W November 2008 : Angelina Jolie by Brad Pitt - Page 8

Kanna · 10-10-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by Starry

I still think this is so Vanity Fair material...

I can't agree more.

shop7th · 10-10-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by classicalbang

If this was a cover for any other month, I would not have so much disdain for it. But this is an art issue. Brad is not an artist; he is an actor.

Totally agree with this. And as for the breastfeeding thing, I feel that America is conservative to a fault, so in a way, I'm kind of for this type of thing. But it also represents another problem with all cultures; celebrity whoring. Can another type of person get one freaking cover?

surrealseven · 10-10-2008

When is this issue being coming in the states?

Can't wait to see the review, excited to see the other content in the issue

Not so interested in the Angelina photos...

**Luxx** · 10-10-2008

I'm just going to lay it out on the line with this thing. In some ways this cover is about Bradgelina and in some ways it has almost nothing to do with them. This is a cover about celebrity in my view but I don't think it's smart enough to be a commentary on celebrity. It's a cover that is using celebrity and our fascination with it to pimp product and that's fine, just not for the art issue.

People are saying that if this same cover were done with different people everyone would love it and I don't think that is the case quite frankly. First of all this image would not have been printed as a cover if it were hypothetically Mario Sorrenti shooting with Sigrid or Yulia because it's not an inherently strong visual in my opinion. The thing that makes this picture cover worthy is the celebrity of the individuals represented - the whole dynamic is that this is a "candid" moment, something we aren't supposed to see and is therefore interesting due to the voyeurism. As a picture in and of itself this is the kind of fuzzy black and white snapshot that you will find in almost any new parent's photo album. The only thing that makes it noteworthy is that it 's a picture of Angelina Jolie taken by Brad Pitt and therefore a window into the omnipresent juggernaut of their celebrity.

At the same time yes there is a public annoyance over Bradgelina and that cant be denied. Are the complaints about this issue grounded in something more than the "UR JUST JELLUS" school of celebrity nitpicking? Yes. Absolutely. This is an art issue. I don't think the complaints would be as loud if this were just a plain old issue but slapping the words "art issue" on the cover instantly changes our expectations in terms of content. This isn't art, this is commerce, pure and simple. As stated up thread this is a calculated attempt to a) increase W's newsstand sales b) promote Angelina's latest film and that kind of thing could be done with any other issue.

I think I'm going to go on about this and the way such pictorials problematize ideas on celebrity and privacy but I need to organize my thoughts, maybe I need to blog about this. All all I don't think this is an epic tragedy - it's just another fine example of the way magazines disrespect the intelligence of their readership and pander to, deify and systematically destroy celebrities. As many copies as this issue is going to sell it's going to be a blight on Brad and Angelina because you cannot claim to want privacy while indulging in highly publicized, deliberate displays of exhibitionism.

Erin · 10-10-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by t-rex

I think her on the cover is quite a step up from last year's issue with multiple covers -

-which were pictures of celebrities Richard Prince scribbled on and passed off as art

YES, I remember getting the Britney Spears one in the mail and being astonished. I couldn't stand the cover, and "art" -

jennifer~ · 10-10-2008

Although I wouldn't doubt that Brad Pitt pictures himself as some kind of talent-laden, Renaissance-man artist, calling this the Art Issue aids W in separating itself from a host of tabloids, while exploiting exactly the same type of material.

It's an alright cover (and theme), but overall I'm not falling for the 'art' tagline. I'm sure it hasn't hurt Brad's ego, though...

**hfgl** · 10-10-2008

I'm not happy this is the cover of W,and it's not exactly art,no.But she looks so happy and beautiful,so i like the pic itself but yeah,shouldn't be the cover of W.

jf813 · 10-10-2008

These people have no sense of discretion adn then they wonder why paparazzi are on them 24-7....

**MissMagAddict** · 10-10-2008

Brad & Angelina already made a bundle of money off the People Mag pictures which they gave to charity. IMO these pics are a way for them to control how their image is presented since Brad is taking the pictures which is a way to balance their privacy & the public's demand to see more of their lives. I don't think there's anything wrong with them wanting to provide the images they want out... The cover image is beautiful & natural & if it encourages more women to breastfeed then that's lovely... but for the Art Issue... I don't think so & I agree with what Luxx said. They can do what they want... I don't really care about them anyway... I'm more interested in the other content.

Thank you for the post Luxx

as always... you make me think.

dizzytacks · 10-10-2008

that fact that everyone is in an uproar about them being actors, and that this photo should be on People etc says everything about why this is on the cover. Its a mother, breastfeeding her child, albeit a recognizable mother. Maybe they are questioning your sense of reality...

tigerrouge · 10-10-2008

Talk of last year's issue reminds me that when it arrived in my country, in every store there was only the choice of Jennifer Aniston or Angelina Jolie, and I thought it was some sort of capitalisation on the whole 'feud' thing, like those 'Team Aniston' T-shirts. Anyhow...

