May 23 2006
Oh, dear. SMG fugged at Go Fug Yourself.
The ladies at Go Fug Yourself did not like what SMG wore the the Cannes Film Festival premiere of Southland Tales or how thin she looks.
You need to log in to be able to post comments.
About membership.


phlebotinin | May 23, 07:21 CET
Whatever makes them sleep at night.
Kyotoyoshi | May 23, 07:25 CET
michel | May 23, 07:36 CET
AuburnTiger | May 23, 07:50 CET
totally0random | May 23, 08:06 CET
Impossible | May 23, 08:10 CET
billz | May 23, 08:29 CET
GrrrAargh | May 23, 08:44 CET
But the dress did kind of suck.
Xane | May 23, 09:10 CET
mikejer | May 23, 09:16 CET
willbueche | May 23, 09:33 CET
That having been said, I do wish she'd get back some of her baby fat. This push for really thin actresses often makes the part of my brain that looks at pretty girls short-circuit into the "Maybe I should pet her, give her some warm milk, wrap her in a towel and see if the vet can't find a way to fatten her up" drive.
The Lindsay Wagner thing is going to stick with me.
Ocular | May 23, 09:46 CET
And, I hate to say it but that is one very unattractive dress. She usually looks gorgeous in everything she wears.
[ edited by Firefly Flanatic on 2006-05-23 08:00 ]
Firefly Flanatic | May 23, 09:59 CET
Simon | May 23, 10:13 CET
I also agree with what everyone is saying about the snark. That bit just dripped venom. I guess I just don't get FUGgies or whatever. I hope she never sees this or hears about it. Can you imagine reading something like that about yourself?? Yech. I know that people who seek to be a celebrity have to expect the good and the bad aspects of it, but that was cruel.
SangChaud | May 23, 10:52 CET
Firefly Flanatic | May 23, 10:59 CET
Please, the snark wasn't even well-done. I could write better snark with my eyes closed. It's okay to focus on how badly the dress fits or whatever...but please, focus on the outfit. I get that it's a site created for the sake of being mean [about people looking fugly] but I've seen fugly and that ain't it.
And yeah, I'm sure if Sarah read that...she'd just weep into her millions of dollars and completely disregard how idiotic and petty the fug report was.
Kyotoyoshi | May 23, 11:02 CET
Being famous nets you both sides of celebrity (and the two reactions are really two sides of the same coin...but I won't bore you with Lacanian analysis!).
Loiosh | May 23, 11:02 CET
And I... liked the dress. But I don't understand fashion.
Gouki | May 23, 11:58 CET
(though personally I don't think it's a very pretty or flattering dress and while SMG's weight is definitely her own business I worry that maybe she - among others - feels pressure to conform to unhealthy eating practices in order to get work. Kind of ironic for the woman who played a feminist icon, don'tcha think ?)
Saje | May 23, 13:40 CET
However, I'm happy to see that even gofugyourself loves Lordi, the Finnish Eurovision song contest winner! Can't you just imagine Buffy against Lordi :-) See them almost side by side at the main page.
Karenina | May 23, 14:18 CET
The bitchyness is kinda the point. And the majority of the time, those girls are so so right.
Angelite | May 23, 15:08 CET
Sarah looks great and is getting all the roles she could shake a stick at, I guess that means she gets the last laugh over a group of jealous "wish we were her" gals.
Behind every famous person there will always be someone standing around whining...." but, but, but....she isn't THAT pretty!"
Sorry, in this case she is, so deal.
cheryl | May 23, 15:20 CET
What I dislike most of that post is how bitchy can be with POINTLESS things. Women have fought along generations to be looked more deeply than this, haven't we? If I was Sarah, I guess I'd prefer to be "fugged" _is it correct? regarding my work, even if it really sucks, and not my dresses, please!
When Sarah visited Spain to promote "The Grid" at Sitges Festival, most of girls who worked there _and I know a bunch, were almost as bitchy as the FUG ladies... because she didn't frequented the parties and preferred to spend time with her husband. The workers told me she was "too weird to be a famous actress"... really deep thought from them, right? :(
Small Blue Thing | May 23, 15:57 CET
Ilana | May 23, 16:03 CET
Gouki | May 23, 16:07 CET
Honestly, I don't at all care what Sarah wears in public. As long as she keeps getting work and does stuff she's happy with, she can wear all the ugly dresses she wants to in the mean time :-). I mean, I love Sarah as an actress, I want to see stuff she's in, and I'm even interested in the person behind what we see on screen. But her dress sense? I just don't care :-)
As for actresses "starving themselves": it's always a slippery discussion. On the one hand: it's everone's own business how much they weigh or what they look like, even if their choice proves unhealthy (which I still don't believe is true in SMG's case). It's another thing entirely to discuss the pressure in hollywood to lose too much weight (which adds to the public perception of "what people should look like") or educate people on what's a healthy weight to have and what isn't, but that's clearly all off-topic here.
