Fairly self-explanatory, I think. People you are most attracted, or think you would find most attractive. You have a time machine, and somehow are capable of convincing this celebrity that you are attractive and you are magically available but the time machine has no other purpose.
Penelope Anne Miller- Carlito's Way
Jessica Lang- King Kong to The Postman Always Rings Twice. That movie is hot as fuck.
Anna Karina-1960-1966
Eva Green-The Dreamers
Claudia Cardinale-Once Upon a Time in the West
Monica Vitti-Red Desert
Gong Li-Raise the Red Lantern
Paula Marshall-1998. She was in a wonderful one season tv show called Cupid that I loved, and was one of my most intense childhood crushes.
Also, Bardot in Contempt.
Jennifer Connelly - Career Opportunities
Quote from: Maladict on December 31, 2013, 04:22:56 AM
Jennifer Connelly - Career Opportunities
In that case you want the Last Action Hero golden ticket instead of the time machine. :hmm:
That is, if you want to be banging JC in the tent inside a Target.
Quote from: Tonitrus on December 31, 2013, 08:44:32 AM
Quote from: Maladict on December 31, 2013, 04:22:56 AM
Jennifer Connelly - Career Opportunities
In that case you want the Last Action Hero golden ticket instead of the time machine. :hmm:
That is, if you want to be banging JC in the tent inside a Target.
Rape Tent.
It had been awhile since I've seen the movie, but I am pretty sure that it was daddy-issues consensual. :hmm:
Quote from: Tonitrus on December 31, 2013, 08:51:32 AM
It had been awhile since I've seen the movie, but I am pretty sure that it was daddy-issues consensual. :hmm:
I've gone beyond the movie. And good taste.
Anna Mae Wong, Thief of Bagdad '24.
Nicole Kidman, To Die For.
Sasha Grey, anytime from age eighteen till present.
Quote from: Queequeg on December 31, 2013, 12:45:55 AM
Fairly self-explanatory, I think. People you are most attracted, or think you would find most attractive. You have a time machine, and somehow are capable of convincing this celebrity that you are attractive and you are magically available but the time machine has no other purpose.
Penelope Anne Miller- Carlito's Way
Jessica Lang- King Kong to The Postman Always Rings Twice. That movie is hot as fuck.
Anna Karina-1960-1966
Eva Green-The Dreamers
Claudia Cardinale-Once Upon a Time in the West
Monica Vitti-Red Desert
Gong Li-Raise the Red Lantern
Paula Marshall-1998. She was in a wonderful one season tv show called Cupid that I loved, and was one of my most intense childhood crushes.
Besides Jessica Lang, I haven't heard of any of those people.
Quote from: Maladict on December 31, 2013, 04:22:56 AM
Jennifer Connelly - Career Opportunities
She was better in Labyrinth.
Evangeline Lilly in The Desolation of Smaug and Real Steel.
Too fat and too old, but you can see she was great once.
Quote from: Tonitrus on December 31, 2013, 08:44:32 AM
Quote from: Maladict on December 31, 2013, 04:22:56 AM
Jennifer Connelly - Career Opportunities
In that case you want the Last Action Hero golden ticket instead of the time machine. :hmm:
That is, if you want to be banging JC in the tent inside a Target.
What's the golden ticket?
Is Audrey Hepburn in BaT too obvious?
Also, Ingrid Bergman in the Casablanca-For Whom the Bell Tolls years.
That was a bad joke. I googled golden ticket and I got blonde pubic hair. Not funny.
Quote from: Siege on December 31, 2013, 04:13:01 PM
That was a bad joke. I googled golden ticket and I got blonde pubic hair. Not funny.
Very disappointed that Charlie Bucket would pose for that kind of picture. :(
Liv Tyler--That Thing You Do.
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on December 31, 2013, 03:39:51 PM
Is Audrey Hepburn in BaT too obvious?
I was holding off on that for the same reason.
Scarlett Johansson - Lost In Translation
Juluiet Binoche and Lena Olin--The Unbearable Lightness of Being.
