Met Gala Fug or Fab: Kirsten Dunst


fug-or-fab

Kiki Dunst went topless to the Met Gala on Monday:

Just kidding (we would have led off with her if that were the case — who do you think we are?). Just a halter top!

A halter top that is causing me to think more about Kirsten Dunst’s boobs than I have in a tremendously long time. The more that I think about this, though, the more that I am kind of bummed out by it. Not because it’s terrible. In fact, although I am not insane about the top, it’s basically pretty. I just expected more crazy from her. But maybe that sideboob was all the crazy she could muster. What do you think?

[Photos: Getty]

react:
Leave a reply

Comments (30):

  1. Esme
    +1

    Yeah, not crazy enough; she didn’t even change her make-up. I never realized her boobs looked like that, but maybe it’s the first I’ve seen them unfettered.

  2. Helen
    +10

    I’m fine with the sideboob, but not with the supremely unnatural-looking cleavage. It’s eclipsing the rest of the dress, which is too bad because otherwise it might be kind of great.

  3. aeb
    +2

    i felt like her stance from photos i have seen indicates she thinks she looks pretty dang hot. i guess i like the dress (but could do without the tatas on such display), it’s just not thematic. sometimes i feel like her looking good is enough.

  4. Ines
    +1

    i am disappointed
    normally she is so brave… (cleavaging isn’t)

  5. Barbara
    +1

    Weirdly I really, really like this! I just wish something more exciting was happening with the hair/make up. She looks pretty, but I feel as if her head looks aways exactly the same. I guess she doesn’t want to change a winning team?

  6. Sophia Loren
    +2

    Boring, yet ugly.

  7. Crispy Phoenix
    +10

    Dislike the front. Love the back.

  8. 1st time caller
    +2

    i like the wee paisleys tho

  9. goldfish
    +5

    It sort of looks like she’s in a Showtime After Dark production of Midsummer Night’s Dream.

  10. labyrinthine
    +2

    I like the concept, but not the execution. It also doesn’t look like the halter part fits her very well.

  11.  ErinB
    0

    What a beautiful back she has!

    Maybe she brought the crazy — the crazy chest bronzer in a
    )(
    shape on her chest to enhance her cleavage in kind of a weird way (IMO, the dress would be prettier without emphasized cleave). Since I’m not there to see it in person (and would hope not to be a boob-stalker at the Met Gala), I can’t tell if this is the case or not.

  12. Stefanie
    +5

    I wish it wasnt so deep in the front. Otherwise it’s nice. Im glad to see Kiki out and about.

  13. acake
    +6

    Love it unconditionally. Dr. Sunken Tits has somehow elevated them and I am pleased.

    • Edith
      +3

      YES! As any longtime reader remembers, Kirstin Dunst anagrams to Dr. Sunken Tits, and yet here they are positively buoyant. Either she’s got some tremendous, invisible support under there (in which case, I want her secrets), or I’m forgetting what breasts were like before bearing children. Or she’s had a surgical assist, but a VERY good one.

      I’m tired of being unhappy with completely unpunk looks, but yet, still unhappy that she didn’t bring the punk, even a little bit.

      • Karen G
        +1

        I don’t remember her looking this buoyant either. I’m thinking there’s been some sort of unnatural change. The back looks lovely though.

        • Liz
          +3

          Something about how her chest looks from the front screams ‘gads of garment tape!’ to me…if so, ouch.

  14. lola
    +6

    This thing just looks odd. I can’t believe you guys thought Blake LIvely’s dress was so bad and you like this. It’s a grass skirt before the grass died. It’s just mowed and it’s dieing from the top down. I look at it and I just think “oh, must remember to mow the lawn tomorrow”.
    and then the top is so stiff, it looks like it’s the equivalent of a man’s tie masquerading as a bodice. plus it looks like it was fitted before she had a boob job and it was made for her boobs to hang out 4 inches lower. Probably it’s more that the nearly naval baring split is allowing the 2 halves to wander. Thank goodness tho- because she has plenty of side boob already.
    I will say she has a beautiful alabaster back to show off – so that’s working well here.

  15. Michelle
    +5

    It reminds me of Evan Rachel Wood’s Golden Globes dress with the feathery stuff. I like it minus the boobage.

  16. Alicia
    +1

    I love that she brought the characteristically-baked facial expression with her. Side-boob? Who cares? I got the munchies…

  17. Michelle
    0

    Do I see nipple again? maybe it’s just the hangover from Anne’s Oscar’s dress where I think I can see areola in every photo but… what am I seeing?

  18. Eirwen
    +4

    Squished boobs are tacky- fail!

  19. Nancy
    +4

    It’s pretty and well-fitting EXCEPT that her front cleavage looks fake, and I will NEVER approve of side-boob. NEVER.

  20. Amberoni13
    +1

    I think her expression here says “FINE, take my picture. I know there’s something wrong with the front, and I wish I could fix it, but apparently you don’t care. I am now thinking very nasty thoughts of you.”

  21. Sajorina
    0

    LOVE! She looks GORGEOUS and DAMN SEXY! The dress is amazing and her hair looks fabulous! The makeup is average and I would’ve given her my firstborn if she’d worn some awesome jewelry, but her boobs are FANTASTIC!

  22. Nancy
    0

    The dress is OK, but this is the second time she has looked wasted. Not a good look on the red carpet.

  23. gryt
    +1

    It reminds me of what it looks like when men get bad plugs.

  24. OughtaKnow
    0

    Well according to a blind item people are guessing is her she’s had a boob job.

    I always liked her crazy style. Not sure about the newHollyboobs though. There was nothing wrong with her boobies before.

  25. Jessica
    0

    why don’t people wear their boobs inside their clothes anymore? i think it would look good if she didn’t push them together like that.