HOLLYWOOD, 7:53 AM, WED JUL 9 | 26 POSTS IN THE LAST 24 HOURS | tips@defamer.com | RSS
AU
Posts Tagged “

Celebrity Nudity

keira knightley

Keira Knightley Doesn't Mind Stripping Down, But Are Those Body Parts Really Hers?

Though she may not be among the top five searches on Mr. Skin, Keira Knightley just adores getting naked on screen. Discussing her upcoming Sienna Miller lovefest Edge Of Love, she tells People: “I always bare my breasts...It’s not like it’s only in this film!” Whoopee! Well, not so much. We took Keira up on her implied offer to review just how many times she’s stripped down for the sake of The Craft, and have one primary question post-study: having exposed 26 (no, not a typo) cinematic naughty bits so far, are we so sure they really belong to her? NSFW evidence lies after the jump. More »

Play For Pay

The Barely Dressed Beckhams Just Can't Resist Stripping Down For Cash

This may come as a shock, but we have some troubling news to report: it seems that the Double Dating, Non-Eating foursome of Tom Cruise, Katie Holmes and power duo Posh 'n Becks differ in one key regard. As opposed to TomKat's demure sartorial choices, from their first public motorcycle ride to their wedding attire to Katie’s current desire to wear dresses with hemlines as long as possible, their British counterparts just love showing us some skin. As People reports, frosty-locked David has been confirmed to appear in yet another glossy ad campaign for Armani, in which the soccer star will continue to contort his Adonis body into poses highlighting his too-good-to-be-true physical assets. Since the new pictures coincide with recently released oddball shots taken of permanently deadpan wife Victoria Beckham for Marc Jacobs’ Spring/Summer print campaign, we took a nostalgic (and arousing) look back at just how many times the Beckhams have admirably sold their bodies for bundles of cash. Enjoy the various real and fake body parts belonging to Britain’s most rare creation: a real live hot couple. More »

Pants Optional

Gisele Bundchen Forgets Pants, Boyfriend in 'GQ' Interview

Rear end greasee Gisele Bundchen reveals what her astonishingly edible behind looks like without the assistance of Shiny Butt Masters in the new issue of GQ, but after spending the required hour drooling over the photos (many more, don’t you worry, after the jump), also overshares on her clear indifference towards boyfriend/baby mama abandoner Tom Brady. Despite confessing that former paramour and constant Lakers (tear) game make-out partner Leonardo DiCaprio “broke [her] heart,” it seems the tall, dark and handsome quarterback barely even caught Bundchen’s eye after repeated introductions. And when pressed for more details on why exactly she’s with the cheating jock, her reasoning sounds eerily similar to the way we’d describe our feelings towards a brother, ex-stalker, or (gulp) our dear ol’ dad. The skin-baring photos, and evidence Gisele is just playing the friendship game with Brady, after the jump. More »

celebrity nudity

Gwyneth Loses The Short Skirts And Hooker Heels For Au Naturel 'GQ' Shoot

As we've been noting throughout Gwyneth Paltrow's incredibly successful campaign to rack up attention during her Iron Man press tour, her wardrobe has been just this side of trampy. In the last few weeks, transparent dresses (but they're designer!), S&M shoes (eccentric!), and clavicle accented jumpsuits have all been pulled out of the twice-retired actress' bag of tricks. But now that we've seen just what lies inside the June issue of British GQ, we think this sexy train has reached its final destination. Yes, Gwyneth has dropped trou, but listening to her tell it, it's just not that big of a deal, okay?
Paltrow states she isn't trying to court controversy with the new photo, insisting it's just an innocent shot. The mother-of-two says, "I'm not going out without my knickers, and I'm not getting drunk and I'm not on my eighth husband."

While we do appreciate her usage of "knickers" in a British glossy, we feel obligated to point out that her statement just isn't entirely true. More »