GVH | May 23, 16:31 CET
electricspacegirl | May 23, 16:31 CET
[ edited by syd on 2006-05-23 14:53 ]
syd | May 23, 16:52 CET
I hardly ever read the FUG stuff, but I have to say their piece on Tom Cruise promoting Mission: Impossible III from eariler this year was one of the funniest things I have ever read.
UnpluggedCrazy | May 23, 17:33 CET
They should fug Lacan's "lack" of fashion sense.
I can see the resemblance, but who Sarah has always reminded me of is a young Barbara Stanwyck, particularly since she got thinner. Similar features, voice, intelligence and projection of a strong, independent character with a flair for witty humor. I'm usually not much for remakes, but if Sarah did remakes of, say, "Ball of Fire", "Double Indemnity" or "The Strange Love of Martha Ivers" I would love it.
jaynelovesvera | May 23, 17:50 CET
cronopio | May 23, 18:36 CET
I believe that this article was writen by angry fat people.
Ginny | May 23, 19:23 CET
cmbackshane | May 23, 19:39 CET
I could also do without the commentary about weight, whether too fat or too thin - we're far too obsessed with the subject in this country. I do think the dress contributes to making her look exceptionally skinny, which might be one reason the fuggers mentioned it, but it's amazing to me how quickly the commentary here has turned into yet another weight discussion. And the facial expression, as others mentioned, is just the inevitable result of having lots of photos taken.
The snark on Freddie - while probably not the fairest to Sarah - didn't bother me as much. Overall, I found the writing not terribly witty or funny, and pretty mean, though certainly not the cruelest they can be. But the dress was probably deserving of a fug mention.
acp | May 23, 19:43 CET
[ edited by Impossible on 2006-05-23 18:23 ]
Impossible | May 23, 20:21 CET
jverse | May 23, 21:30 CET
The point of the site is to comment on public photos of celebrities (usually at events) that anyone with the internet has access to. And the point is to snark, which they do very well. They do, however, give credit when it's due—if they like part of an outfit (or someone's skin or hair), they say it. And when one of the their usual "fuggees" shows up well-dressed, they point that out, too (see the Peldons).
SMG hasn't been on their radar before that I recall. If you can go with it, they are very funny. And, while I didn't like SMG's dress, you see some incredibly awful outfits on there.
Gaudior | May 23, 21:51 CET
If you'll read other GoFugYourself posts, you'll find that the ladies (and their gentleman apprentice) who run the show are fans of fashion and fans of celebrities. From this post, it is pretty clear that they have enjoyed Sarah's work and fashion taste in the past.
The GFY medium is snark (as is most of the web's), but their message is--usually--not meant cruelly. Gaudior is right: celebrities at press events are meant to be photographed, and their pictures are meant to be circulated and discussed. The GFY girls are not tastemakers nor slanderers: they're opinionated girls (whose weight is not relevant) who write an entertaining blog about celebrity fashion.
Harmless fun.
[ edited by blutortu on 2006-05-23 20:51 ]
blutortu | May 23, 22:30 CET
I agree that it would have looked better if it actually fit her.
Rogue | May 23, 23:01 CET
Apart from the comments, that dress is atrocious. Dear god, talk about unflattering. It's actually an accomplshment to make SMG look BAD. Did they just wrap some curtains around her or something? Clothes are suppose to positively accentuate your shape. Not....turn a beautiful woman into a wrapped lamp post. Damn and she's usually pretty good with what she wears.
As for her weight, no, none of our business. But I've been wondering about her health since S6. Hey, maybe she's fine. I just really hope that in a few years, we won't be seeing her writing a book about her having had an eating disorder or something. She wouldn't be the first actress the industry pushed into it.
EdDantes | May 23, 23:02 CET
EdDantes: She always lost weight during the shooting of a season of 'Buffy'. Not surprisingly. She put on her usual little bit of weight when the show ended, and has been pretty much exactly the same weight since then IMO. She's certainly not a sack of bones. In appropriate outfits, she looks pretty toned to me.
