A buddy of mine says he liked Meg Ryan more before she had work done.
I said, “what work”
He said, “its pretty well known she’s had some tightening done. and botox in the lips too”
Has she had work done?
BOTOX in the lips? No one has that done right? He either meant collagen in the lips or botox in the forehead I guess.
Well, if this site is to be believed. . .
She definitely got some lip injections (collegen, or whatever that stuff is). I think she looks hideous now. Dissapointing, since I had such a crush on her as an adolescent.
The collagen thing wears off or is absorbed after a while. It’s not a one-time procedure. She’ll look like her adorable self before too long.
I hate all the Meg bashing that is going on these days. One fucking time the woman steps out on the man and all papparazzi hell breaks loose. Her husband wouldn’t have suffered a career meltdown if it was him slutting around.
I’m just sayin’…
It was all over the news back when she had to do the press junket circuit for… In the Cut (I think?), I’m surprised you didn’t hear about it. Geez, her lips so overshadowed her flick that I don’t remember squat about the movie press, just the press’s shock and awe about the work done.
Back around the Toronto Film Festival (I think it was around then) her own father was interviewed and when on records saying it was terrible. He said (roughly paraphrasing) that it was a real shame that so many women/celebrities felt they had to go and do that.
It was hard to keep the press off the topic of her trout pout during the festival. And she made worldwide headlines for “bad” platic surgery.
She was the spitting image of Melanie Griffiths after the work.
Color me clueless.
I just watched “In the cut” and was recommending it to my friend solely for the meg watching.
Dirty spoilers, in male-centric juvenile language. See it if you want if you’re a Meg fan, but it’s a pretty damn dull flick, IMO. . .
In this movie, you see Meg get fucked a couple times. You see her bush, her ass, her titties repeatedly. She gets eaten out from the front and from behind (Where’s his NOSE GO???). She fingers herself a couple times. And, there’s an almost pornographic shot of a knob job where you see lips on cock – not Meg’s lips.
If Dennis Quaid’s lips suddenly tripled in size I daresay the papparazzi would have a field day. Ryan’s career meltdown was inevitable because she has built a career out of being “darling” and now she’s getting older. She claims that this image is contrary to her “real” personality, but after the fifth Nora Ephron movie, you have to hoist some of the blame on her for not branching out more.
In 10 years we’ll be looking at horrifying pictures of Sandra Bullock stepping out with fish lips as she has also fallen into the Meg Ryan trap. And the criticism will have nothing to do with her personal life.
My theory is that Meg Ryan is attempting to turn herself into Avril Lavigne. Really. Look at her in the last two movies – **In the Cut ** and that boxing flick. The hair alone is a dead giveaway. She’s having a mid-life crisis and she wants to be a spunky teenager again. 
Funny, I was coming at it from the opposite side. I figured Avril Lavigne was proof that Meg Ryan had taken part in human cloning experiments about 20 years ago.
The lips are bad, but as stated above, collegen disappears and if she’s got any sense at all, she’ll at least tone it down.
But am I confused or didn’t she get cheek implants as well? I saw a picture of her cheeks - instead of fairly refined looking cheekbones, like before, she has these awful, apple-cheeks that look like she stole them from a cabbage patch doll. I understand the desire of an aging actress, one who built a career on charm and sex appeal, to look younger, but she just looks bizarre now.
Um, why should there be any stigma to an actress (particularly one who has traded heavily on her looks for her whole career) having cosmetic surgery? Yeah, it looks scary initially, but…
Meg Ryan, Sandra Bullock and Julia Roberts are slowly being replaced by Hillary Duff, Amanda Bynes and the Olsen twins. Sorry, I’m not ready. I think there’s life in the old girls yet. And while I have acres of respect for older actresses who face it head-on (like Gena Rowland and Judi Densch), part of me thinks a really good-looking woman should keep looking terrific for as long as she can.
Hey, if a few nips and tucks could make me look movie-star handsome, I’d go for it.
I think people are a little too sensitive to plastic surgery. Does it look bad sometimes? Yeah, so what? If it’s okay to mock people for artificial “ugliness”, why can’t one mock people for natural ugliness?
If you can’t laugh at other people, who *can * you laugh at?
Here are a bunch of pictures from a thread a few months ago
10 years? According to IMDB, Meg Ryan is only 3 years older than Sandra Bullock and she doesn’t look like a freak-o-nature.
Because the purpose of plastic surgery is to look MORE attractive, not less.
Blashamy! I strongly doubt any of those hos will be around in a few years. I don’t even know who is considered a good young actress these days. Kate Hudson seems popular with the ladies. Nicole Kidman is in everything but she’s in the same age bracket as Meg Ryan and Sandra Bullock. Juliane Moore is older than all of them and she’s still pretty hot.
Maybe the problem is that Meg Ryans last decent movie (from a date movie perspective…straight date that is) was that one where Huge Assman traveled through time. No one wants to see her coaching boxers or weeping over a kidnapped husband. She needs to stick to what she does best - quirky romantic comedies. That may not be her “true” personality, but that’s why they call it ACTING.
Now if you’ll excuse me, this thread is making me feel a little gay. I’m off to watch DVR recorded episodes of the Sopranos and Band of Brothers.
People don’t always wrinkle-up at the same rate. 
Bad example with Nicole, since she actually stretches for roles other than the “Cutie-Pie” character.
You kiddin’? That’s what necessitates the plastic surgery! She needs a LESS superficial role!
The problem is that she’s trying to take roles that are outside her typical resume’, but is bringing the same “style” to the character. Whereas an actress like Charlize Theron will commit entirely to a more difficult role.
I honestly think that if they didn’t drink, smoke, tan and attempt to get rid of all of their bodyfat, their faces would look a lot younger than they do. As it is, I think for almost all of them lifestyle is what causes them to look older than they are which in turn leads to them getting plastic surgery. Then again, some people do have good genes but doing all the stuff I listed above doesn’t help them any.
I don’t think it’s mocking their “artificial ugliness” as much as mocking the ridiculousness of already above-average people resorting to unnecessary plastic surgery, and then wakling around acting as though they look terrific with lips like pufferfish, perpetually surprised expressions or noses which appear to be receeding into their bodies.
Meg Ryan and Melanie Griffith were both beautiful before they were inadvisedly plasticized. Britney Spears and Lindsay Lohan – like millions of other women – were just as attractive and eyecatching and desirable when they wore B-cup bras. It’s not the results that are so objectionable, it’s the idea of any of these people needing to go under the knife/needle to begin with. The youth and beauty obsessed culture in which we live, and especially in which celebrities work, is horrifying.
Ugh, her mouth looks vaguely obscene in the “after” picture.
Still, it doesn’t look nearly as horrid as Greta Van Sustren’s “after” pictures. Damn, but that was bad.
Problem is that as women age, they have less “natural beauty” and have to cover uo with makup, plastic surgury, etc. That ends up making them look very plastic and artificial. What I can’t figure out is why Nicole Kidman looks normal in her movies but now looks like a freak in interviews on the Tonight Show.