It's really difficult for a fashion magazine to make a pure artistic statement with its cover, because the cover has to perform its function of persuading people to buy the issue - and we're so aware of the commercialism that it somehow cancels out any artistic purpose. Whatever the theme of the issue, the cover's foremost purpose is to stimulate purchase, not our minds.

The editorial has leeway to say something different because it's internal content. There could be plenty to discover in the editorial.

So I don't see much artistic merit in the cover, but I do give W kudos for producing something that will sell, according to the usual rules of commerce (unique pictures of a popular celebrity). To me, it calls itself an art issue, but it's business as usual. Maybe even better than usual.

tkendros · 10-10-2008

i just want to say that i think this is a sweet picture of angelina taken by someone who loves her.

weather or not it belongs on the cover it doesnt matter i just like the pic..

Dont hate

Paws · 10-10-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by LUXXX

I'm surprised at the negative reaction, I think it's a really beautiful cover and picture...it's natural and real. I'm curious to see the rest of the pics, his point of view and style is gritty and real. The picture also has something that many fashoin photographs lack: emotion.

^I agree with you.

And I also agree with MissMagAddict

Brad & Angelina already made a bundle of money off the People Mag pictures which they gave to charity. IMO these pics are a way for them to control how their image is presented since Brad is taking the pictures which is a way to balance their privacy & the public's demand to see more of their lives. I don't think there's anything wrong with them wanting to provide the images they want out...

I think they just want some control of what is put out there.....the paps are going to continue to take their photos....maybe they just want to show alittle of how they really are.

LUXXX · 10-10-2008

E! showed a ton of pics from the shoot tonight on their show and it all looks very interesting;the pics give of an isolating feeling. It's like a peak into their existence behind the gated walls they have to live in, there's pictures of the kids entertaining themselves outside, a lot of really really candid shots...

sedirea · 10-10-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paws

I think they just want some control of what is put out there.....the paps are going to continue to take their photos....maybe they just want to show alittle of how they really are.

This. Thank you for saying that.

10-10-2008	#108
surrealseven le avant-garde Profile:* Gender: homme Posts: 3,298	When is this issue being coming in the states? Can't wait to see the review, excited to see the other content in the issue Not so interested in the Angelina photos... Last edited by surrealseven : 10-10-2008 at 10:20 AM.
	Reply w/ Quote

10-10-2008	#109
Luxx disgusted. revolted. Profile: Mod Squad Member Location: NYC Gender: femme Posts: 5,770 Status: Online	I'm just going to lay it out on the line with this thing. In some ways this cover is about Bradgelina and in some ways it has almost nothing to do with them. This is a cover about celebrity in my view but I don't think it's smart enough to be a commentary on celebrity. It's a cover that is using celebrity and our fascination with it to pimp product and that's fine, just not for the art issue. People are saying that if this same cover were done with different people everyone would love it and I don't think that is the case quite frankly. First of all this image would not have been printed as a cover if it were hypothetically Mario Sorrenti shooting with Sigrid or Yulia because it's not an inherently strong visual in my opinion. The thing that makes this picture cover worthy is the celebrity of the individuals represented - the whole dynamic is that this is a "candid" moment, something we aren't supposed to see and is therefore interesting due to the voyeurism. As a picture in and of itself this is the kind of fuzzy black and white snapshot that you will find in almost any new parent's photo album. The only thing that makes it noteworthy is that it 's a picture of Angelina Jolie taken by Brad Pitt and therefore a window into the omnipresent juggernaut of their celebrity. At the same time yes there is a public annoyance over Bradgelina and that cant be denied. Are the complaints about this issue grounded in something more than the "UR JUST JELLUS" school of celebrity nitpicking? Yes. Absolutely. This is an art issue. I don't think the complaints would be as loud if this were just a plain old issue but slapping the words "art issue" on the cover instantly changes our expectations in terms of content. This isn't art, this is commerce, pure and simple. As stated up thread this is a calculated attempt to a) increase W's newsstand sales b) promote Angelina's latest film and that kind of thing could be done with any other issue. I think I'm going to go on about this and the way such pictorials problematize ideas on celebrity and privacy but I need to organize my thoughts, maybe I need to blog about this. All all I don't think this is an epic tragedy - it's just another fine example of the way magazines disrespect the intelligence of their readership and pander to, deify and systematically destroy celebrities. As many copies as this issue is going to sell it's going to be a blight on Brad and Angelina because you cannot claim to want privacy while indulging in highly publicized, deliberate displays of exhibitionism. __________________ "I have grown tired of apologising for being in this profession. I know that clothes are not important, that I am not changing society." - Miuccia Prada *SANS ARTIFICE.COM* - Fashion Without Fakery Last edited by Luxx : 10-10-2008 at 10:28 AM.
	Reply w/ Quote

