LOLZ they’ve made Hermione’s boobies bigger for the IMAX poster of Harry Potter and The Order of The Phoenix.
Oh Hermione! How you’ve grown!
ADDED: Animated .gif of the difference!
Thanks stupid photoshop user!
UPDATE:
LONDON, May 6, 2007 (UPI via COMTEX) — Warner Bros. Pictures is under fire for an electronically enhanced photo of “Harry Potter” star Emma Watson advertising the newest installment in the series.
In the new poster for the version of the film for Imax 3D cinemas, the 17-year-old actress, who plays 15-year-old Hermione Granger, appears to have had her bust enhanced, The Mail on Sunday reported.
A similar photo in ads for the regular film version of “Harry Potter And The Order Of The Phoenix” is un-altered.
The editor of a Harry Potter fan Web site, Melissa Anelli, said hundreds of fans have already posted angry messages.
“Emma Watson is playing a 15-year-old girl, and she herself is under 18,” she said. “I get the full heebie jeebies thinking about the person who sat there thinking: ‘Now, if we cinch her waist a bit, and inflate her bust a bit, and give her some dramatic lighting and more blonde hair, this would be a much better picture.'”
Warner Bros. released a statement saying the enhanced image was not approved.
“This is not an official poster. Unfortunately this image was accidentally posted on the Imax website. The mistake was promptly rectified and the image taken down,” the statement said.
Not bigger. Shrunken screen.
#1 | Comment by Arion — May 7, 2007 @ 3:30 am
That’s pretty frigg’n funny right there.
#2 | Comment by hitokirivader — May 7, 2007 @ 3:31 am
first comment
#3 | Comment by Ed — May 7, 2007 @ 3:31 am
Correction. They did add an extra lair of light over her chest.
#4 | Comment by Arion — May 7, 2007 @ 3:31 am
No, they definitely changed her profile.
animated gif
(feel free to add that to the post if you want to, justin)
#5 | Comment by stupid photoshop user — May 7, 2007 @ 4:06 am
I’d like to add a layer of something over her chest
#6 | Comment by Ron Dingleberry — May 7, 2007 @ 4:25 am
i think what they actually did is bring in the line of her stomach
#7 | Comment by tre — May 7, 2007 @ 4:56 am
NO.. i overlaied them in photoshop… they are different photo’s taken seconds apart… everyone is slightly different, and emma has just spun by like five degrees so you get a different chest angle. check out her hair, and the redhead guy’s eyes..
two different photo’s.. no touching up
#8 | Comment by Steve — May 7, 2007 @ 5:19 am
Ron Weasley’s eyes are different in each too. More sinister in the 3D poster.
#9 | Comment by Mordenmost — May 7, 2007 @ 5:25 am
You’re wrong #7, there’s a distinctly different bend to her profile and some fluffing out of her hair; but her face and everyone else is identical (although everyone’s lighting has been messed with). I tried to post an animated gif showing the difference but it got flagged as spam.
#10 | Comment by stupid photoshop user — May 7, 2007 @ 5:27 am
#10
unflagged! (see #5)
and added to the post!
#11 | Comment by Justin — May 7, 2007 @ 5:39 am
NICE
#12 | Comment by the super cumbucket from hell named chuck norris — May 7, 2007 @ 6:19 am
The great thing is this probably did come down to just one person, but they’re most likely not a pervert, just realistic.
“How can we make this poster look better?
…
Well there’s a girl right at the front of it so let’s turn up her settings.”
Gross or not, Emma Watson is part of the eye candy. Are the casters at fault for picking an attractive little girl? I don’t seem to recall the character being pretty very often.
Just business, but this time somebody complained.
#13 | Comment by Seriously — May 7, 2007 @ 7:37 am
LOL
#14 | Comment by Deviant Spawn — May 7, 2007 @ 7:48 am
i don’t think they’re bigger…they’re just in 3D.
#15 | Comment by AngelBaby — May 7, 2007 @ 8:12 am
Either way, they’re still not bigger enough to pull me in. I love/can’t believe that this is such a problem for fans though.
#16 | Comment by Kewtr — May 7, 2007 @ 8:16 am
I have no usefull comment about this!
#17 | Comment by MacDaddy — May 7, 2007 @ 8:38 am
^^ 8 – I can’t really see that. Check out the position of HER right shoulder and her neck and head. It doesn’t look like she turned. It appears she may have pulled in her stomach, which would have lifted the chest more as well as given her an appearance of a larger bust. Either way, I can’t see why the fans are in such an uproar – she’s portraying a 15 year old in the movie – don’t 15 year olds have boobs yet? All the ones that I see lately do.
