Is this really Scarlett Johansson’s body on the new Cosmo cover?

Much like Lady Gaga, I often feel like Scarlett Johansson over-saturates the market whenever she has a new project. Scar is appearing (in a supporting role) in the new Cameron Crowe film, We Bought a Zoo. It doesn’t look like any kind of ground-breaking, award-potential film, and Scarlett’s performance looks pretty basic-to-horrible, judging solely from the trailer. So how is a supporting role in a non-blockbuster, not-acclaimed film somehow allowing Scarlett to take the covers of Vanity Fair, Interview and now Cosmopolitan, all within a few months? I don’t know. I don’t think Scarlett is that important, honestly. I don’t hate the girl, I just don’t think she’s all that talented or worth all of this fuss.

Anyway, Cosmo just released their cover of Scarlett, although this is a really weird image that I would not have selected for a cover. That’s not her body, correct? They, like, stuck Scarlett’s head on Minka Kelly’s body, I think. The dress is bad, the hair isn’t great, and the whole endeavor looks like a successful Photoshop project. Cosmo also released a quote from their cover interview:

“I’m attracted to the quality of being adventurous and perhaps a bit mischievous and also questioning authority and being proactive. If that makes up a quintessential bad boy, then whatever. I’m not at all attracted to meanness or bullying, but I do think conviction is attractive. I mean, really, who doesn’t?” – Scarlett Johansson in the January issue of Cosmo

[From Cosmo]

Scarlett is just describing Sean Penn, correct? Do you think she’s still hung up on Penn’s jock? I think she might be. One of the blind items that I’ve always believed was Scarlett was that one about a young actress who thought boning Oscar winners would make her more talented and award-worthy. Allegedly, Scarlett is currently boning Joseph Gordon Levitt, but I don’t know if it’s serious or anything. If she’s serious about boning Oscar winners, I’d like to see her with Adrien Brody next. They would make an interesting pair.

Cover courtesy of Cosmo, additional photos courtesy of Fame.

 

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

57 Responses to “Is this really Scarlett Johansson’s body on the new Cosmo cover?”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Nancy C. says:

    a lot of the people on covers aren’t worth the fuss, but Scarlett is beautiful. she slimmed down for that superhero role she played. i just love her!

  2. Sisi says:

    What a lazy cover :/ if thats the best pic the photographer, stylist and Scarlett had to offer, imagine the rejected pictures…

  3. theaPie says:

    No one is their real self on magazine covers! She’s been slimmified, tweaked and airbrushed. Also, what is with her eyebrows these days? Didn’t they used to be arched?

  4. Jackson says:

    That doesn’t even look like her face, let alone her body. It’s like they puffed up her face and trimmed down her body. Looks more like a Beginner Photoshop project to me. And I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: this chick would never have even gotten an acting job as a kid if it weren’t for her husky voice. Without that she is completely forgettable and bland.

  5. STOPGOOP says:

    She slimmed down, as evidenced by the lack of boob. I find her MEH

  6. Tazina says:

    Why wouldn’t it be her on the cover? She has a great body normally, no need to get a stand-in.

  7. Incredulous says:

    Magazine puts Photoshop on cover again shocker.

  8. laura says:

    please just like every other magazine cover out there she’s photoshopped. do you know how easy it is to cut out and reshape something against a white back drop? I could look like that too in a matter of minutes.

  9. HotPockets says:

    The body on any magazine cover is never an accurate depiction of the real thing. I thought we all knew this.

    Adele’s body on Cosmo was photo-shopped into an oblivion, it is no different for ScarJo.

  10. Nikster says:

    I just want to know where my other g spot is.

  11. Findley says:

    They wanted her to look more like Kristen Stewart…

    (Nikster–me too! LOL–prob yr brain.)

  12. Orange Cone says:

    she looks like Ke$ha w/red hair on the Cosmo cover.

  13. madpoe says:

    Oooh – this reminds me that their Bedside Astrologer is out! :)

  14. Leigh says:

    Adrian Brody + Scarlett Johansson.. Good call!

  15. novaraen says:

    She’s totally wall eyed in this photo and where did her tata’s go?? Plus her hair looks like it’s about to fall out or break off. Looks extra crispy.

  16. Poirot says:

    I love how on the frontpage there’s a byline unerneath her

    ‘I knew he was the wrong guy on our Wedding Day’

    As if its an actual quote fom Scar Jo
    Sad to see that even mags like Cosmo are so skeezy.

