Do You "Believe" Britney's New Ad?
AUG 9, 2007 AT 08:53 AM
Access Hollywood has the new ad for Britney Spears' latest fragrance, Believe, and in pure Britney fashion the ad is already causing controversy. With the blonde hair and toned body, the picture resembles a Britney we would have seen a few years ago. However, Elizabeth Arden (the company that manufactures the perfume) claims the picture was shot just a few months ago, early in the summer. Reports have now come out that Britney used a body double, the body of an assistant on set named Cayli Cavaco, but that claim is also being denied.
"We recently shot Britney Spears for the print campaign for her new fragrance Britney Spears Believe, in Santa Monica. It is true that Britney did leave the set; however, she returned after a brief time. Cayli was the wardrobe assistant on the shoot. We used her as a stand in so that we could set up the lighting while Britney was off the set. When Britney returned, we shot the national print ad with her. The only person in the national print ad for Britney's Believe fragrance is Britney Spears."
Ok, if it's not a body double, that is some major Photoshop!
Read more about: Britney Spears
I think the only people who believe that will be the ones that buy her perfume.
Aw, that pic makes me miss the old Britney.
That has to absolutely be a body double cause brit has a tatoo down low on her stomach and with those shorts pulled down so low you would see the tatoo if it were her. That is so not her body
DUH! Thank you! :)
This is obviously old Britney. She looks way younger. Do they really think people are that stupid!?
They should have named the perfume "Believe in Photoshop." Or better yet, "Skank." It would have been much more credible.
This is so old Britney. Unless they photoshopped her hair, nails, tattoos and managed to change her fugure too
I miss the old days when movies and pictures were the actual people and not computer-generated.
Ha ha ha ha - this picture is ridiculous!
Photoshop is a magic!
so,
It does not surprise me if they shot these pictures a few moths ago.
Those are not her hands. Her fingers are much shorter.
I agree this makes me miss the old Brittney.
yeah, we are all as Stupid as Brittney if we believe that! There is nothing about this photo that makes me think it is Brittney...I mean where is her double chin???
I actually thought it was JLo at first glance. It took alot of eye squinting to even see Brit in this photo.
anon
that is soooooooooooooooooo funny!!!!!!!!!!!!
hahaha
yeah thats her.....like in 1990!
Jane- hahahahahahah access hollywood! what a credible resource!
Totally agree about the hands/fingers! It was the first thing I noticed! So funny Sher!
even her face looks different!!
How appropriate is the name of the fragrance its for....
you idiot..A rep for Elizabeth Arden released the following statement..
look closer. She actually is wider and rounder-look to the left. They just did a heck of a job with shading to create the illusion of a thinner her. Also arms are held back a bit, that way extra skin goes around the back of her rather than shows up "rounded" around her upper arms. I will say there is also some major retouching.
I think that it is her body, just an old picture of her body!!
She WISHES she looked like that! Come to think of it, we all wish she looked like that!
Definitely a body double! Her arms are not that skinny. And her neck is not that long.
WOULD A WIG HAVE DARK ROOTS? AND YES, THOSE HANDS ARE A DEAD GIVEAWAY. NOT HERS!!!WHO ARE THOSE HALF WITS TRYING TO KID, ANYWAY????
diffrent hands, diffrent body, && brown roots dont show from wigs.
theres no way *to* believe this ad.
The hands and the wrists are too thin.
The "light" of the photo is really tricky, because you cannot make a right calculation of how large her waist or arms really are.
Her hair falls down around her neck, in a way that we would not be able to see the transition between a body-double and her head.
Also, her jaw-line is so well-designed here. It is to rare to see a picture of her with such a beautiful jaw-line these days.
She looks so beautiful in this picture, like her old days indeed. The reacent pictures the paparazzi take from her, are much less flattering. This is why there is such confusion about the "truthfulness" of this picture.
ONE thinf for sure, in her older days, there used to be this vivid spark in her wide big eyes. NOW, she has small eyes and look tired.
Whether it is her or not, it is not the same Britney we knew before.
Post new comment
When commenting, please be respectful to other INO readers. No racial, sexual or homophobic slurs will be tolerated.