If her weight isn't any of our business, there shouldn't really be a "but" following that statement.
[ edited by Impossible on 2006-05-23 21:18 ]
Impossible | May 23, 23:13 CET
So you'll be posting a pic of yourself then as well, right?
Allyson | May 23, 23:47 CET
If her weight isn't any of our business, there shouldn't really be a "but" following that statement.
I think we can still wonder about things that aren't our business. I mean, it was no one's business if Bill Clinton cheated on his wife, but a LOT of people felt compelled to talk about it!
And I think Ed was more talking about concern for her health, rather than saying he SMG's weight should be somehow in his control and his opinion should matter to her.
Rogue Slayer | May 24, 00:00 CET
I've found much GFY stuff quite funny. Still, I wish they'd stick to the fashion critique, and steer clear of the weight thing. That never helps.
SoddingNancyTribe | May 24, 00:19 CET
rightjealooouuuusss!There, I fixed that for you ;-)
t r a c y | May 24, 02:04 CET
Exactly. For example, this afternoon's desperate Tara Reid intervention that included: "Is your American Pie contemporary Alyson Hannigan photographed looking like she's been styled solely using cast-offs from streetwalker's White Elephant sale?" :D
barest_smidgen | May 24, 02:07 CET
EdDantes, you could be writing for them with this paragraph! You've got the tone and style right.
If you read them regularly, they do mention when people (usually women) seem too thin to them—and in many cases, these stars' weights are already being discussed (e.g. Nicole Ritchie).
Don't like it? Don't find it funny? Don't go there.
[ edited by Gaudior on 2006-05-24 00:18 ]
Gaudior | May 24, 02:10 CET
Some people find this kind of stuff funny, others find it offensive. Gellar got off lightly compared to some of the other victims of the site's "humour", but that really isn't the point. It could be argued that it simply helps to keep alive the belief that women should be judged on their looks (in this case represented partly by their fashion choices, although the comments seem to regularly go beyond just that) and very little else.
That is certainly very good advice, but would we want to stretch its use to justify the existence of websites spouting, for example, racist hatred? Okay, that is an extreme comparison, but what one person considers to be offensive, there is always someone else who doesn't.
And just as a side note, "bimbo" and "dumb bitch" have both been used here in recent times to describe female characters in 'Buffy' and 'Angel'.
Edited to correct typos caused by old age and failing eyesight.
[ edited by dashboardprophet on 2006-05-24 00:46 ]
alien lanes | May 24, 02:39 CET
I just can't really think of anything else to say about it.
I am feeling slightly defensive of SMG even though I am not her biggest fan. piffle on them.
ruthless1 | May 24, 02:42 CET
In all the other photos I've seen of her from Cannes, she looks gorgeous.
Reddygirl | May 24, 02:59 CET
And the comments about them being fat and ugly is not only uncalled for, it's ridiculous since they both used to have a picture up on the site and they were perfectly normal-looking and attractive girls.
gilraen | May 24, 03:47 CET
jverse | May 24, 04:02 CET
I've seen a lot of SMG's pictures from Cannes and I personally didn't find the premiere gown very appealing and flattering on Sarah, who usually looks fantastic. The picture used for the article is also not the best one. But I guess that's really the purpose of the Fug site. ;)
There are some nice pics of Sarah on SMGFan.com from Cannes. There is one in particular from the premiere where she's looking to the side straight at the camera and her smile is just glowing. The photocall pictures are very nice too.
Silent Night | May 24, 05:52 CET
hmmm... this culture of mean is just not fun...
It's not even campy fun... like John Waters... just seems like unprincipled bitchiness to me
hbojo | May 24, 05:52 CET
It's supposed to be commentary about "fugliness", not her husband, or her career choices. The piece was just badly written. It doesn't matter if one is a fan of Sarah or not...it was just stupid catty commentary.
Meh.
Kyotoyoshi | May 24, 08:04 CET
Methinks. Not that I shouldn't be working instead of commenting on silly things like this. *s*
bschnell | May 24, 12:21 CET
They should fug Lacan's "lack" of fashion sense.
That's what I'd call "whedonesque"!! :)
Small Blue Thing | May 24, 14:31 CET
BTW, dashboardprophet, there are sites that are racist. the KKK has it's own site, though they say they're sharing love, not hate.
[ edited by Gaudior on 2006-05-24 23:30 ]
Gaudior | May 24, 20:39 CET