Mariska Hargitay Pixied?

I think that she looks lovely with either hair cut but if its gotta be short it should be a shorter pixie. I have to agree with previous poster that the long hair is my fav look for her it really softened her face and made her look more feminine

That picture you suggested makes me scared to talk to her if I ever met her. Yikes.

I'm with trekgod on this.  There are some short haircuts which can be flattering on some, but this cut is fugly.

I think maybe they've already started filming part of the next season?  I would hope that is the case and they are working it into the plot, otherwise it's a little silly. 

 The photoshop on that cover is terrible! Why do they do that?!  Her body proportions look really odd---her elbows are positioned to be wider than her waist, and have these weird "crisp" edges that only Photoshop can provide...it would appear that in trying to make her look super-skinny, they succeeded in making her look like a "bobble head" type! And she has a great body---I remember seeing a photo of her in a bathing suit and being totally envious of how tall, athletic and beautifully well-proportioned she looked.  She looks like Aphrodite of Knidos--and naturally, they try to "Nicole Richie" her! Typical Hollywood ridiculousness.

Edited by HopeB - June 05 2007 at 2:11am

The hair in the picture may look great, but her face was definately photoshopped onto whoever's body that is.  She looks unnatural.

      We are strange ones, Mike. That's all I noticed too! If all guys were like us, they'd leave the bodies alone and photoshop long hair onto all the ladies! Of course, with Mariska's striking locks in this photo, no alteration would have been necessary! Blessings, Bob

I think they had plenty of time to incorporate the (unfortunate) change, had they so desired.
Maybe they didn't like the short hair and kept the long hair look. I know there was another model that had long hair she was going to do the ad but she also cut off her long hair the people that wanted the ad done were mad. I think you have to go bask into this board but I know it is on this board. I think the was a law suit also.

Fat thanks again for that link I still think the longer hair works for her better. Oh well.

Kramer wrote: Couldn't the explanation be as simple as they took the photos before the haircut?   Just curious Fatmoo: How in the world did you stumble upon that link?

You coild be correct Kramer, they do tend to take cover pics for magazines many weeks before the issue goes to press, but I still say that her eyes look too big for her face in that picture. 

No, it isn't. All of these photos were taken before she cut her hair. Magazine covers and ads are shot months, not weeks, in advance. For a June issue, monthly magazines require ads and editorial to be finished by around March 20.

There's no reason to go to the time and money of an expensive photo shoot because the actress changed her hair. Unless she's doing a hair product, her current hairstyle is irrelevant to advertisers. Unless they are mentioning her new haircut, it's irrelevant to magazine editors.

Mike46019, there was a model about five or six years ago who had her hair cut for a job doing a photo shoot and a company that had a contract with her decided they didn't like the haircut and wanted to terminate the contract for breach.

Anyone who has an appearance clause in their contract might anger their employer by cutting their hair, getting a tattoo, or gaining weight. Mariska cut her hair at the request of her employer. So the circomestances are the opposite.