss-natural-no-makeup.jpg
That's not fair. Kate Moss is Kate Moss, because she absolutely stunning when she was a young girl, absolutely perfect facial structure, not because she was airbrushed to look stunning.
Now they airbrush her because they still want to have her in their campaigns, because she sells, even though she does not look at all like in the old days.
Murray is just ugly, is not that he was once good looking, is simply a case of trying very hard to simply make him good looking. Not working though.:D
Kim is gorgeous
And unlikely because she is French...
That's a bit rude to call someone ugly