Why this confusion between fabulous faces and legends. In this slide, noone is looking fabulous except Rekha.You could name it Gautam Radhyekhsa's own favourite shots or something else.The caption fabulous faces definitely does not make you expect Asha bhonsle, Sachin Tendukar or Bhimsen Joshi on the slide
Re: Fabulous Faces?
by darth on Aug 16, 2010 11:07 AM
For once there's an article that is not dominated by faces from movies....do people have to be good looking to be fabulous...superficial bonehead!
Re: Re: Fabulous Faces?
by Sean Fernandes on Aug 16, 2010 11:40 AM
True, people dont have to look good to be on the fabulous list. Good job for once rediff.
Re: Re: Re: Fabulous Faces?
by asdf jkl on Aug 19, 2010 12:02 PM
They are Fabulous People, without a doubt but in these photos except Rekha, noone's face is looking fabulous. Fabulous Shots or Fabulous People or Fabulous personalities all could have been OK but Fabulous Faces is WRONG title given to these slides.
Re: Re: Fabulous Faces?
by asdf jkl on Aug 19, 2010 11:59 AM
So when did I say that rediff articles should be dominated my B wood personalities? Some people love shouting without trying to comprehend the msg. I did not say that they should not have been in the list. I said " Fabulous Faces" was wrong. Take it or leave it, their faces are not fabulous.Moron!
