On the other hand, the foot is far more than the toes. Width? - meh; doesn't bother me. Have you seen those arches? the ankle? the bridge? Take a look at id. 1987664 - had the toes not been showing, that could have easily been tagged NFS even with several inches of the lateral aspect on lovely display. Beauty in feet is subjective.
Sorry @Vis, you're just going by the inane NFS rules. So yes, there is tiny glimpse of a few toes showing. I'm just bitching about the NFS definition. I won't repeat myself. It's a stupid definition.
2016-04-01 16:30:54Kawen Mr Jeyt (user)
2015-04-01 05:21:53Windows 2 The Sole (user)
I see a hint of the elusive Labia Majora, but hey, I'm not complaining! As a matter of fact, I'm barely looking. I'm too hypnotized by those feet. To me, if it was a mathematical equation: Feet > Labia Majora.
Who are those 60 people who qualify Olivia Wildes feet as bad feet? Not to mention those 58 who find her feet even ugly? I think those people don't like her as a person and therefor like to give her feet a bad rating. These 118 people (bad feet and ugly feet al together), should NOT be at this site if they think the feet of Olivia Wilde are bad or even ugly. Cause than you don't have a taste for feet at all! And that is not even a matter of taste any more, even if you find other feet still more beautiful than hers. You can't find her feet bad or ugly as long as your'e just have an objectively look pure at her feet alone and not at the rest of her! And in my personal view there's also nothing wrong with the rest of her, but that may be perhaps up for discussion, in contrast to her feet who are not up for discussion!