#18 | Comment by Webpager — May 7, 2007 @ 9:46 am
The girl is perfect without blonde blowy hair and enhanced boobs. She doesn’t need to be barbie-ized.
The commentary in the article is hilarious. “OMG, she’s not 18. People aren’t supposed to have naughty thoughts about her. Whoever did this is a sick pig.” (my paraphrase) Y’know, 18 is a completely moral-legal created artificial age. Nature tells men that it’s ok to look at women when they have boobs and hips for a reason. You can’t argue with nature, so deal with it already.
#19 | Comment by exelis — May 7, 2007 @ 11:05 am
@#19
Yep, that’s what all child molesters try to make themselves believe so they don’t feel guilty. 😉
#20 | Comment by Franc — May 7, 2007 @ 12:32 pm
Is it me or does the apparently ‘photo-shopped’ picture look less fake?
/fap
#21 | Comment by Ant — May 7, 2007 @ 12:33 pm
“boob it up.”
There’s a song about 17 being old enough, so that’s settled. As long as I don’t have to hear her talk.
#22 | Comment by d00d — May 7, 2007 @ 12:59 pm
@#20
It’s a simple statement of fact, whether you like it or not. You may choose to remain ignorant if you like.
Oh, and P.S. I’ve never molested a child.
P.P.S. Get a life.
#23 | Comment by exelis — May 7, 2007 @ 2:52 pm
The “harry potter fans” are just angry because they’re fat ugly douchenozzle bitches who can’t use photoshop on themselves in real life.
Nor do they have a real life.
They should go write more boring fanfics that no one but equally pathetic prickbuckets read. You know which fanfics I’m talking about. The kind with no Hermione/Ginny lesbo action.
Fact!True Story.#24 | Comment by The Deadly Superman — May 7, 2007 @ 3:34 pm
this bitch SUCKS!!! she had so much potential when she was younger. now she looks like some nasty oddly shaped headed chick with down syndrome.
on a similar subject. I love the chick from lemony snicket.
#25 | Comment by Chris Hansen - Dateline NBC — May 7, 2007 @ 3:40 pm
IF PEOPLE R SAYING ITS SO BAD BECAUSE SHE’S UNDER 18, WHAT ARE THEY LOOKIN AT HER BOOBS 4 ANYHOW????????? I DONT GET Y ITS SO BAD, TEENS DONT GET A HARDON FOR BIGGER BOOBS?????
#26 | Comment by DADDY — May 7, 2007 @ 4:06 pm
i like emma watson… and i like harry potter… and i liked her boobs in BOTH pictures
/stalker
#27 | Comment by FUCK — May 7, 2007 @ 4:55 pm
#25
“this bitch SUCKS!!! she had so much potential when she was younger. now she looks like some nasty oddly shaped headed chick with down syndrome.”
YOUR GAY – True
…
im 42 and id hit that
FTW!!
#28 | Comment by John Douglas - FBI profiler — May 7, 2007 @ 4:56 pm
At least the picture doesn’t feature Harry Potter’s cock hanging out.
#29 | Comment by Tony — May 7, 2007 @ 6:06 pm
So Harry can have his cock out for all the women ( underage and adult) to get wet to but as soon as a girl has her breasts “enhanced” ( under her shirt even) then it’s all “OMG
#30 | Comment by net — May 7, 2007 @ 6:20 pm
the heck? It cut out half of what I typed!
I meant to say that people are hypocrits and age laws are ridiculous and an excuse to control people for their own insecurities.
#31 | Comment by net — May 7, 2007 @ 6:22 pm
id hit it anyway
#32 | Comment by loco367 — May 7, 2007 @ 7:03 pm
justin, post some recent high def pics of emma watson if youve got any LOL
#33 | Comment by mx — May 7, 2007 @ 8:07 pm
More pictures of Emma please!!
#34 | Comment by tom — May 7, 2007 @ 9:04 pm
*fap*
#35 | Comment by The_Abyss — May 7, 2007 @ 10:14 pm
“Emma Watson is playing a 15-year-old girl, and she herself is under 18,” she said. “I get the full heebie jeebies….” – 17 is legal where I live in the USA so I can enjoy her tits and not get arrested for it. As for the “I get the full heebie jeebies….” quote – get a fucking life you loser bitch. You run a fucking Harry Potter fan-site so you’re obviously a loser so dont get all “holier than thou” on everyone by saying you’re freaked out by a guy slightly editing a picture to make it more appealing to ALL ages. When you were 18 and a SR in high school, did you completely ignore all the guys/girls under 18 that went to school with you? No. so fuck off and shut up.