  17. rooci says:

    Whatever. I still say the girl looks like she’s having an allergic reaction to something. Her nose is too big for her face, her cheeks are too big, her lips are too big. Her eyes aren’t big enough given every other feature. All I can think of when I see her, especially if she’s smiling, is that I want to give her a tissue because she looks like she’s going to need to blow her nose at any moment. Maybe it’s just me. I don’t dislike her. I just cannot seem to look at her without thinking she’s “stuffy” or needs some Nyquil. (And her so-called husky voice doesn’t help either. If she could be typecast at this point it would be as a congestion-relieving product commercial actress.)

  18. BigHair&Pearls says:

    Thanks Kaiser! I’ve been waiting for someone else to say this: I don’t hate her either, but I don’t see what all the fuss is about! I have really tried to like her but I always think “meh”.

  19. SisterMaryHotPantz says:

    It doesnt even look much like her face. Whats up with that?

  20. Anna says:

    She hasn’t looked good in a very long time. She looks busted on the cover. Honestly, someone is out to get her. How hard is it to make Scarlett sexy? Please.

  21. Jover says:

    Give me the cosmo covers of the 70s/80s tacky sexy gaudy but at least interesting to look at not the celeb of the moment. BTW, given scarjo’s political pretensions, nothing says serious political intellectual than a photoshopped cosmo cover.

  22. Gosh I hope not. What happened to her hot body? she lost her voluptuousness.

  23. CTgirl says:

    The styling makes her look like a refuge from the 1980s. Sad.

  24. dahlia1947 says:

    He*L no that is not her body! So much photoshop was used here! PHOTOSHOP OVERLOAD!

  25. Turtle Dove says:

    “I’m not at all attracted to meanness or bullying…”

    Uhh… right. Didn’t she mean girl a woman in the ladies room per a Lainey blind that was later revealed: “She was in the ladies’ room recently at a private event, a private no-fans non-civilian event, standing next to an industry type at the counter. The other woman complimented her on her appearance, something to effect of: that’s a great dress, it looks amazing on you … And her answer? Hear this with a sneer: ‘Is this the moment when I’m supposed to tell you that you look good too?’
    And walked away.”

    My take on her lately is that she’s had so many set backs and failures (brought on by her own stupidity) that she’s leaving little slam-Ryan crumbs. He has been nothing but generous post divorce, so she better cool it.

  26. Caity says:

    If that is her body her head is ginormous!

  27. Amy says:

    Where is her neck!? It looks like a cut/paste job to me, too. If nothing else, they shrunk her body and left her head at its original size.

  28. Cerulean says:

    When did Glamour Shots start doing Cosmo covers for them? All she needs is a feather boa.
    Seriously, this looks awkward and painful.

  29. Barbara says:

    Cosmo covers stopped being fabulous when HGB and Francesco Scavullo left the magazine.

  30. FingerBinger says:

    Eff the haters she looks good.

  31. whatevs says:

    no minka kelly is way thinner. aside from the wight i think scarjo’s boobs look smaller tho

  32. cindy says:

    This girl is so heinous it amazes me. She looked disgusting in Iron man. Only in the cropped ads of Dolce does she look decent. Yet this country complains about Kim Kardashian…who is stunning. ScarJo=piglet

  33. Jag says:

    Her facial expressions have been so weird on the last few covers y’all have shown. She used to know how to give good face.

  34. normades says:

    Bad actress, “full of it” interviews, overexposed in general… ScarJo’s star is going down faster than this beer I’m drinking. She has been eclisped by all the “newcomers” (Laurence, Mulligan, Stone et al.)

  35. mademoiselle says:

    I have no particular love/hate for her but she really does resemble a piglet. I have struggled and completely fail to find her attractive in any way. And then there is the terrible acting, poor taste in men…. Go away Scarlett and take some acting lessons.

  36. Lady_Luck says:

    Agreed – terrible cover. Ugh, that red hair, she just shouldn’t go there.

    Yep, seems she’s hung up on Penn still. I really don’t get this woman. Her and Cameron, they both insist on clinging onto douche-bags, like some sick, twisted sort of self-sabotage routine for life.

    She is not aging particularly well either. I imagine her to be the frumpy, middle-aged woman you see in curlers walking down the street with weight that just won’t budge.

  37. Jules says:

    She looks awful in the auburn or black shades, she needs to go back to blonde/caramel immediately.

  38. wunder says:

    Red hair dye is really unflattering. . . what was she thinking? (oh yeah, just strike that)

  39. Tessa says:

    There is no way that is her body! I think that she has a beautiful, curvy figure, and that body is DEFINITELY not it! What happened to her boobs, waist, and butt?? Not only that, but like everyone else said, this is a lazy picture. They totally could have done her hair better, she has beautiful hair. And the dress, ugh. This is the best they could do??

  40. Meanchick says:

    That cover is butt fugly.