Fugger: Mila Kunis

Fugs and Fabs: CinemaCon 2014


I just looked it up, and The Fault In Our Stars comes out June 6 — so Shailene Woodley will get to sit down sometime between Divergent and that one. Also, I kept misreading this event as being Cinnabon 2014, and boy, that sounds more fun.

[Photos: Getty]

react:

Golden Globes Scrolldown Fug: Mila Kunis


If this had kept going as it began, I might be swooning.

Instead, it tapered off into the color of the water in an overused mop bucket, like it lost interest in being alive. YOU SHOULD HAVE STAYED ALIVE, GOWN. I WOULD HAVE FOUND YOU.

[Photo: Getty]

react:

Fug or Fab: Mila Kunis


It’s nice to see Mila back in action, too — she’s basically been off since the Oz prequel. Come back to us, Ladies With Interesting Taste.

How about that white dress:

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

[Photos: Getty]

react:

Fugs and Fabs: Mila Kunis, Rachel Weisz, and James Franco


Do I like this dress, or am I just enamored of the fact that the perfect fierce wind and her perfect fierce face make her look like she’s stomping down a yellow-brick runway? I like to think that whenever she’s mad at Ashton Kutcher, she’ll just send him a JPEG of this face and he’ll go straight to the florist.

[Photos: Splash News]

react:

Well Played, Mila Kunis


This is not normally a color of which I approve, and yet I am going to approve of this. Hang on to your hats and glasses:

That’s also a length that I think is hard to wear, and yet I appreciate how she is wearing it. In short, for all intents and purposes, this whole thing should be a hot, moldy mess BUT IT IS NOT. Maybe this movie IS magical.

[Photo: Getty]

react:

Fug the Covers: Mila Kunis’s Australian Exploits


So, Mila Kunis isn’t having the best month of covers. First she got hosed into unrecognizability by Glamour, and then two magazines in Australia chimed in to make sure the rule of threes was in effect.

At least this FACIALLY looks like Mila, although her EXPRESSION suggests that she is extremely skeptical that: a $6.50 expenditure can make her richer; that a $9.99 accessory will change her wardrobe (is the subplot of this magazine, “Never spend more than $10″?); and that sixty seconds will make her look hotter. Unless you mean hotter as in sweltering, in which case, yes, I could go outside onto Madison Avenue and achieve that in about six seconds and then spend my extra fifty-four standing in front of a box fan. Further, Mila Kunis is someone who comes off in movies like she IS the coolest girl in Hollywood, and like your dream is to get stuck in an elevator with her and Emma Stone and then become besties and go shopping together and swap saucy stories about famous boys. The girl on this cover looks bored and kind of annoyed with you, and as if she would sit down in the stalled elevator the whole time stabbing angrily at her iPhone and pretending it was getting a signal. Finally, the unflattering melange of ruffles sits on her like armor. She’s so disconnected from it, as if she just stood there and someone snapped it onto her torso, took the shots, and then lifted it off and ushered in the next thing.

However, the Cleo cover is a dream to me compared to this horror:

Let’s hear it for InStyle Australia

react: