|
|
Post by Perplexed on Jan 1, 2004 14:13:54 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Fwings on Jan 2, 2004 8:30:46 GMT
What's going on with the second image there? George looks to be aged by about thirty years, John's face is stretched, and Paul is... well, Faul.
|
|
|
|
Post by Perplexed on Jan 2, 2004 22:25:49 GMT
But doesn't it seem that no matter what year, no matter what photographer, no matter what is the current style, Ringo ALWAYS looks consistent.
With Ringo's unusual bone structure and prominent nose and bright eyes, and full lips and daffy smile, there is just NO leeway whatsoever.
|
|
|
|
Post by fixingahole on Jan 4, 2004 9:07:47 GMT
But doesn't it seem that no matter what year, no matter what photographer, no matter what is the current style, Ringo ALWAYS looks consistent. With Ringo's unusual bone structure and prominent nose and bright eyes, and full lips and daffy smile, there is just NO leeway whatsoever. I don't know, Rodney Dangerfield might've worked. |
|
|
|
Post by Perplexed on Jan 4, 2004 10:48:50 GMT
ROFL...........or Barbra Streisand..........certain angles---they both have my I call a "leonine" type of face. (I tend to analyse human faces against other types of things, animals often)
This is to say nothing unkind about either one. The way they gaze over their eyes out into the world has a lionlike caste. IMO.
but Dangerfield in a big black Beatle top wig.............I think Rodney would get a kick out of that idea.
|
|
|
|
Post by fixingahole on Jan 5, 2004 5:43:40 GMT
I'm picturing Rodney singing "What would you do if I sang out of tune..."
|
|
