carl_arkin wrote:What I like about this thread Prince Calixto is your very very diverse choices! Whoa, what more can you ask? You've covered 'em all! It's true that there are many facets a Miss Universe can be defined and it is apparent that over the years this definition has evolved, adjusting to the our modern times.
Great work here.
PRINCE CALIXTO wrote:carl_arkin wrote:What I like about this thread Prince Calixto is your very very diverse choices! Whoa, what more can you ask? You've covered 'em all! It's true that there are many facets a Miss Universe can be defined and it is apparent that over the years this definition has evolved, adjusting to the our modern times.
Great work here.
Yes, Carl, as the times change, it is important to understand the standard of beauty according to the times, but also that regardless of times, all of them in this list, were very deserving and special, in one way , or another.
carl_arkin wrote:PRINCE CALIXTO wrote:carl_arkin wrote:What I like about this thread Prince Calixto is your very very diverse choices! Whoa, what more can you ask? You've covered 'em all! It's true that there are many facets a Miss Universe can be defined and it is apparent that over the years this definition has evolved, adjusting to the our modern times.
Great work here.
Yes, Carl, as the times change, it is important to understand the standard of beauty according to the times, but also that regardless of times, all of them in this list, were very deserving and special, in one way , or another.Very true! I guess that's what makes this pageant universal. The winners may have different backgrounds and may be from different races but we see something special in them that tells us that "This lady has it, she is a Miss Universe".
PRINCE CALIXTO wrote:carl_arkin wrote:PRINCE CALIXTO wrote:carl_arkin wrote:What I like about this thread Prince Calixto is your very very diverse choices! Whoa, what more can you ask? You've covered 'em all! It's true that there are many facets a Miss Universe can be defined and it is apparent that over the years this definition has evolved, adjusting to the our modern times.
Great work here.
Yes, Carl, as the times change, it is important to understand the standard of beauty according to the times, but also that regardless of times, all of them in this list, were very deserving and special, in one way , or another.Very true! I guess that's what makes this pageant universal. The winners may have different backgrounds and may be from different races but we see something special in them that tells us that "This lady has it, she is a Miss Universe".
Yes, not always the most beautiful girl wins, but the most special and the one whose star shone the most, but they must also be very beautiful. Unfortunately, not all Miss Universe, nor all GS winners are that beautiful.
kwanloong wrote:[size=150]Nice one!
The standard of beauty is not definite....these ladies defined it! (from Shamcey??? hahaha)
carl_arkin wrote:PRINCE CALIXTO wrote:carl_arkin wrote:PRINCE CALIXTO wrote:carl_arkin wrote:What I like about this thread Prince Calixto is your very very diverse choices! Whoa, what more can you ask? You've covered 'em all! It's true that there are many facets a Miss Universe can be defined and it is apparent that over the years this definition has evolved, adjusting to the our modern times.
Great work here.
Yes, Carl, as the times change, it is important to understand the standard of beauty according to the times, but also that regardless of times, all of them in this list, were very deserving and special, in one way , or another.Very true! I guess that's what makes this pageant universal. The winners may have different backgrounds and may be from different races but we see something special in them that tells us that "This lady has it, she is a Miss Universe".
Yes, not always the most beautiful girl wins, but the most special and the one whose star shone the most, but they must also be very beautiful. Unfortunately, not all Miss Universe, nor all GS winners are that beautiful.Yep!
By the way, I'm just wondering if there are other girls you have wanted on this list too. Or this is really "the chosen ones", a closed group?
PRINCE CALIXTO wrote:[size=150][font=Arial]kwanloong wrote:[color=#000099][size=150]Nice one!
The standard of beauty is not definite....these ladies defined it! (from Shamcey??? hahaha)
Yes, and is not only about beauty, it is also about projection, charisma, charm, and much more.. I watched videos of recent pageants and also from way before I was born and that is how, in part, I evaluate those characteristics.
[/size][/font]
Alvee wrote:this thread deserves the Seal of Excellence'....Mind blowing and very informative post...very well executed...
Athalia wrote:Nice! And what about Shawn Weatherly? She was the best from the '80s in my opinion.
PRINCE CALIXTO wrote:carl_arkin wrote:PRINCE CALIXTO wrote:carl_arkin wrote:PRINCE CALIXTO wrote:carl_arkin wrote:What I like about this thread Prince Calixto is your very very diverse choices! Whoa, what more can you ask? You've covered 'em all! It's true that there are many facets a Miss Universe can be defined and it is apparent that over the years this definition has evolved, adjusting to the our modern times.
Great work here.
Yes, Carl, as the times change, it is important to understand the standard of beauty according to the times, but also that regardless of times, all of them in this list, were very deserving and special, in one way , or another.Very true! I guess that's what makes this pageant universal. The winners may have different backgrounds and may be from different races but we see something special in them that tells us that "This lady has it, she is a Miss Universe".
Yes, not always the most beautiful girl wins, but the most special and the one whose star shone the most, but they must also be very beautiful. Unfortunately, not all Miss Universe, nor all GS winners are that beautiful.Yep!
By the way, I'm just wondering if there are other girls you have wanted on this list too. Or this is really "the chosen ones", a closed group?
No, of course there are others I love most, beauty wise, like Natalie Glevoba , 2005, Amelia Vega 2003, Jennifer Hawkins and others, but, I decided to choose winners from past and present , to evaluate and examine why they won.
Myles76 wrote: great and fantastic thread my dear Prince C ..I love your choices of pics and the very eloquent summaries of the great ladies of our time....keep the good work and the typical Prince P. style..
Gracias a mi amigo por un hermoso homenaje. Es fantástico para leer esos puestos de ti y ver....I hope my Spanish was understandable. .I am not proposing, if you misread it
rayray wrote:YOU ALWAYS PRODUCE SUCH MAGNIFICENT POST. I LOVE STEFANIA, WHILE EVERYONE BASH HER AND SAYING THAT SHE HAS LONG GIRAFFE NECK, I FIND IT UNIQUE AND SHE REALLY LOOK GORGEOUS. I LIKE HER EVEN MORE THAN DAYANA.
abby_saatchi wrote:One of the best threads I read this yr.!!!
Good Job!!!
e_maris wrote:Very nice and original thread PRINCE CALIXTO, I enjoyed reading.
PR-Beauty wrote:WHAT A GREAT POST!!
READING IT CAPTURES YOUR ATTENTION, IT WAS VERY INTERESTING!! AND I LOVE YOUR PICKS.
GREAT WORK PRINCE!!
charlie309pr wrote:Nice Thread...
Just have to comment about Stefania Fernandez.....who at the moment of being crowned didn't have any essence of a Miss Universe!! She didn't wow anybody in the final night....and much less with her wrong answer which was the most fucked up thing about her performance....
Yes, she had a great evolution WHILE being Miss Universe, AFTER being crowned......we all know that her "winning" was and always will be a FRAUD for many of us....she CLEARLY wasn't the best of the night......she wasn't even suppose to make the cut to the top 15 after how UGLY she looked in the preliminaries...
Users browsing this forum: Marinaxcs, Michae, Zelenadas, Zelenarlo