Bea Arthur
Quote from: Ed Anger on December 31, 2013, 07:23:01 PM
Bea Arthur
:perv:
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia-cache-ak0.pinimg.com%2F236x%2F4a%2F95%2F46%2F4a95465bb620f84d821a1c3161acc4be.jpg&hash=d5749edeb89334ffa44d6ae10730531a06a64516)
That Big Fat Cow from Cheers--Star Trek II
Jennifer Connelly in Career Opportunities is a good one. That woman was just about the sexiest thing ever when she still had that babyfat.
Jennifer Connelly-Requiem For a Dream.
Quote from: Queequeg on January 01, 2014, 05:12:30 PM
Jennifer Connelly in Career Opportunities is a good one. That woman was just about the sexiest thing ever when she still had that babyfat.
Sicko.
Jennifer Connelly is kinda plain. Browmania.
She needs to fall into a wood chipper
After the technological singularity, we can all choose how we look.
Too bad we are not going to be able to have real sex anymore.
What is the Singularity:
The Singularity involves the following principles, which I will document, develop, analyze, and contemplate
throughout the rest of this book:
- The rate of paradigm shift (technical innovation) is accelerating, right now doubling every decade.
- The power (price-performance, speed, capacity, and bandwidth) of information technologies is growing
exponentially at an even faster pace, now doubling about every year.29 This principle applies to a wide range of
measures, including the amount of human knowledge.
- For information technologies, there is a second level of exponential growth: that is, exponential growth in the
rate of exponential growth (the exponent). The reason: as a technology becomes more cost effective, more
resources are deployed toward its advancement, so the rate of exponential growth increases over time. For
example, the computer industry in the 1940s consisted of a handful of now historically important projects. Today
total revenue in the computer industry is more than one trillion dollars, so research and development budgets are
comparably higher.
- Human brain scanning is one of these exponentially improving technologies. As I will show in chapter 4, the
temporal and spatial resolution and bandwidth of brain scanning are doubling each year. We are just now
obtaining the tools sufficient to begin serious reverse engineering (decoding) of the human brain's principles of
operation. We already have impressive models and simulations of a couple dozen of the brain's several hundred
regions. Within two decades, we will have a detailed understanding of how all the regions of the human brain
work.
- We will have the requisite hardware to emulate human intelligence with supercomputers by the end of this
decade and with personal-computer-size devices by the end of the following decade. We will have effective
software models of human intelligence by the mid-2020s.
- With both the hardware and software needed to fully emulate human intelligence, we can expect computers to
pass the Turing test, indicating intelligence indistinguishable from that of biological humans, by the end of the
2020s.
- When they achieve this level of development, computers will be able to combine the traditional strengths of
human intelligence with the strengths of machine intelligence.
- The traditional strengths of human intelligence include a formidable ability to recognize patterns. The massively
parallel and self-organizing nature of the human brain is an ideal architecture for recognizing patterns that are
based on subtle, invariant properties. Humans are also capable of learning new knowledge by applying insights
and inferring principles from experience, including information gathered through language. A key capability of
human intelligence is the ability to create mental models of reality and to conduct mental "what-if" experiments
by varying aspects of these models.
-The traditional strengths of machine intelligence include the ability to remember billions of facts precisely and
recall them instantly.
-Another advantage of nonbiological intelligence is that once a skill is mastered by a machine, it can be
performed repeatedly at high speed, at optimal accuracy, and without tiring.
-Perhaps most important, machines can share their knowledge at extremely high speed, compared to the very
slow speed of human knowledge-sharing through language.
-Nonbiological intelligence will be able to download skills and knowledge from other machines, eventually also
from humans.
-Machines will process and switch signals at close to the speed of light (about three hundred million meters per
second), compared to about one hundred meters per second for the electrochemical signals used in biological
mammalian brains.31 This speed ratio is at least three million to one.
-Machines will have access via the Internet to all the knowledge of our human-machine civilization and will be
able to master all of this knowledge.
-Machines can pool their resources, intelligence, and memories. Two machines—or one million machines—can
join together to become one and then become separate again. Multiple machines can do both at the same time:
become one and separate simultaneously. Humans call this falling in love, but our biological ability to do this is
fleeting and unreliable.
