US Vogue May 2007 : The World's Next Top Models by Steven Meisel

[iriswills]

1. YAY!!!
2. I don't know why people aren't impressed with the look of the cover. I don't think I have seen that background color on a cover before (but correct me if I'm wrong), and the styling is genius because I can't stop looking at the shades of blue/green. It's simple, but drop dead gorgeous!!!
3. I really shouldn't complain because models are on the cover but the last few kind of tick me off...Agnyess, Coco, and Chanel. They are either too new, or just plain crap. But I'm not going to complain too hard because gorgeous Sasha and Hilary are on the front. EEK!

[julesrules815]

I think most of these girls deserve to cover. They have the resume's to earn it.

Doutzen- Calvin Klein campaign, Loreal campaign, Bottega Venata and lots of other campaigns, Vogue covers
Hilary- has done Balenciaga, Givenchy, Donna Karan, Gucci ads and now is going to be one of the faces of Estee Lauder, several Vogue covers
Lily- Burberry, Dior, and lots of other campaigns, Vogue covers
Sasha- Prada campaign for several seasons, Vogue covers, Armani makeup campaign
Caroline- has been in every US Vogue ed ever!!!!
Stam- tons of campaigns, tons of covers
Raquel- I don't see how she is the next top model since she has been around for a while now, but she deserves it.

And all of these girls do the big fashion shows each season. As for Coco and Agyness, I just think Anna likes them.

edit: Forgive me if I forgot some campaigns, but I was writing off the top of my head.

[Pastry]

It's a fresh choice, sort of a "we-haven't-forgotten-about-that-sept.2004-cover-no-no-no" 2nd try cover. BUT, would it kill them to do something fresh with the actual image?

It's no different from Vogue's 100th anniversary cover from the 90's, where all the supermodels wore white shirts and jeans from the GAP. Pretty clothes and airbrushed faces mirror the same idea, imo.

Ditto on the choice of the girls. I don't think the west needs a flawless Hilary, Jessica, or Lily. I think they need a cover full of beautiful Jane Does without make-up who might actually make up for some compelling imagery.

That's the thing, the "new supermodels" will be replaced by another tribe of new supermodels. The true new supermodel, in my humble opinion, really is a Jane Doe without make up. And trying to bring back the old idea (and ideal) is no longer relevant.

[kimair]

for me the cover is a bit anti-climatic for two reasons:

a. the setup is something they've done before (thanks missmag for the pic)...

b. there are no real surprises in terms of the girls...
i could have guessed each of them...even chanel iman...
she had an entire feature in teen vogue, and anna does oversee that as well..

i'm not surprised anja and hye are missing, even though they each have done major campaigns, neither has ever been an anna favorite (anja frequently appears in bazaar, so that could have counted against her as well)...

[MulletProof]

This cover does nothing for me, I don't hate it.. I'm just indifferent.. Meisel has never remotely managed to impress me, same for Herrera or De La Renta or whoever made that nonsense big skirt-white shirt combo.. and those girls are just painfully boring.. I feel like they can't just bring themselves to surprise the average american so instead, they take barbie-resembling models and whore them out to death in their pages.. because that's how they understand the top model term. a little 'behind' with the rest of the world as always, being so condescending to people over 40 who are still dreaming about the 80/90s or those who aren't even interested for real in fashion and trying to turn them into model maniacs by giving them an aesthetic that's not really representing the one in the current shows (or the spirit of the generation in general) is not going to gain ms. wintour a favorable place in timeline IMO.

and isn't it too soon for this 'next top model' issue anyway?.. i believe the girls in the past episode are still [very] firmly holding their status as they did when the issue was published.. models like doutzen might've increased their salary but they're still ghosts when they go down the runway..

[Pastry]

Originally Posted by MulletProof

...that nonsense big skirt-white shirt combo...

off-topic, but, Mullet..I think i might have to immortalize that in a quotation!

[alix*]

I think this cover looks like a flop compared to the previous covers.

[russh_kris_z]

I dont like much of the models there except: Raquel , Doutzen and Sasha. I'm surprised that VOGUE would actually choose the unconventional beauties(of course aside from raquel and Doutzen) I thought they'd pick all the classically beautiful ones for the american market.. haha

[agneslo]

i heard that Doutzen will have 2 pages of interview where the others only have 1 page ... she's huge!!!

[LibertyRose]

As far as model covers go, I like the idea of using new or new-ish models who are on first-name basis among people in the industry and modelizers but still relatively new to the general public. This is the kind of cover that can take a girl's career to exciting new heights. I am definitely more interested in seeing this than a cover with Natalia Vodianova or Shalom Harlow. I'm also glad that it's a group shot. Does it say something about the lack of wow-factor of the current crop of girls when it's hard to find a girl that can single-handedly carry a cover?

The styling -- white shirt with bright-colored taffata skirt -- is a bit Carolina Herrera.

Now onto the selection: thank you who did a breakdown of the girls' agencies and nationalities. Always helpful to see the politics behind the scenes.

- I have mixed feelings about the selection but not at all surprised, except the fact that Sasha took center stage instead of Trentini.

- Sasha may be a Meisel favorite but she really hasn't proven her range to be considered so vital. I mean, she hasn't worked with that many photographers. Even Natalia Vodianova didn't go exclusive that early in her career, and she pretty much took the industry by storm when she started. Also, I thought Sasha looks a lot like Anja Rubik there.

- Why would Agyness's inclusion surprise anyone? She got an only-girl edit plus a one-page article in March. If that is not a big deal, I don't know what is.

- I think Freja did shoot an editoral for US Vogue (with Raymond Meiers, possibly) but it did not run, and only bits of it showed up in the back pages. That doesn't bode well for her future at this publication. Lisa Cant is sort of the same way.

- Anja Rubik may just be another Mariacarla Boscono, always the bridesmaid, never the bride. She is everywhere except for US Vogue.

-- You know who I really feel bad for? Elise Crombez. Meisel works in mysterious ways. I wonder if Elise is given the cold shoulder b/c her shape has become more womanly, but that apparently did not hurt Karen Elson one bit in Meisel's world.

-- If Cameron Russell didn't take time off for Wellsley, she'd be right up there representing American girls along with Hilary Rhoda.

[homeboy]

When will the issue hit the stores?

[julesrules815]

^someone said 2 weeks

[TheGlassAngel]

I said two weeks because I read a post that said two weeks

[julesrules815]

Originally Posted by LibertyRose

As far as model covers go, I like the idea of using new or new-ish models who are on first-name basis among people in the industry and modelizers but still relatively new to the general public. This is the kind of cover that can take a girl's career to exciting new heights. I am definitely more interested in seeing this than a cover with Natalia Vodianova or Shalom Harlow. I'm also glad that it's a group shot. Does it say something about the lack of wow-factor of the current crop of girls when it's hard to find a girl that can single-handedly carry a cover?

So are you saying that Natalia, Daria and Gisele can't carry a cover either? Becuase they shared the Sep 2004 cover

edit: I wish they had done this cover like the Sep 2004 cover. It was so much better!

[Cut Copy]

this is a horrible cover. even if it's got models on it for once.

B

O

R

I

N

G