10-10-2008	#111
jennifer~ it's a long story... Profile: Location: Long Island Gender: homme Posts: 8,168	Although I wouldn't doubt that Brad Pitt pictures himself as some kind of talent-laden, Renaissance-man artist, calling this the Art Issue aids W in separating itself from a host of tabloids, while exploiting exactly the same type of material. It's an alright cover (and theme), but overall I'm not falling for the 'art' tagline. I'm sure it hasn't hurt Brad's ego, though... __________________ the lines are fading in my kingdom...
	Reply w/ Quote

10-10-2008	#112
hfgl OMGZZ!! Profile: Mod Squad Member Location: Coconut Inn Gender: femme Posts: 10,290	I'm not happy this is the cover of W,and it's not exactly art,no.But she looks so happy and beautiful,so i like the pic itself but yeah,shouldn't be the cover of W. __________________ Forever:Turlington>Bercu>Moss>Williams>Evangelista Now:Trentini>Kloss>StoneStiekema>>smit Vogue covers as a reason to live Me is el
	Reply w/ Quote

10-10-2008	#113
jf813 front row Profile: Location: New York Gender: femme Posts: 262	These people have no sense of discretion adn then they wonder why paparazzi are on them 24-7.... __________________ http://richgirlsandrollerskates.wordpress.com
	Reply w/ Quote

10-10-2008	#114
MissMagAddict glossy & torn Profile: Mod Squad Member Gender: femme Posts: 22,294	Brad & Angelina already made a bundle of money off the People Mag pictures which they gave to charity. IMO these pics are a way for them to control how their image is presented since Brad is taking the pictures which is a way to balance their privacy & the public's demand to see more of their lives. I don't think there's anything wrong with them wanting to provide the images they want out... The cover image is beautiful & natural & if it encourages more women to breastfeed then that's lovely... but for the Art Issue... I don't think so & I agree with what Luxx said. They can do what they want... I don't really care about them anyway... I'm more interested in the other content. Thank you for the post Luxx as always... you make me think. __________________ She's got everything she needs, she's an artist she don't look back. She can take the dark out of the nighttime, and paint the daytime black.
	Reply w/ Quote

10-10-2008	#115
dizzytacks tfs star Profile: Location: canada Gender: homme Posts: 1,701	that fact that everyone is in an uproar about them being actors, and that this photo should be on People etc says everything about why this is on the cover. Its a mother, breastfeeding her child, albeit a recognizable mother. Maybe they are questioning your sense of reality... __________________ two girls in paris "the twig and the tree" -circa 1968 Last edited by dizzytacks : 10-10-2008 at 03:38 PM.
	Reply w/ Quote

10-10-2008	#116
tigerrouge don't look down Profile: Location: Béal Feirste Gender: femme Posts: 4,866	Talk of last year's issue reminds me that when it arrived in my country, in every store there was only the choice of Jennifer Aniston or Angelina Jolie, and I thought it was some sort of capitalisation on the whole 'feud' thing, like those 'Team Aniston' T-shirts. Anyhow... It's really difficult for a fashion magazine to make a pure artistic statement with its cover, because the cover has to perform its function of persuading people to buy the issue - and we're so aware of the commercialism that it somehow cancels out any artistic purpose. Whatever the theme of the issue, the cover's foremost purpose is to stimulate purchase, not our minds. The editorial has leeway to say something different because it's internal content. There could be plenty to discover in the editorial. So I don't see much artistic merit in the cover, but I do give W kudos for producing something that will sell, according to the usual rules of commerce (unique pictures of a popular celebrity). To me, it calls itself an art issue, but it's business as usual. Maybe even better than usual. __________________ Futurology isn't what it used to be. Last edited by tigerrouge : 10-10-2008 at 04:23 PM.
	Reply w/ Quote

10-10-2008	#117
tkendros rising star Profile: Location: Toronto Gender: femme Posts: 162	i just want to say that i think this is a sweet picture of angelina taken by someone who loves her. weather or not it belongs on the cover it doesnt matter i just like the pic.. Dont hate
	Reply w/ Quote

10-10-2008	#119
LUXXX fashion elite Profile: Gender: femme Posts: 2,881	E! showed a ton of pics from the shoot tonight on their show and it all looks very interesting;the pics give of an isolating feeling. It's like a peak into their existence behind the gated walls they have to live in, there's pictures of the kids entertaining themselves outside, a lot of really really candid shots...
	Reply w/ Quote

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode