Discovered in
- Fashion on Jan 29, 2009
-
cool. retro. few of em are a stretch though...and gotta say, the drew part of the diana-drew thing's a huge fail though. please, drew, comb it out! lol.
Reviewed by AmberJackson1980 Apr 28 2009, 06:21pm ( 54 reviews ) • elle.com
-
minkybird
minkybird
27 Favs
-
AmiraNajwa
AmiraNajwa
111 Favs
-
roup14
roup14
620 Favs
-
jadeMulvaney
jadeMul...
74 Favs
Recently online -
rocsanne
rocsanne
571 Favs
-
samoungi
samoungi
357 Favs
-
Lost-Destroyer
Lost-De...
1,095 Favs
-
hanaqerimi
hanaqerimi
223 Favs
-
simpleblueprint
simpleb...
81 Favs
-
h3idii
h3idii
143 Favs
- Showing 47 of 54

- Reviews of the site
-
Join StumbleUpon or login to add a review!
-
Rated by annajyu on Sep 25, 6:04pm
very interesting
-
Rated by atticeye on Sep 07, 1:53pm
No such thing as anything new only the reiteration of what was.www.atticeyewear.com
-
Rated by asmila on Sep 01, 4:52pm
it's a bit ridiculous. there are only so many ways to style your hair in a normal fashion. only if they were outrageous hairstyles would i be impressed.
-
Rated by interlocutor01 on Aug 14, 6:08pm
True classics never fade away - they just get imitated over and over again.
-
Rated by gadget5 on Aug 09, 1:10pm
the classics never die
-
Rated by sharp-objex on Jul 29, 9:47pm
I'm sorry but Hilary Swank is no Mia Farrow (Rosemary's Baby days). I assure you. I could say the same for Natalie Portman's hair, but Swank's hair just look's god awful.
-
Rated by TessaBunny on Jul 25, 8:10am
Female hairstyles through the years and their modern day counterparts. I guess style really is cyclical.
-
Rated by muse2u on Jul 06, 11:21am
Hairstyles then and now. Nothing actually changes it just gets recycled.
-
Rated by TimeTrackerGrl on Jul 01, 10:46am
They don't really match.