Everyone ages at their own pace, and there's nothing wrong with that!
Beauty comes in all shapes and sizes, and the last thing we're here to do is shame anyone.
Still, it's amazing how genetics, lifestyle choices, and even movie roles can shape how
a celebrity changes over time.
Just take a look at these side-by-side comparisons of celebrities you had no idea were the same
age.
Kate Upton vs Selena Gomez
Kate Upton has been an icon of the fashion industry for years, from shows on the hottest
runways to multiple appearances on the cover of Sports Illustrated: Swimsuit Edition.
Clearly, she's a beautiful woman, but there's something about her face that's just so…
mature for her age.
After all, she was only born in 1992!
It's easier to see when you compare her to Selena Gomez, who just so happens to be the
same age.
It's been awhile since the Gomez appeared on Wizards of Waverly Place, but maybe some
of the show's magic had a lingering effect on her looks.
She looks years younger than Upton!
Jennifer Lawrence vs Sarah Hyland
Jennifer Lawrence got her big break with The Hunger Games, but she's gone on to become
an Oscar-winning actress with huge roles in Silver Linings Playbook, American Hustle,
and Joy.
Maybe it's because she's taken on such serious roles but, it's not hard to argue that she
looks a little older than her birth year of 1990 would seem to indicate.
Meanwhile, Sarah Hyland, an essential member of the ensemble cast of Modern Family, was
born in the same year, but somehow looks a lot younger than Lawrence.
It could be that her role allows her to be more fun-loving than J-Law's Katniss Everdeen,
which, in turn, makes her appear younger.
But there's also something about those plump cheeks that give her a more youthful look!
Taylor Swift vs Dakota Johnson
When Taylor Swift broke into the music industry with her self-titled album in 2006, she was
just 17 years old.
It's been more than a decade since then, and she doesn't look like she's aged more than
a day.
With her girly style, carefree songs, and steady stream of whirlwind romances, it just
feels like she's in a much earlier stage in life.
Dakota Johnson may not have as long or big a career as Swift, but she does have deep
Hollywood roots.
Her mother is Melanie Griffith, her father is Don Johnson, and her grandmother is the
legendary star of Alfred Hitchcock's The Birds, Tippi Hedren.
The budding actress has been captivating audiences with her risqué portrayal of Anastasia Steele
in the Fifty Shades movies but, despite the innocence of Ms. Steele, we can't help but
notice that Johnson looks...wellll, a bit older than Swift does.
Right?
Emilia Clarke vs Lena Dunham
When she's not busy wearing an elegant toga-gown as the "Mother of Dragons" on Game of Thrones,
Emilia Clarke goes about her life as a normal person with homes in both London and Venice
Beach.
You know.
Normal.
And then there's the fact that she doesn't look at all like she was born three decades
ago, in 1986, especially without her Khaleesi wig.
Meanwhile, her same-age counterpart, Lena Dunham, looks several years older, at the
very least.
The creator and star of HBO's hit show Girls tends to opt for a more organic, down-to-earth
look, and takes on roles that are a bit grittier.
Maybe her more subdued persona adds to a more mature look, but it's hard to accept that
she and Clarke are really the same age.
Katherine Heigl vs Rachel McAdams
For years now, Katherine Heigl has been dogged by rumors that she's difficult to work with.
As a result, we haven't seen much of her lately.
Citing bad writing on the part of the Grey's Anatomy staff, she declined to be considered
for an Emmy Award back in 2007 and famously clashed with Seth Rogen after making disparaging
remarks about Knocked Up.
They say that a bad attitude can age a person.
Combine that with the fact that Heigl smoked for years and you can see how she might look
a little older than her 1978 birth date would make it seem.
On the other hand, Rachel McAdams is the same age but looks much younger.
Yeah, she wasn't the nicest character in Mean Girls, or the smartest…
"Is butter a carb?"
"Yes."
...but after over a decade of stardom, there has been very little controversy surrounding
the actress.
Over the years, the Canadian star has won the hearts of audiences in films such as The
Notebook and more recently made the leap into the Marvel Universe in Doctor Strange.
What's really strange is how many years apart these two same-aged actors look.
Jim Parsons vs Andrew Lincoln
Anyone who has watched The Big Bang Theory will be familiar with Sheldon Cooper.
Neurotic and clever, the character's love for trains and video games makes him seem
plenty youthful, and despite being born in 1973, and already in his forties, Jim Parsons
is more than able to bring a childlike enthusiasm to the thirtysomething man-child that's won
him so much recognition.
That's why it's so shocking to look at a picture of Jim Parsons next to Andrew Lincoln and
accept that they are, in fact, the same age.
And judging by his appearance in 2003's Love Actually, this is a guy who didn't receive
the gift of Hollywood immortality that guys like Keanu have enjoyed.
Maybe it's because of all of the sun-drenched days he's spent filming The Walking Dead in
the Atlanta sun, but Lincoln definitely looks older.
"Ohhhhh!"
Paul Rudd vs Rory McCann
Now, on the subject of Hollywood immortality, look no further than Paul Rudd.
The man has barely aged in two decades!
Most people first saw him in Clueless back in 1995.
Compare that to how he looked in 2005 when The 40-Year-Old Virgin was released!
Leap ahead another 10 years to 2015 for Ant-Man and, well, now we're getting suspicious.
Compare Rudd's youthful face to Game of Thrones' Rory McCann and you'll be shocked all over
again to learn that they were both born in 1969.
Again, this is more about Rudd looking young than it is about McCann aging badly.
But isn't it a little hard to believe that these men were born in the same year?
"Yarppp."
John Stamos vs Mike Myers
Back in 1982, General Hospital viewers swooned over the new character, Blackie Parrish, handsomely
portrayed by John Stamos.
The actor really came into his own, however, in the role of Jesse Katsopolis on Full House.
Today, having crossed the half-century mark with his 1963 birth year, he's still making
hearts beat faster...even if it's just in commercials for Greek yogurt.
By comparison, Austin Powers actor and creator Mike Myers looks every bit of his five-plus
decades.
The former Saturday Night Live cast member has since gone gray and is usually photographed
wearing a pair of glasses, or at least looking really, really tired.
He's still got that great funny man persona he always had, but it's hard not to wonder:
What happened?
"Throw me a freakin' bone here!"
Chuck Norris vs Michael Gambon
Let's just get one thing out of the way — Chuck Norris is not a normal human being.
So is anyone really shocked that the martial arts expert and action star looks a lot younger
than his seven decades-plus?
Father Time came looking for him but, but Father Time's the only one who got clocked.
Meanwhile, Michael Gambon looks exactly like the kind of guy you'd expect to have been
born in 1940.
This is precisely why he was such a good pick to take over the role of Albus Dumbledore
in the Harry Potter series, after the original Dumbledore, Richard Harris, passed away in
2002.
On a side note… who wouldn't want to see a battle between Chuck Norris and Dumbledore?
Thanks for watching!
Click The List icon to subscribe to our YouTube channel.
Plus check out all this cool stuff we know you'll love, too!