JERSEY Shore star Angelina Pivarnick looked unrecognizable in a filtered selfie.
The 35-year-old shared the new snap after she fans accused her of being a “Kim Kardashian wannabe.”
The MTV star’s face appeared flawless in the filtered selfie, which she captioned: “Smile even in the presence of lost souls🧿🔮”
The Jersey Shore star noticeably disabled comments from the post, as she likely suspected fans might slam her for editing the photo.
‘KIM KARDASHIAN WANNABE’
The reality star wore her long dark hair in a high ponytail, which was then draped over a metallic vest top.
With huge fake eyelashes and make-up similar to that favored by business mogul Kim, Angelina wrote: “Happy Monday everyone! Top by @fashionnova ❤️🙏🏼.
“Be thankful for another day and be proud of yourselves always.”
She concluded: “Spread love.”
While many of Angelina’s Instagram followers could not get enough of the sultry picture, others were not so impressed by her changing looks.
One complained: “Kim kardashian wannabe….smh.”
Another added: “FILTER!!!”
“I miss the days when girl wanted to look like like them selves.”
ANGELINA’S LOVE LIFE
Angelina’s changing looks come as she seems to have reconciled with husband Chris Larangeira.
US Weekly previously confirmed the TV personality had secretly filed for divorce from her hubby back in January.
Even Jersey Shore stars Jenni “JWoww” Farley and Mike “The Situation” Sorrentino learned about the alleged cheating video earlier in the season.
Angelina ended up denying the cheating rumors and said: “I’m an open book.
“I don’t like to hide secrets and hide s**t, so I decide to let my husband know I have these videos and he said he’s good with not seeing them.”
Earlier this month, The Sun exclusively revealed that Angelina’s divorce from Chris has been officially dismissed.
Documents obtained by The Sun stated that the “complaint in this matter was filed on January 19, 2021. This matter has been pending for four months without the filing of required documentation.”
Since the case had languished for so long without any follow-up, the court then decided that it “will dismiss the above case for lack of prosecution without prejudice.”