Matthew McConaughey 2
I realize that few people in the history of photography have had their picture taken with their shirt off more than Matthew McConaughey, but since his movies have been rather stingy with skin shots I thought this was post-worthy. The movie is “Fools Gold”, and while it’s a pretty generic romantic comedy, the sheer amount of time Matthew spends shirtless makes it watch-able. A few months back “Entertainment Weekly” magazine had a little graph in there showing that the more time Matthew spent in a movie without his shirt, the more successful the movie was. Hopefully some producers took note.
There’s been a rumor floating around the last few months that Matthew is up for the title role in “Captain America: The First Avenger”. I’m all for it. Not only is Matthew perfect for the role, but there’s always the slim possibility that they could work a shower scene into the subsequent “Avengers” movie involving Matthew, Ed Norton and Robert Downey Jr. and whoever they get to play Thor. I’d buy a ticket to see that!
Juicy Comments
10 Responses to “Matthew McConaughey 2”
Register to comment easier or log in if you are already a member. Learn how to setup your own avatar here.
Leave a Reply
Yes he’s hot. Yes his body is insanely gorgeous. But somehow he has lost a slice of my interest because everything is not a “mystery” anymore because he has now surpassed about 30% of his time on screen with no shirt on. In fact, the only thing that is left to be desired is his peen. “Fool’s Gold” should be renamed to “That McConaughey Shirtless Movie”.
Well as for Avengers, Matteo has absolutely the perfect body for Captain America. I can’t wait to see him in all that spandex, which I think should be sexier than seeing his bare overexposed (but delicious) body. Hmm… Thor eh? I’m thinking John Cena or Thomas Jane, but to wear a blond wig and still look shagable will be quite a challenge for anyone.
Having said that, you all know I’d tap Matteo in a heartbeat regardless. Heh.
I’m with you on this one, Square… mystery gone, nudity clause in his contract, hotter in spanded, I’d tap that… And I, too would love to see the “men’s shower” scene in the upcoming “Avengers” movie… heh.
This guy never did anything for me.
He has a great body… but he made it look generic (I’ve seen it a lot of times and thinks nothing more will come out of it.) And I agree, If he shows some peen somewhere, I might change his mind.
Absolutely generic. To me he is in the same category as George Clooney (except for a MUCH better body) in that his appeal is so heterosexual that it almost turns me off. I’ve never enjoyed his face, and his body screams for some hair on it. I just don’t get him, and he’s certainly not much of an actor to boot.
I have a feeling that seeing him naked wouldn’t enhance his appeal to me at all.
Wow, Love Matt! I also love the fact that he does NOT use deodorant, all natural, only soap. Baby, my face, tongue could live in those hairy pits, love it!
Why do people say ‘peen’ – it’s called a penis.
Well, Harry, if one is to speak in an anatomically correct manner, “penis” is the proper name. If, however, people are speaking in a casual way, jokesterish I guess, body parts are often nicknamed: peen, wee-wee, pee-pee, and a bunch more that get a bit too graphic and considerably off-color even for here.
If you’re teaching your kids about one’s body, for sure use the correct anatomical name, for every part. There’s nothing to be ashamed about in terms of the beautiful creation the body is, therefore its parts don’t have to have silly names in order to avoid embarrassment with the kiddies. They only get embarrassed if the parents do.
I remember when my little daughter went to school and told all her friends she had a vagina. We got a call from her teacher telling us to tell her to stop it. I asked the teacher what was wrong with using the term. She said it was “nasty” and they don’t discuss nasty body parts at school!! Not making that up. We took her out of that school.
[...] clothes, and Paul Telfer is one of them. I’m usually not too keen at over exposed actors (see Matthew McConaughey) but in the case of Paul Telfer, I definitely can make an exception. It’s quite puzzling why [...]
@Square: Or rather “Fools’ Gold” should be renamed “That movie where we get so much shots of McConaugheys’ feet it’s like a fetish flick”.