Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Magazines' started by vogue28, Nov 21, 2019.
I love it! both the cover and editorial, not matter how literal
That logo ruins the picture.
How do magazines always make such a beautiful young woman look so desperately bad? Was the ugly nonsense retro styling neccessary? Is there a storyline to it? I need answers. And Zendaya needs justice!
Zendaya is gorgeous and interesting ENOUGH to not need any gimmick of theirs. She doesn’t deserve this.
Not sure about that hair and the coat plus taking flight but she is giving some good face.
Love it! Love her!
She can pull off any look, no matter how ridiculous.
The mayonnaise to Rihanna's mustard. Tragedy is that Zendaya probably thinks she's so brave/edgy/fierce (insert generic superlative in same vein) for allowing Allure to make her look a mug when at the end of the day she basically just looks like a mug. Let's not get carried away here - she's a former Disney star selling Lancome and Tommy Hilfiger.
Another forgettable cover for Allure.
Another month (or two) where Allure shies away from the job of making its cover models look good, even though 'looking good' is the lifeblood of the beauty industry.
If this magazine were a person, it would need therapy regarding self-sabotage.
Because other celebrities who front fashion magazines are saving the world, Benn? Come on.
I didn't say anything about 'saving the world' - my comment relates to the faux 'edgy' persona she puts on every now and then.
Apologies, I took your comment as you trying to make it seem like other cover stars have more importance than a “former Disney star selling Lancome and Tommy Hilfiger”. But still, I think she’s trying to grow out of her Disney persona and will get there soon. But yeah, this cover isn’t it.
I think Zendaya is possibly the only who would be able to pull this off and she did. Also I'm pretty sure her hair is about the take flight not Zendaya.
118 pgs, it's full of L'Oreal and Lancôme ads (lots more Zendaya). The articles are feeble - Korean injectables (you'd learn more from a lengthy reddit post on a skincare forum) and a global spa article that's more like a travel brochure. Henna's New Frontier is just a short piece about someone who paints hands, with a few small shots of the work thrown in (leopardprint pattern etc). There's an "LA" beauty editorial that's just close-ups of faces with stars stuck on them, and a few palm trees visible in the background. A piece about short hair opens with an image that you think is going to become a full-fledged fashion editorial - but no! The issue is over.
This truly is the "Out of Office" issue.
Why is that asinine “Out of Office” phrase rearing it’s head again?