-The combination of these traditional strengths (the pattern-recognition ability of biological human intelligence
and the speed, memory capacity and accuracy, and knowledge and skill-sharing abilities of nonbiological
intelligence) will be formidable.
-Machine intelligence will have complete freedom of design and architecture (that is, they won't be constrained
by biological limitations, such as the slow switching speed of our interneuronal connections or a fixed skull size)
as well as consistent performance at all times.
-Once nonbiological intelligence combines the traditional strengths of both humans and machines, the
nonbiological portion of our civilization's intelligence will then continue to benefit from the double exponential
growth of machine price-performance, speed, and capacity.
-Once machines achieve the ability to design and engineer technology as humans do, only at far higher speeds
and capacities, they will have access to their own designs (source code) and the ability to manipulate them.
Humans are now accomplishing something similar through biotechnology (changing the genetic and other
information processes underlying our biology), but in a much slower and far more limited way than what
machines will be able to achieve by modifying their own programs.
-Biology has inherent limitations. For example, every living organism must be built from proteins that are folded
from one-dimensional strings of amino acids. Protein-based mechanisms are lacking in strength and speed. We
will be able to reengineer all of the organs and systems in our biological bodies and brains to be vastly more
capable.
-As we will discuss in chapter 4, human intelligence does have a certain amount of plasticity (ability to change its
structure), more so than had previously been understood. But the architecture of the human brain is nonetheless
profoundly limited. For example, there is room for only about one hundred trillion interneuronal connections in
each of our skulls. A key genetic change that allowed for the greater cognitive ability of humans compared to
that of our primate ancestors was the development of a larger cerebral cortex as well as the development of
increased volume of gray-matter tissue in certain regions of the brain. This change occurred, however, on the
very slow timescale of biological evolution and still involves an inherent limit to the brain's capacity. Machines
will be able to reformulate their own designs and augment their own capacities without limit. By using
nanotechnology-based designs, their capabilities will be far greater than biological brains without increased size
or energy consumption.
-Machines will also benefit from using very fast three-dimensional molecular circuits. Today's electronic circuits
are more than one million times faster than the electrochemical switching used in mammalian brains.
Tomorrow's molecular circuits will be based on devices such as nanotubes, which are tiny cylinders of carbon
atoms that measure about ten atoms across and are five hundred times smaller than today's silicon-based
transistors. Since the signals have less distance to travel, they will also be able to operate at terahertz (trillions of
operations per second) speeds compared to the few gigahertz (billions of operations per second) speeds of
current chips.
-The rate of technological change will not be limited to human mental speeds. Machine intelligence will improve
its own abilities in a feedback cycle that unaided human intelligence will not be able to follow.
-This cycle of machine intelligence's iteratively improving its own design will become faster and faster. This is in
fact exactly what is predicted by the formula for continued acceleration of the rate of paradigm shift. One of the
objections that has been raised to the continuation of the acceleration of paradigm shift is that it ultimately
becomes much too fast for humans to follow, and so therefore, it's argued, it cannot happen. However, the shift
from biological to nonbiological intelligence will enable the trend to continue.
-Along with the accelerating improvement cycle of nonbiological intelligence, nanotechnology will enable the
manipulation of physical reality at the molecular level.
-Nanotechnology will enable the design of nanobots: robots designed at the molecular level, measured in microns
(millionths of a meter), such as "respirocytes" (mechanical red-blood cells).33 Nanobots will have myriad roles
within the human body, including reversing human aging (to the extent that this task will not already have been
completed through biotechnology, such as genetic engineering).
-Nanobots will interact with biological neurons to vastly extend human experience by creating virtual reality from
within the nervous system.
-Billions of nanobots in the capillaries of the brain will also vastly extend human intelligence.
-Once nonbiological intelligence gets a foothold in the human brain (this has already started with computerized
neural implants), the machine intelligence in our brains will grow exponentially (as it has been doing all along),
at least doubling in power each year. In contrast, biological intelligence is effectively of fixed capacity. Thus, the
nonbiological portion of our intelligence will ultimately predominate.