#36 | Comment by Sampson — May 7, 2007 @ 11:37 pm
How about that Ginny Weasley towering over Harry like some tall, redheaded sophisticate?
Who is the blonde over Harry’s right shoulder? (Did Malfoy have a sex change?)
#37 | Comment by Fubarvet2 — May 8, 2007 @ 12:23 am
The blonde is Luna “Looney” Lovegood. Please don’t make fun of me for knowing that.
#38 | Comment by commentatornater — May 8, 2007 @ 12:41 am
The “unofficial” IMAX version looks a lot more detailed. Just look at her hair. I think they shrunk her boobs for the official version.
And then there’s another theory put forth by someone with way too much time on his hands who thinks both pictures are real and actually a stereoscopic pair.
#39 | Comment by brew — May 8, 2007 @ 12:52 am
Is it me or does she look like STEPHEN DORF in the IMAX poster????
#40 | Comment by Lou Zar — May 8, 2007 @ 1:56 am
#28
The problem is, I’ve gotten nothing but quality pussy throughout my life, so my standards are probably just much higher than yours.
“im 42 and id hit that.”
…indeed.
#41 | Comment by Chris Hansen - Dateline NBC — May 8, 2007 @ 11:22 am
#39
zomg
#42 | Comment by Coolstream — May 8, 2007 @ 11:36 am
justin! post some emma watson pics!! LOL
#43 | Comment by mx — May 8, 2007 @ 7:52 pm
[…] Link From dontlinkthis.net […]
#44 | Pingback by EMMA WATSON [Don't Link This @ Ectio.us] — May 9, 2007 @ 3:40 am
This is truly a mystery we need to get to the bottom of, and I can’t see how we can do that unless we get more pictures of Emma and her tits up on the site. Have at it.
#45 | Comment by Upchuck — May 9, 2007 @ 5:58 am
That is a Sic song you totally need to get more by that guy
common why is there no jojo
#46 | Comment by Tom Foolery — May 9, 2007 @ 4:13 pm
WHERES TRIP? AKA JUSTIN.
#47 | Comment by needs more trip — May 10, 2007 @ 1:50 am
#6… You´ve spoken the truth mate!!!
#48 | Comment by Leo — May 11, 2007 @ 6:00 pm
Whatever her boobs look like she’s still hot! 😛
#49 | Comment by Whitty071 — May 13, 2007 @ 8:10 pm
LOL. (This is one of the rare times when I actually did laugh out loud.)
#50 | Comment by David — May 14, 2007 @ 11:39 pm
A real improvement to the poster would have been to make Emma nude and with larger tits!
For anyone who wants to see just that go to:
http://locksleysrealm.blogspot.com/
You won’t believe your eyes!
#51 | Comment by Locksleysurfer — May 21, 2007 @ 11:30 am
^^^
oh, that’s not TOO disturbing or anything.
#52 | Comment by AngelBaby — May 21, 2007 @ 11:56 am
i think they are hot big or not
#53 | Comment by aaron — July 23, 2007 @ 2:26 am
I heard that they taped her up for OOTP, she was too large for a 15 year old. Check her non movie photoshoots. Shes stacked.
#54 | Comment by anon — July 23, 2007 @ 4:13 am
The I dea of editing is proven wrong by clicking the link below and looking at it through 3D glasses.
Close one eye, then open it and close the other one.
You should notice that these images match well with those show at the top of this page, and that when you look at it with both eyes, it is 3D.
3D demonstration
#55 | Comment by Cometa — February 23, 2008 @ 4:53 pm
I felt oddly perturbed by this harry potter film.. the scary/weird level’s about right.. but.. I felt ashamed that I quite fancied the creepy blonde luna more than hermoine… that’s not right.
#56 | Comment by Garth2k — February 23, 2008 @ 9:22 pm
Yeah!
That Luna girl was hot!
#57 | Comment by Chuck — February 24, 2008 @ 5:56 pm
blah blah blah.
they’re bigger, they’re photoshopped, so is the lighting, so is her hair, so is ron’s eye. ALL photoshop. Period.
The funniest thing about it is that some jerk-off got paid to do it. Seriously, is anybody really more stricken by the IMAX version? No. 99%of us never would have noticed.
Actually even funnier (and sadder) is that TWO people got paid to touch up the photo: One for theatrical, one for IMAX.
Laaaaaaaaaame
#58 | Comment by jesus — February 25, 2008 @ 8:09 pm