Kim Kardashian: Playboy Magazine Outtakes-December 2007

Pilaf · November 2nd, 2007, 08:25 PM

MillionDollarBaby · November 4th, 2007, 10:42 PM

too bad they didnt use these, these look hella lot better than the shots they used

ManxMouse · November 4th, 2007, 11:16 PM

I really think they 'shopped her butt to be smaller. I have seen many photos that make be believe without a DOUBT that she has butt implants. It just looks SO unreal, naturally big butts don't pooch upwards and then out with a huge rounded edge at the very top. Just like Coco and her big ass implants.

JamieElizabeth · November 4th, 2007, 11:53 PM

Just b'cause she looks good doesn't mean she has fake ass;.

Shalev · November 5th, 2007, 03:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MillionDollarBaby

too bad they didnt use these, these look hella lot better than the shots they used

True.

Lily · November 6th, 2007, 10:44 AM

There's that dumb finger-in-the-mouth pose again.

These pics are boring. Like all "Come sex me up" pics. They used to be hot. Now there are so many, it's become extremely boring and common.

Sweetie · November 6th, 2007, 10:47 AM

She has a great body. I hate that shade of lipstick on her though.

suede · November 6th, 2007, 10:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JamieElizabeth

Just b'cause she looks good doesn't mean she has fake ass;.

I don't think her ass looks good at all, she looks ridiculous and I think some people would hope it's just a bad implant and not natural because that's really unfortunate because she has a very nicely shaped figure otherwise.

She's short with a huge ass that just makes her look like a duck.

Yeah, I'm jealous and I have to say it's fake to feel better about myself.

No.

VenusInFauxFurs · November 6th, 2007, 10:50 AM

She doesn't look as short and stumpy in these ones. There was one pic of her looking over her arse it looked like a halfling glamour shot. Her backside was massive, could have passed for a bird bath, her legs just looked stumpy and kind of big. I'm trying not to sound rude, but she just looks better in my opinion with clothes on.

Although these outtakes look better than pics that made the magazine.

suede · November 6th, 2007, 10:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by VenusInFauxFurs

She doesn't look as short and stumpy in these ones.

I happen to really like the the 3rd one from the left.
Which is kind of ironic as it focuses mainly on her backside.

LOL

Sweetie · November 6th, 2007, 10:55 AM

^ I love the panties in that shot.

TheONe · November 6th, 2007, 11:08 AM

Is this on sale already? I'll be rushing out to get it TODAY!

Mel1973 · November 6th, 2007, 11:24 AM

When I see that picture with her holding that necklace in her mouth, I hear Julia Sugarbaker say "I'm saying I want you and your equipment out of here now. If you are looking for somebody to suck pearls, then I suggest you try finding yourself an oyster. Because I am not a woman who does that, as a matter of fact, I don't know any woman who does that, because it's stupid. And it doesn't have any more to do with decorating than having cleavage and looking sexy has to do with working in a bank. These are not pictures about the women of Atlanta. These are about just the same thing they're always about. And it doesn't matter whether the clothes are on or off... it's just the same ol' message. And I don't care how many pictures you've taken of movie stars - when you start snapping photos of serious, successful businessmen like Donald Trump and Lee Iacocca in unzipped jumpsuits with wet lips, straddling chairs, then we'll talk."