-Nanobots will also enhance the environment by reversing pollution from earlier industrialization.
-Nanobots called foglets that can manipulate image and sound waves will bring the morphing qualities of virtual
reality to the real world.
-The human ability to understand and respond appropriately to emotion (so-called emotional intelligence) is one
of the forms of human intelligence that will be understood and mastered by future machine intelligence. Some of
our emotional responses are tuned to optimize our intelligence in the context of our limited and frail biological
bodies. Future machine intelligence will also have "bodies" (for example, virtual bodies in virtual reality, or
projections in real reality using foglets) in order to interact with the world, but these nanoengineered bodies will
be far more capable and durable than biological human bodies. Thus, some of the "emotional" responses of
future machine intelligence will be redesigned to reflect their vastly enhanced physical capabilities.35
-As virtual reality from within the nervous system becomes competitive with real reality in terms of resolution
and believability, our experiences will increasingly take place in virtual environments.
-In virtual reality, we can be a different person both physically and emotionally. In fact, other people (such as
your romantic partner) will be able to select a different body for you than you might select for yourself (and vice
versa).
-The law of accelerating returns will continue until nonbiological intelligence comes dose to "saturating" the
matter and energy in our vicinity of the universe with our human-machine intelligence. By saturating, I mean
utilizing the matter and energy patterns for computation to an optimal degree, based on our understanding of the
physics of computation. As we approach this limit, the intelligence of our civilization will continue its expansion
in capability by spreading outward toward the rest of the universe. The speed of this expansion will quickly
achieve the maximum speed at which information can travel.
-Ultimately, the entire universe will become saturated with our intelligence. This is the destiny of the universe.
(See chapter 6.) We will determine our own fate rather than have it determined by the current "dumb," simple,
machinelike forces that rule celestial mechanics.
-The length of time it will take the universe to become intelligent to this extent depends on whether or not the
speed of light is an immutable limit. There are indications of possible subtle exceptions (or circumventions) to
this limit, which, if they exist, the vast intelligence of our civilization at this future time will be able to exploit.
Seige, it's either time to start drinking, or it's time to stop drinking, because whatever your current level of sobriety is, it's not working.
I'd rather bang my Marilyn Monrobot.
This thread contains exactly one picture. Of Bea Arthur. WTF?
It's that or the singularity.
Quote from: Grinning_Colossus on January 02, 2014, 01:28:07 PM
I'd rather bang my Marilyn Monrobot.
This thread contains exactly one picture. Of Bea Arthur. WTF?
Have one of Rue McClanahan:
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg2.timeinc.net%2Fpeople%2Fi%2F2010%2Fgalleries%2Frue-mcclanahan%2Frue-mcclanahan-11.jpg&hash=a6712a28d3929619e801c0ccee59bf0e530a35ae)
Betty White
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F31.media.tumblr.com%2Ftumblr_lol2mbjWOC1qbz9meo1_500.jpg&hash=3d15f109366af34fe0ccd1c5f7a7dcef9a71ca04)
Quote from: Barrister on January 02, 2014, 01:26:55 PM
Seige, it's either time to start drinking, or it's time to stop drinking, because whatever your current level of sobriety is, it's not working.
Is this Delerium Tremens? He's pretty out of it.
