Random Fug Scrolldown: Penelope Austin


I’m not sure how else to say this except: At the Australian Star Trek premiere, this… is a thing that actually happened.

It’s like she’s wearing the break in the changing-room curtain — you know, when it doesn’t pull cleanly to the opposite wall, and someone walks by and accidentally sees you between pairs of pants. This is not a dress; it’s a snapshot of the act of getting undressed. And not for nothing, it’s REALLY SUPER FREAKY. YOUR PANTIES ARE YOUR BUSINESS.

[Photo: Getty]

react:
Leave a reply

Comments (67):

  1. Willow
    +26

    When your hair is covering more of your modesty than your dress; you know you have a problem.

    • glee
      0

      Wait – are we sure this is down under? I mean, Australia, obvs – because the background behind this… person is London.

      • Gigi
        0

        It’s just a printed backdrop. You can see how it falls on the red carpet.

        • Michelle J.
          0

          I think the point is… why would an Aussie event use a backdrop depicting London? You’d think they’d use Sydney or wherever this event is supposedly taking place.

          • Lindsay
            0

            It is the Star Trek promotional backdrop – a fancy, more interesting step and repeat to promote the movie. Other walls had “Star Trek”, the release date, and one even had a larger than life size shot of the main characters. Other actors in front of it, from a different angle, not head on: (http://www.demotiximages.com/photo/1987083/star-trek-darkness-australian-premiere)

            Why London? In the film a lot of the action on Earth takes place in London. The skyline is also on the promotional posters and featured heavily in the trailer.

            • Tamburlaine
              0

              Most of those towers don’t currently exist, apart from St Mary Axe (the Gherkin), by the way.

              Note how I’m carefully not talking about the “dress”…

            • Emma
              +1

              Also, the famous London Gherkin is obviously a spaceship. I mean, come on.

      • Chris P
        +3

        I’m pretty sure it’s down under. This picture shows more of it than I feel comfortable viewing.

  2. Mara
    +9

    PUBIC REGION WHAT.

  3. Anita
    +29

    I can’t even figure out what’s going on here, anatomically speaking. She looks like one of those dolls that twists at the waist, and someone’s twisted her bottom half clear off and reattached it in a wholly unnatural way. This may give me nightmares.

    • Leelee
      +11

      I have spent far too long looking at her crotch, trying to figure out WHAT IS HAPPENING.

    • Lisa
      +2

      Yes! That’s exactly what I was thinking. I couldn’t even figure out the dress because I was so busy trying to figure how they put her body back together in such an odd way. Also, the hair adds to the distraction.

  4. Lizzy
    +8

    It appears that her tresses are covering a transparent bodice.
    Plop her on a horse and you have Lady Godiva.

    • Helen
      +2

      Except people wanted to look at Lady Godiva.

      Look at Austin’s face… you can practically hear her thinking, Oh no, I’ve made a terrible mistake. I just want to go home and change!

      I’m torn between feeling annoyed with her for doing this in the first place, and terribly sorry for her because there was no way out once it was done.

    • Miriam
      +7

      Definitely transparent- check out the runway version:
      http://www.news.com.au/entertainment/celebrity/first-it-was-angelinas-right-leg-now-the-thigh-high-dress-split-reaches-a-whole-new-level/story-fn9076o9-1226628655222

      and an Aussie style host’s comments, haha:
      “On the other hand, I can’t quite equate sexy with a split that has been prematurely cut off with boy-leg or granny underpants.
      I reckon if you are going to rock the split, be prepared to bare a lot of skin. Or get out the needle and thread and sew it down to a length that doesn’t need the giant undie addition.”

      • Art Eclectic
        +6

        What’s kind of hilarious is that she’s all proud of her thigh-high slit and visible spanx but too modest to move her hair out of the way and show the transparent top. Panties are ok but nipples are a bridge too far? What?

        • Heather
          0

          Are we sure it’s transparent? Runway versions get lined for the red-carpet all the time. Having said that… she certainly hasn’t earned the benefit of the doubt, I suppose…

  5. Rowynn
    +4

    This was a Star Trek premiere. Couldn’t we have had a pic of Benedict Cumberbatch instead? I don’t care HOW revealing his clothes are!

