Cover Rumor Thread

[JPineapple]

Cole Sprouse will be GQ march cover.

 

[8eight]

Cole Sprouse will be GQ march cover.

US or UK?

 

[Deleted member 141523]

it's been a year of VI without Meisel so sad

 

[JPineapple]

US or UK?

US, Armie Hammer is UK’s cover

 

[honeycombchild]

I can’t see him being the UK cover anytime soon. They’ve also really cut back on the amount of females gracing their cover of late, not sure if anyone’s noticed.

I guess the days of only agreeing to include them if they wore a bikini have come to an end. GQ was the worst.

 

[Benn98]

I guess the days of only agreeing to include them if they wore a bikini have come to an end. GQ was the worst.

They really shocked me when they dared to shoot Kristen Stewart in a bikini complete with come hither pose. I mean, even back in her Twilight days she was never really about overt sexuality.

 

[tigerrouge]

People willing to be (and wanting to see) women posing in bikinis is still endemic, it's just moved to social media. A celebrity is currently free to self-promote themselves via a thousand Insta posts of skimpy clothing for thousands of likes, yet if a print magazine dares to serve up the same with a willing cover star, they're living in the past.

 

[AD011620]

I kind of want it to be Olivia....ink:. I mean, have you seen The Favourite?

I have and I absolutely loved it but Glen, I think, is an actress with a wider range as far as the acting is concerned... Olivia is totally amazing and I love her but I am sure she will have another chance...

 

[Benn98]

People willing to be (and wanting to see) women posing in bikinis is still endemic, it's just moved to social media. A celebrity is currently free to self-promote themselves via a thousand Insta posts of skimpy clothing for thousands of likes, yet if a print magazine dares to serve up the same with a willing cover star, they're living in the past.

That's the difference. GQ magazine is supposed to have a higher moral code than (let me think who made a living off a hypersexualised image...) Kylie Jenner, because they're tasked with shaping men and society and a scantily clad cover represents far more than just the woman wearing it. Kylie is only concerned with strengthening her image. The two are different somewhat, you see.

 

[Deleted member 141523]

I would love to see only guys on the cover of GQ. If Vogue only put them with a girl on the cover, and never alone, they should do the same. I want to see menswear, they're selling that. Not a sexy model wearing bikini.

 

[JPineapple]

Katy Perry is engaged (and released new muzzzzzic) ... so, will Anna give her a cover?

 

[honeycombchild]

I think the main distinction to be made here with social media and GQ is that GQ used to only shoot women for the cover if they would agree to appear in their underwear or a bikini. There’s very few woman who’ve managed to land a cover and not had to agree to be suped up into some Male fantasy for it.

 

[tigerrouge]

I don't buy this idea that people aren't in charge of their own choices. There are plenty of celebrities who have appeared on the cover of men's magazines as part of diversifying their image.

Have we really reached the stage where we're saying that people who used to wear bikinis on GQ were forced into it? Not to mention the idea that being seen as sexually desirable to a certain audience is a bad thing that no woman actually wants?

I am sick of the current trend in print media to shy away from sensuality and sexuality. I can see the necessity for a period of serious self-reflection given the conduct of many people in the industry, but all the vigour has been stripped from the pages.

Fashion is full of gorgeous faces and bodies and creative energies - but we're stuck with sackcloth and ashes and terminal dullness. The bikinis on the covers are not the problem.

 

[mepps]

When I was growing up, GQ was very defined, and knew exactly who it's readers were. That started to change in the late 90's and early aughts. Some of the changes were great, others not so much. I have no idea who the target demo for this magazine is anymore, and I doubt GQ does either. Posing in a bikini is a non starter for most A list women, especially in the current #MeToo climate. What would be the point of a serious actress wearing a bikini on the cover of GQ? She gets nothing out of it, except a starring role in some guys celebrity stroke fantasy. GQ should stick to Men's fashion, and if they really want to speak to the audience that's actually kept it alive in the 21st century, they should put hot guys in speedos on their covers. I can get behind that kind of sensuality.

 

[tigerrouge]

Cate Blanchett would never have needed a GQ cover for her career, but there were plenty of actresses and models aiming for different segments of the entertainment industry who saw some potential benefit from the opportunity and took it.

I do think men's fashion magazines should be about men's fashion, but I also think women's fashion magazines should have fashion for women, rather than clothes for perpetual adolescents, and preferably seen on proper models. But that seems to have gone the way of history too.

 

[Benn98]

I don't get the obsession with Speedos. I find it so....Latin. Anyway, the last time I saw a speedo on the cover of US GQ was with Cristiano Ronaldo. And despite his exaggerated macho pose, they had to drape Alessandra Ambrosio around him to make sure the cover doesn't fall in the Attitude realm. Even Nelson himself said he was worried about the cover because American men, in general, don't much like speedos.

 

[tigerrouge]

The latest UK Vogue magazine survey is asking about coverlines that include fashion and flight, Kate Moss, backstage at couture, the life of Donyale Luna, Richard Madden, miniskirts, wedding party dressing, and as before, a long list of models that you're asked whether you want to see on the cover or read about, and it's a varied list.

So it's likely a Kate Moss cover at some point - how could they run an article and not put her on the front? Imagine if that happened! Truly the end of an era...

 

[Benn98]

Kate Moss photographed by Steven Meisel!

 

[mikel]

Kate Moss photographed by Steven Meisel!

I was thinking the same. But if anyone can make it happen, it’s Edward. After all he managed to persuade Meisel to shoot Cara for the cover last year.

 

[honeycombchild]

I don't buy this idea that people aren't in charge of their own choices. There are plenty of celebrities who have appeared on the cover of men's magazines as part of diversifying their image.

Have we really reached the stage where we're saying that people who used to wear bikinis on GQ were forced into it? Not to mention the idea that being seen as sexually desirable to a certain audience is a bad thing that no woman actually wants?

I am sick of the current trend in print media to shy away from sensuality and sexuality. I can see the necessity for a period of serious self-reflection given the conduct of many people in the industry, but all the vigour has been stripped from the pages.

Fashion is full of gorgeous faces and bodies and creative energies - but we're stuck with sackcloth and ashes and terminal dullness. The bikinis on the covers are not the problem.

I’m saying that, and this is a pure unadulterated fact here, that females have in the past only been able to land a cover for GQ by agreeing to the ‘concept’ of the shoot. Those that tried to fight against this and desired to be shot in another way were told they wouldn’t be booking the cover.

This is world’s away from deciding to do that shoot and showcase that side of yourself, on your own terms. If you decide to, absolutely, but to those in the past who were told they would only be able to appear if they agreed to the bikini/underwear/wet in a swimming pool ‘concept’, it’s no different from the Weinstein situation. You’ll be more famous if you do this.

So yes, in part, I am saying that. Due to the facts that back up that exact statement.