Prudish Filmmaker Stops Lindsay Lohan from Expressing Herself Via Cooter, Allows Toplessness

There are quite a few things we don't understand about Lindsay Lohan. At the top of the list is why she insists on remaining blonde when it looks terrible on her and she was so gorgeous as a redhead. Also, why will she only get naked for free (or close to it, by celeb standards)? If we had Lindsay's rack and people were willing to shell out millions to see it we wouldn't go flaunting it for free in New York magazine. Especially when her "disgusting" and "poor" net worth has all but dried up. Also, we wouldn't play a clothed stripper for (we assume) a decent paycheck and then go topless for next to nothing. Oh and also, we would wear some pants once in a while. Star magazine reports (via Celebitchy):

Star Magazine has learned exclusively that the 21-year-old will get naked again to play a nymphomaniac waitress in the indie film Florence. And she’s getting paid only $75,000 for her part - just 1 percent of the whopping $7.5 million she earned for Just My Luck! “Lindsay doesn’t care that she’s getting paid peanuts,” an insider tells Star “She just wants to remind people that she can act and she’s worth hiring.” The role requires her to take off only her top for a lust sex scene, but the source says Lindsay… volunteered to do more. “She said it would be no problem to go Full Monty.”

We're excited to see those funbags in motion and all, but what's wrong with this girl? Isn't booze supposed to make you more likely to constantly take your shirt off? Is it possible that the drink and drugs actually gave her inhibitions that sobriety has freed? Does her willingness to flash bald beav in addition to boobs mean that she'll be starring in an erotic thriller opposite Eric Roberts by 2010?


If Lindsay does do a nude scene, you will see it at MrSkin.com. Until then, check out that cleavage.