    • Stefanie
      +3

      I just cant get behind Cumberbatch. He will always be the creeper rapist in Atonement saying “You have to bite it.” Gag me.

      • Rowynn
        +2

        Stefanie, he creeped me out in Atonement, too. But I didn’t see that until I had already seen Sherlock, so to me, he will always be Sherlock. Also, he made a sweet and touching movie with Tom Hardy called Stuart: A Life Lived Backward. If you see him in that, its pretty much a palate cleanser to counteract Atonement. The whole movie is available on YouTube, of all places. It’s worth seeing.

        • Rowynn
          0

          Oh, and if you weren’t a Tom Hardy fan before, that movie will make you a fan. He is amazing in it.

      • Heather
        0

        As far as I can tell, BC was not there.

  6. Miss Louise
    +11

    My eyes can’t stop oscillating between those dark fleshtone granny pants (not even a match with her skin – please girl, small mercies) and the horrible, dry-looking ends of her hair – all the while catching glimpses of the opened-curtain dress, which I just want to safety-pin together for everyone’s sake. Clearly she decided to boldly go where no fugger has gone before.

  7. Linda
    0

    I’ve been up since 4 am, so I can’t even form a sentence.

    My brain is just “what… what….. what”.

  8. regina
    +1

    NO! WHY? NO!

  9. Rachael
    +1

    What the what?

  10. Trace
    +1

    Who exactly is this girl?

  11. Kristin
    +2

    A new low of fugdom. Let’s hope she gets her head screwed on correctly soon.

  12. Helen
    +5

    It was inevitable that eventually the super-high side-slit and granny-panties phenomena would meet, and go to their natural furthest extremes in battling it out together.

    Let us hope this brings a merciful end to both.

  13. Mahogany A.
    +5

    I can’t I just can’t. She looks like a naked shower curtain and she is gonna need a chiropractor after this because that is no way shape or form a natural pose. I’m also gonna need a break from sheer seriously its getting out of control. If your hair has to protect your modesty and your not Eve and we are not in the garden of Eden then I have a problem.

  14. Lori
    +3

    Also, can we please talk about her feet, or rather, what’s on them and how she bends them that way and remains upright?

    • Helen
      +1

      Right? It looks like she’s about to fall over, and no wonder.

      The super-high heels tried to get in on this battle, too. They failed, but it was a good effort… those shoes darned near toppled the actress all on their own.

    • Lori
      +1

      Yeah, I just don’t get those super-high shoes. My toes just don’t bend that way.

  15. amys
    0

    Celine Dion, Ke$ha and E!s Heather MacDonald all rolled into one misguided spanky wearing fool. Perhaps she’s vying to become the new L’eggs spokeswoman?

    • Cora
      +8

      Yeah, and Erin Wasson wishes she’d thought of it first.

      • Helen
        +1

        Haha, you KNOW if Wasson sees this, she’s going to be thinking, “Bitch stole my look!”

  16. nicole
    +1

    what in the hell am I looking at? this is an accident, right?

  17. skitzfiggitous
    +11

    She is proportionally vexing. I can’t tell what parts go where. Is she standing sideways? Is she just that thin? Is she wringing herself out? I AM SO CONFUSED.

  18. ringthing
    +3

    Man, this level of tacky combined with that…hair, just makes me concerned about our collective humanity.

  19. Stefanie
    +4

    I think I need a drink.

  20. Susie
    +1

    I still don’t know what I’m looking at. Is she wearing nude granny panties and like, what? Showing it? Not behind something sheer? What? I’m so confused!

  21.  deee
    +2

    I am so disturbed by this. isn’t there law against having a peek a boo hooha and bare nips in public? And the hair looks like the Dumbledore’s beard. I’m speechless.

  22. Erin
    +1

    Before I saw the picture of the runway version, I was just hoping beyond hope that the dress tore when she was getting out of the limo, and she was just putting a brave face on and trying to make the best of a bad situation.

