Is it true that Frankenstein appeared on 'Extreme Makeover' and is now a swimwear model?
920434
yes, although you will probably be more familiar with his stage name, David Hasselhoff.
1071288
Has modeled for Abercrombie & Fitch, Dolce & Gabbana and Aeropostale........
110473
If you want to apply to be on his show (Extreme Makeover: Home Edition) then go to abc.com and in the keyword search box type: homemakeover. At that site you can find the link that gives you the applicatino form. \n\nYou can also e-mail Ty personally at his site: www.tythehandyguy.com
899260
Re-shape!!!! I had mine done there and have had no problems at all!!I would highly recommend them!!They have a web site,check it out i think its www.re-shape.co.uk.
418104
Not sure if this is what you're looking for, but Mary Shelley is the author of Frankenstein, also known as The Modern Prometheus.
724258
I assumed that Ugly Betty was modeled after "The Devil wears Prada". I find it to be obvious. I liked the movie better.\nDoesn't it seem that Betty will eventually get a makeover and no longer be ugly?
175593
You wish! She was a model before she was a teenager & had huge contracts, she would never had messed that career up by doing porn. Sorry.
760057
We must of been watching the same show today.. Just had this conversation with hubby.  Yup..she looks so much better. Her before pictures looked like she was on drugs. Poor thing. ...Hollywood is just horrible!
670241
Cindy Crawford, Linda Evangalista,\n\nAre you looking for models or celebrities, in general?  And, do you mean "style icon" as in people copying what they wore and looked like?
299610
From what I've heard, and I can't verify this, Victoria's secret was that in the beginning the models used were lesbians. Either that or Victoria herself is gay.  I don't put much stock in this heresay and as I said I can't verify any of this.
129803
Dawg, that seems a little extreme, don't ya think? I'll never be on the cover of Maxim, but I'm pretty confident with my looks. Wicked grins!
320790
Well... I think we have to get our terms straight here. Frankenstein was a fictional doctor and researcher somewhere in Central Europe (perhaps what is now Romania) in a story written in France by a young British woman on a vacation which included the poets Shelley and Lord Byron. It all happened early in the 1800s, before Shelly drowned.\n\nSo, F wasn't a monster. In the story, he created a creature which was either a monster or misunderstood, depending on how you take the story. Assorted movies and other books have taken it all possible ways by now. Including one by Mel Brooks. \n\nAnd, since F supposedly lived about 1800, neither he nor the creature (fictional though they both be) were even alive (in iagination) 1 000 000 000 years ago. In fact, no humans actually lived then, nor any mammals nor reptiles nor dinosaurs nor birds no, if memeory serves, insects nor trees nor grass nor ... If there was life then, it was probably limited to micro-organisms which have left no fossils to be studied.\n\nYou might want to look up the age of the Earth to see how long ago in its life was 1 000 000 000 years ago. \n\nFrankenstein's monster (or creature or whatever) was promptly taken to be a warning about the possible downside of all that science and mechanical changes that had been occurring for more than a hundred years in 1800, and have added not only another 200 years, but sped up  up considerably since then. Many artists and writers have taken the metaphor seriously and have written quite a lot using it as an analytic tool. \n\n========\nmodern developments of science and engineering\n\nAnd indeed, the progress in our understanding of the physical universe, and our increased ability to control it which sometimes follows an increase of understanding, have brought up some new dangers. Engineering managed to produce atomic weapons after 50 years of increasing understanding of submicroscopic particles and their nature. \n\nWe are still coping with this today, more than 60 years afterwards. The effort to prevent the spread of these weapons has been slowly fraying for some time. The French, the Russians, the Pakistanis, the Indians, the Chinese, and probably both the Israelis and the South Africans, have all developed nuclear weapons, although the practicality of their various warheads and delivery systems are rather debatable. \n\nQuite a number of writers have used the Frankenstein story as an organizing motif in their accounts of the dangers and reasons for the dangers of having nuclear weapons in the hands of any nations, much less Third World nations somewhat controlled by religious or ethnic factions who may demand their use in a territorial dispute. \n\nBut, there is a problem here. Artists and writers are rarely good sources for a clear understanding of science and engineering. when they attempt to analyze and predict things scientific or engineering, they often get themselves considerably tangled up. A recent example is a spoof article written by Alan Sokal, a professor of physics at NYU, and submitted to a journal of advanced thought, Social Text. The article was well done of its type, and was complete and utter and deliberate nonsense. The editors and their reviewers couldn't see that, though, and it was accepted for publication. Sokal held a press conference announcing the hoax the day that issue of the magazine hit the street. Its editors continued for some time to defend their decision to publish it, despite the intended hoax. Their public explanations of why it was fine to publish the article even if it were a deliberate hoax are astonishing. And, if honest and not merely damage control via an attempt to guide the media spin, are evidence of rather considerable cluelessness. \n\nScience and engineering require a certain amount of intellectual apprenticeship before one becomes competent to really have an opinion. Short of that, everyone is very much as I would be if asked a question about quilting technique. Al
1184471
I'd say this:  Dr. Frankenstein is to Dr. Jekyll as Dr. Frankenstein's monster is to Mr. Hyde.  Dr. Frankenstein used his monster to bring out a different side of his own personality, whereas Dr. Jekyll did the same w/ Mr. Hyde.  The only difference is that Jekyll and Hyde are the same person.
1153802
To T_Von... Mary Shelley wrote Frankenstein. A teenage girl.\n\nAnyway, Frankenstein is meant to be a cautionary story. It was written at the height of the Industrial Revolution, when people were getting replaced with machines, and new technologies came out every week. People were terrified of all these new things that suddenly appeared, working on principles they didn't understand. Yes, I think this has some parallels to our current situation... At one point during the 90s, your computer became outdated seven minutes after you bought it. \n\nWe do sort of blindly rush in with technological innovations these days, just as we did during the Industrial Revolution when Frankenstein was written. After all, we don't even know how most of our technology works. As for the monster representing caution against overstepping the bounds of nature...I might agree with that. But not as a reflection of technology. After all, patching together dead people and bringing them to life is still a bit beyond us... I think the point is that we should carefully consider all the new technologies we create, and their impacts on the world.
551726
It got replaced by extreme makeover home edition
772862
Never heard of it, but you need to change your avatar you REALLY look bad, SORRY!
211200
OMG \nso once in a while i do the google thing and answer some questions that i dont know from the top of my head...\nSOOooooooooo\nI was not prepared for such skin!\n\nThe two "actors" were in a "film?" called 'Miss Erotica' \n\nShe also took on the "great" Rocco Siffredi in "Rocco’s Private Fantasies" \n\nLOL hope you can get those DVDs man.