Ann Miller
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages3.cinema.de%2Fimedia%2F5097%2F2075097%2CoCdddX6QNYA%2BaT9gGiNcCgfmE6gOHmAnWMP5vMBUiPR1Em%2B3vDb9zfon3uv_jNxJfz3ogxTr3jHE26akqhRXcA%3D%3D.jpg&hash=3afd9fbd3b984467095a8e536934f4dede1d6cba)
Lange
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fnoirwhale.files.wordpress.com%2F2011%2F05%2Fnoir-crime-fiction-the-postman-always-rings-twice-1980.jpg%3Fw%3D500%26amp%3Bh%3D333&hash=51247b5de89c62652f6a70001f76fefc321edf88)
Karina
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fshard1.1stdibs.us.com%2FarchivesE%2Fart%2Fupload%2F14%2F4746%2FRaymondCauchetier.jpg&hash=dc6ddd48555916129657364bea50444ed811de17)
Green
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F2.bp.blogspot.com%2F_qm8TSvY521U%2FS-J4IJBa2II%2FAAAAAAAAAGE%2FUWcWN4MTCEc%2Fs400%2Fthedreamers1.jpg&hash=f2312b208148215c746393804e3cae9b6d0afbe6)
Cardinale
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimage.toutlecine.com%2Fphotos%2F8%2F0%2F1%2F8-1-2-1963-07-g.jpg&hash=c82cfe8acbcf6a1b98d5514f3e3a1865375cfe01)
Vitti
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcontent8.flixster.com%2Fphoto%2F31%2F04%2F71%2F3104714_gal.jpg&hash=cd3fbb54aca7f68446225aa133ea11267a2d840c)
Li
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcontent9.flixster.com%2Fphoto%2F11%2F44%2F96%2F11449627_ori.jpg&hash=4cbd3154f2462c86d9eb71428945e722d94e771e)
Paula Marshall :wub:
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F3.bp.blogspot.com%2F_qgjVwM7E6iQ%2FTFvEHt1L-lI%2FAAAAAAAAFIw%2Fdd7768-sa3A%2Fs1600%2FCupid%2B%282%29.JPG&hash=bf55936e9bfd2affbd360391d676c05c69e7dfb4)
I still need Estelle Getty for my fantasy fivesome.
Quote from: Grinning_Colossus on January 02, 2014, 03:20:31 PM
I still need Estelle Getty for my fantasy fivesome.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F4.bp.blogspot.com%2F-OcvQSapRNaE%2FUWMN8noeCZI%2FAAAAAAAAVe4%2FrK9mRNzBpc8%2Fs1600%2FMyrna.jpg&hash=b3ce093bb870c25f1d0ad8a93c298df4a6a37d05)
Thank you for being a friend. I'll be back shortly.
Whoa. :mellow: I never figured Getty was that hot.
Quote from: Siege on December 31, 2013, 04:13:01 PM
That was a bad joke. I googled golden ticket and I got blonde pubic hair. Not funny.
The golden ticket is the MacGuffin in Charlie and the Chocolate Factory by Roald Dahl: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlie_and_the_Chocolate_Factory (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlie_and_the_Chocolate_Factory)
A MacGuffin is an object or goal which drives the plot of a story.
A "story" is a series of events that relate to one another in a causative or thematic way.
A "way" is a method, style, or manner of doing something.
Quote from: Savonarola on January 02, 2014, 03:34:50 PM
Quote from: Siege on December 31, 2013, 04:13:01 PM
That was a bad joke. I googled golden ticket and I got blonde pubic hair. Not funny.
The golden ticket is the MacGuffin in Charlie and the Chocolate Factory by Roald Dahl: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlie_and_the_Chocolate_Factory (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlie_and_the_Chocolate_Factory)
A MacGuffin is an object or goal which drives the plot of a story.
I was referring to Last Action Hero. :P
Cann I post pictures tooo?
Micchelle's glare:
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.salon.com%2F2013%2F12%2Fobamas_mandela_funeral-620x412.jpg&hash=22afb567c3ae787ec25366596656fb5675ca4ef4)
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.usnews.com%2Fpubdbimages%2Fimage%2F59860%2Fwidemodern_obamaselfie_131210620x413.jpg&hash=bdbe88835373d9439613ea628fb40ed2f9cd7f56)
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fguardianlv.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2013%2F12%2Fbarack-obama-selfie-650x487.jpg&hash=3653db824a3cb364bd29bcf0eca8928a4c01a108)
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fpoliticaloutcast.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2013%2F02%2Fmichelle-obama-glare.jpg&hash=ba166d46d3d3a10aec73b5511816a382202cadd3)
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi600.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Ftt85%2FPb43905%2FPoliticalPhotos%2Fmichelle-obama-france-6-2009.jpg&hash=b719623f0bf7a50d0878d1415be3a500361eb133)
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.telegraph.co.uk%2Fmultimedia%2Farchive%2F01489%2Fcarla-barack_1489090i.jpg&hash=6f2fb42c00aae2288cb76ad449d427f0cdfbc00b)
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fthegatewaypundit.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2012%2F08%2Fflotus.jpg&hash=f15e91e97def201671d9de782acabf5f6b120ea3)
Sober up, Siege, or get out of the thread.
