She is just sooooo beautiful!

[Goal]

I swear she just doesn't age. I want to be her! How is she 44

Helena christensen

whats4tea Michael

But surely she's had plastic surgery?

Don't all women in the public eye who are there primarily for their appearance (models, actresses, vague unspecified famous types) have their bodies mutilated a bit as they go through life, unless they specifically tell you they haven't?

I thought it was just standard now, that famous rich women have to have "work" done, whether they want to or not - if they don't, they don't get that part/ photo-shoot etc.?

I realise I could be being cynical, but I can't help feeling more and more that we're being invited to admire plastic surgeon's handiwork rather than women's bodies. Apologies to Helena Christiansen if that's not the case. (And I'm ever so slightly dubious about admiring women's bodies -where are the pictures of Brad Pitt pouting at me with a strategically placed kitschy ornament?)

Whilst I agree , what is up with Taft photoshoot?? So tacky ..

Basil,I think you're right.unless they specifically state that they are making a stand against it, there will probably be work done. That's also true for male celebs now though I reckon.

She is lovely but not IMO as lovely or interesting as the late great Paula Yates ( weird that I felt the need to say that as inappropriate and not a competition ) soz

I loved Paula she really was an interesting and beautiful woman

lol at that 'article'
What is it for?!

She's gorgeous. But those photographs are vile - really cheap and tacky. I wonder why on earth she felt the need to do them tbh. I thought she had more class.

I think they are supposed to be like that ironic like a bit readers wives meets vintage

I don't think they're tacky. She looks beautiful and she was hardly pressganged into it.

I don't think so either. I really like them and love the apartment and lizard! My office is like that full of 'stuff' sadly I am nothing like her so won't be draping myself around any time soon

So a woman choosing to drape herself around in soft-porn cliche style poses makes it a feminist statement, rather than tacky? Right.

She's always looked to me like she needs a good wash.

Agreed - Helena: gorge as ever. Photos: hideous. The one where's she's showing her arse is reminiscent of that photo one MNer complained to her local car dealership for displaying in their window.

If Helena wants to float about being naked that's up to her, but given she's a photographer I'd expect her to have a more artistic eye. I'm not sure I think the readers' wives concept is one that needs parodying in this way.

Who said it was a feminist statement? You would have to ask her about that but I like it and I consider myself a feminist in that I suit myself in life and don't feel held back by my gender in any way.

That mag is like that

I actually think that fully naked, rather than semi-clad in horrible underwear would be less unpleasant and more artistic. I'm astonished that she chose to style herself in that way.

I'm not its quite common in those mags. Have seen them parody worse Whether its right or not is another thread. It is like Terry Richardson you either like or are offended and hate it.

Terry Richardson?

Photographer who shoots this sort of thing a lot

Just had a quick google. I'm not offended by it as such, but I don't like it.

I like her big pants.
She does look lovely but touched up in some way IYSWIM?

I loved Paula Yates, she was the first cleb death that really upset me.

I love the pants too.