    Alas, no such luck.

    (what is fashion coming to when a car-exiting-dress-tear would be the best of all possible worlds??)

    I can’t wait to see Beyonce’s “Mrs. Carter Tour” response to this blatant “whose waxer is better” challenge.

    • Erin
      +1

      and obviously by “can’t wait” I mean “am slightly terrified”… eek.

  23. maryse
    +6

    i have to say i’m relieved she’s wearing those underpants.

  24. Reporter Laydee
    +6

    Your Panties are Your Business would make a great band name/book title.

  25. Reporter Laydee
    +3

    Oops, hit send too soon. Was going to add that my biggest peeve with the whole sheer trend is the pairing of granny panties. If you’re so risque and you want to let everyone know you’re into your body/form and oozing confidence don’t undermine it with a pair of panties that look like a bathing costume from the 1920s.

  26. Goldfish
    0

    It’s like a mannequin you think is person, but then you see the bottom half isn’t screwed on correctly and it suddenly is revealed to be a mannequin after all.

    A child shopping with his/her mother would have serious issues behind this.

  27. Beth
    0

    Those are granny panties? I thought it was a g-string! (I was afraid to look too closely, I have to admit.)

  28. Stephanie
    +5

    You know, I feel like this would have worked at least SOMEWHAT if she had done something fun with the underwear instead of frumpy, mis-colored underwear. Like, gold sparkly granny panties, or something with ribbons or hot pink lace or SOMETHING that acknowledges the high split. Like “Hey! I know it’s kind of an awkward dress, but I’m making up for it by showing you these totally rad undies! There’s a PURPOSE to it other than to make you uncomfortable!”

    • Helen
      0

      Oh, or if it were a matching panty for that famous Victoria’s Secret bra made out of diamonds and… um… diamonds, pretty much!

    • goldfish
      +2

      I get your idea — I had as suite-mate in college like that — “I don’t have class, so I will show you my underwear to compensate.” I was there to witness this several times, and there just aren’t underwear that can compensate.

      • Helen
        +1

        Agreed, there’s no way to class this up, that’s just impossible, but it might look more attractive and/or more interesting with better underwear. I mean, if you’re going to show your underwear, at LEAST make it underwear worth looking at! ;-)

    • Val
      +2

      I could go with the gold sparkly underoos idea…

  29. Julia
    +6

    IF ONLY this could have gone up against the vagkin in Fug Madness. Epic.

  30. Erykah
    +1

    Can I point out the colour of that foot compared to the rest of her? AWFUL fake tanning.

  31. Claire1
    +1

    ..and this is why I take the large dressing rooms when I shop. So that I might practice lunges and squats and turns and twists and sitting down and standing up and over the head reaches and toe touches…..
    Seriously, if you all hear a woman in the dressing room next to yours doing what sounds like circuit training…. say “hi”….I’m just trying to avoid THIS kind of issue.

  32. Sally
    +1

    I can’t stop staring at her shoes- she looks like she is practically en pointe in those things! Well, I also can’t stop staring at the twisted mannequin body either.

  33. SPJava
    +1

    The whole thing is like porn Glinda the not very Good instead quite Nasty Witch.
    What I will never understand is how these women, even with questionable intelligence because you have to at least allow for that, get talked into these absurd outfits.
    I mean, the slit, the panties, the top covered by the long, frazzled, what I assume are, extensions and the latest in clubbed footwear.
    Its like she should be sending a distress signal. What an embarassment.

  34. Vandalfan
    +1

    Her hair came off of a hand me down Barbie dragged through Walmart by a sticky three-year-old. The gown is the dressing room curtain.

  35. Emma
    +1

    There was an episode of Frasier where his real life then-wife Camille turns up at a party dressed as Eve. She basically wears a nude body stocking with an ivy leaf and a long blonde wig. This is basically that, sans ivy leaf.

  36. Callie
    +1

    WHAT IS THIS?

  37. Lily1214
    0

    Oh my goodness!!

  38. LucySays
    0

    NO. Just NO.
    Maybe J.Lo can pull this.