Siege got the jungle fever. :cool:
Harrison Ford in Raiders Of The Lost Ark.
Jimmy Stewart in Vertigo.
Brad Pitt in Fight Club, specifically that scene when he first takes his shirt off and he has those extra ab muscles down there.
Will Smith in I, Robot, specifically in that shower scene.
Cary Grant in North By Northwest.
Peter O'Toole in Lawrence Of Arabia.
Jean Reno AND Gary Oldman in Leon.
Sean Connery in Goldfinger.
Christopher Walken in The Dead Zone.
Tim Robbins in Bob Roberts.
Richard E. Grant AND Paul McGann in Withnail And I.
Tim Roth in Reservoir Dogs.
Gay.
Quote from: The Brain on January 03, 2014, 06:38:36 AM
Gay.
I'm proud that you finally feel confident to come out here in 2014.
I don't really see a pattern in that list. :hmm:
Nvm, I got it. Brazen is attracted to actors. :P
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on January 03, 2014, 06:40:29 AM
I don't really see a pattern in that list. :hmm:
Nvm, I got it. Brazen is attracted to actors. :P
:thumbsup:
The pattern is I'm attracted to good looking men in their 30s, preferably with their shirts off.
Quote from: Brazen on January 03, 2014, 06:45:17 AM
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on January 03, 2014, 06:40:29 AM
I don't really see a pattern in that list. :hmm:
Nvm, I got it. Brazen is attracted to actors. :P
:thumbsup:
The pattern is I'm attracted to good looking men in their 30s, preferably with their shirts off.
I'll soon be too old for you. :(
I forgot my favourite!
Alan Rickman, ordering popcorn in front of me with that voice at the British première of the Blade Runner director's cut at the Empire Leicester Square in 1992.
Specific enough for you?
Quote from: Brazen on January 03, 2014, 06:45:17 AM
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on January 03, 2014, 06:40:29 AM
I don't really see a pattern in that list. :hmm:
Nvm, I got it. Brazen is attracted to actors. :P
:thumbsup:
The pattern is I'm attracted to good looking men in their 30s, preferably with their shirts off.
I'm confused by the number of just meh attractiveness people on that list. :hmm:
Quote from: Brazen on January 03, 2014, 06:45:17 AM
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on January 03, 2014, 06:40:29 AM
I don't really see a pattern in that list. :hmm:
Nvm, I got it. Brazen is attracted to actors. :P
:thumbsup:
The pattern is I'm attracted to good looking men in their 30s, preferably with their shirts off.
I'm out. :(
Quote from: Brazen on January 03, 2014, 11:17:43 AM
I forgot my favourite!
Alan Rickman, ordering popcorn in front of me with that voice at the British première of the Blade Runner director's cut at the Empire Leicester Square in 1992.
Specific enough for you?
:lmfao:
This is amazing.
Why wasn't he wearing a shirt?
Quote from: The Brain on January 03, 2014, 02:14:07 PM
Why wasn't he wearing a shirt?
It was a very progressive theatre.
For some reason the thought of Poms eating popcorn, at a theater or otherwise, just doesn't seem right.
:glare:
Let's focus on the classics:
Marilyn Monroe - The Seven Year Itch
Raquel Welch - One Million Years BC
Ursula Andress - Dr. No
Rita Hayworth - Gilda
Jane Fonda - Barbarella
Brigitte Bardot - And God Created Woman
Sophia Loren - Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow
Sharon Tate - The Fearless Vampire Killers
Oh God, Tate, hell yes.
