Valentino S/S 09 : Stephanie Seymour by Mert & Marcus

[Salvatore]

Iconic.

[coolasfcuk1010]

I don't understand why her hands are like that

[dior_couture1245]

Originally Posted by Salvatore

Iconic.

My sentiments exactly. It reminds me of vintage Vogue Avedon & Penn shots...to me, it has as much visual impact as such iconic images as "Dovima and the Elephants," etc.

[Creative]

Oh! I've alredy seen it and it's... very disappointing!
I don't like it at all, although I like Valentino (with Valentino) and Seymour too.
I was waiting for somenthing amazing, I don't know why but I thought it would be in color (I love Black&White) and that it would be shot in an amazing house with beautiful furniture and flowers with a good saturation of colors... I was wrong.

[happycanadian]

WOW!

i'm actually sitting here, jaw agape, literally astonished as the amount of you who are criticizing Stephanie's body. i'm speechless. i just do not even know how to respond. *shocked*.

i think the ad is magnificent. i agree, it certainly does bring back memories of her earlier work. she is an iconic model, an iconic woman. she is strong, yes, but to say she isn't feminine is to equate femininity as being the absence of strength and is simply offensive.

[darri]

^ Excellent point! I think she/the ad is stunning, but i understand peoples dislike of her muscularness. Even i find it abit distracting.

[The_Ida]

Normal healthy women have muscles, you know.

[loverdariafreja]

i dun like it. she looks like she has man arms. they're far too distracting

[The_Ida]

Stand in front of a mirror. Do the pose. See - you have muscles too. I think the lighting and B/W contours a lot, though.

[hfgl]

It never occured to me by looking at it that there were something to be said about her body.Nothign stands out as distracting or manly.I just see Stephanie.

[*ana*]

you don't necessarily need to be muscular to be healthy. we're here judging images all the time and i don't see the problem if some people think a strong woman like stephanie doesn't suit valentino. it doesn't mean she can't do fashion, it just means she doesn't suit the brand's aesthetic. i prefer a softer image for valentino, too. and by softer i don't mean an unhealthy skinny body.

[Miss Dalloway]

Hfgl

Same here, she looks beautiful in a very womanly way, nothing here looks manly to me, not her arms, hands or anything.She was always fmaous for having the best Super body to me, and she had a pretty great year, very glad to see her get work, always.

[tigerrouge]

Originally Posted by *ana*

i prefer a softer image for valentino, too.

Yes, I think Stephanie's superb, but there is the point that we've spent several pages talking about her physique, rather than what she's wearing, which surely means the 'product' has been overshadowed by the person wearing it.

It's a great ad for Stephanie, but would it move anyone to get the dress? Perhaps a softer image would have worked more in the product's favour.

Though the Valentino brand doesn't seem to know what it wants at the moment, so no wonder the dresses aren't being showcased with greater regard. I'll settle for enjoying the sight of Stephanie, while the label sorts itself out.

[rip_ian curtis]

this really is a great ad! reminds me of spring 2003 campaign, it's like mr. Garavani's back at the helm. really a strong and sexy ad, and much better than last seasons guinea pig-Angela!

[dior_couture1245]

To be honest, I'm actually baffled by the comments that Stephanie is too strong for the Valentino aesthetic. I mean, this is the label that has used Shalom, Raquel, Natasha V, Gisele, Linda, Karolina K, Iselin, etc for previous campaigns...none of whom I consider delicate, soft girls....

I personally think Stephanie looks stunning in this ad and I actually think her look in this campaign has a very Sophia Loren/ Dolce Vita/ feline feel...which I always kind of associate with Valentino, anyway. I really don't think the Valentino identity is exclusively soft. In fact, I've always felt that the women that He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named designed for were divas in the classic, Italian sense...not shy, delicate girls. Certainly Alessandra's woman was a softer interpretation, but I think the choice of a strong supermodel is actually an interesting contrast to the delicate, frothy clothes.

Originally Posted by tigerrouge

Yes, I think Stephanie's superb, but there is the point that we've spent several pages talking about her physique, rather than what she's wearing, which surely means the 'product' has been overshadowed by the person wearing it.

To address the point you bring up about how the model has overshadowed the clothes, therefor equating the ad as a failure, I'd have to disagree. To me, while an ad certainly has to showcase the product, it is more important to create a striking image - great composition, great color (or beautiful B&W), fantastic styling and accessorizing, attractive/ appealing model(s), interesting photography, setting, etc...it all has to add up to a stellar campaign. And in my opinion, this is a great campaign because all the elements work together and the image itself feels iconic - and that's far more important than the clothes simply looking good.


All in all, I think the ridiculous amount of attention that has been spent on Stephanie's biceps is really just insane. In fact it's offensive, really that so many users here find a beautifully toned physique distracting. What?...you'd all rather have a pre-pubescent girl starring in this campaign? Would Siri have been a better choice?...she's so feminine, isn't she...