Sara Jean Underwood - Attack of the Show :P
Gail Russell - Angel and the Badman
Janet Leigh - Jet Pilot
Deanna Durbin - It Started with Eve
Quote from: The Larch on January 03, 2014, 08:20:23 PM
Let's focus on the classics:
Marilyn Monroe - The Seven Year Itch
Raquel Welch - One Million Years BC
Ursula Andress - Dr. No
Rita Hayworth - Gilda
Jane Fonda - Barbarella
Brigitte Bardot - And God Created Woman
Sophia Loren - Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow
Sharon Tate - The Fearless Vampire Killers
You forgot Catherine Deneuve in Polanski's Repulsion.
Quote from: Siege on January 02, 2014, 01:20:22 PM
-Ultimately, the entire universe will become saturated with our intelligence. This is the destiny of the universe.
(See chapter 6.) We will determine our own fate rather than have it determined by the current "dumb," simple,
machinelike forces that rule celestial mechanics.
Another planet's civ already reached this point... this is your God of the Torah.
Quote from: PRC on January 04, 2014, 02:11:21 AM
Quote from: Siege on January 02, 2014, 01:20:22 PM
-Ultimately, the entire universe will become saturated with our intelligence. This is the destiny of the universe.
(See chapter 6.) We will determine our own fate rather than have it determined by the current "dumb," simple,
machinelike forces that rule celestial mechanics.
Another planet's civ already reached this point... this is your God of the Torah.
That would be wonderful if true. :huh:
Quote from: Drakken on January 03, 2014, 10:49:09 PM
Quote from: The Larch on January 03, 2014, 08:20:23 PM
Let's focus on the classics:
Marilyn Monroe - The Seven Year Itch
Raquel Welch - One Million Years BC
Ursula Andress - Dr. No
Rita Hayworth - Gilda
Jane Fonda - Barbarella
Brigitte Bardot - And God Created Woman
Sophia Loren - Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow
Sharon Tate - The Fearless Vampire Killers
You forgot Catherine Deneuve in Polanski's Repulsion.
For some reason Deneuve never did it for me. If anything it'd be in Belle de Jour.
Too perfect?
Quote from: Admiral Yi on January 04, 2014, 02:22:27 PM
Too perfect?
Too cold and distant, not a fan of ice queens.
Emma De Caunes- French films where she is nekkid
Quote from: Drakken on January 03, 2014, 10:49:09 PM
Quote from: The Larch on January 03, 2014, 08:20:23 PM
Let's focus on the classics:
Marilyn Monroe - The Seven Year Itch
Raquel Welch - One Million Years BC
Ursula Andress - Dr. No
Rita Hayworth - Gilda
Jane Fonda - Barbarella
Brigitte Bardot - And God Created Woman
Sophia Loren - Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow
Sharon Tate - The Fearless Vampire Killers
You forgot Catherine Deneuve in Polanski's Repulsion.
Maybe it's because Repulsion isn't a classic, it's crap.
But she's pretty hot in that dumb movie I guess.
She was definitely hot in Belle De Jour. Never seen the other.
Emmanuelle Seigner in The 9th Gate.
Zsa Zsa Gabor was really, really hot back in the day.
Bleh.
Sienne Guillory in Troy.
Jane March in the Six Sense.
I thought Olivia Thirlby was extremely attractive in Dredd. I liked her hair a lot.
Quote from: Queequeg on January 06, 2014, 03:19:14 PM
I thought Olivia Thirlby was extremely attractive in Dredd. I liked her hair a lot.
She was very attractive.
But was her chin too big? :hmm:
Not as bad as Reese Witherspoon's. ^_^
I never noticed Reese' chin. Just the way her face squooshes in in the middle.
Quote from: Queequeg on January 06, 2014, 03:19:14 PM
I thought Olivia Thirlby was extremely attractive in Dredd. I liked her hair a lot.
Judge Dredd? Who is Olivia Thirlby? Pics!
Diane Lane from the old Judge Dredd movie :perv:
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdailytrojan.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2012%2F09%2FOlivia-Thirlby-in-Dredd-Lionsgate-Publicity_web.jpg&hash=6bc6a3d3249a8891e9e1c219347c0f64d741d272)
Not drop-dead in the same way as some of the people on the original list, but I remember being really drawn to her.
Watching Byzanitum. Gemma Arterton's body is hard to believe.