Lucky Magazine

[kimair]

i know lucky loves keri alot, but it has been a while since her last cover...
i do have to say that i this is my fave among her 5...

 

[ChrissyM]

at least lucky mixed it up a little bit with the look of the cover shot this month....
even if keri is one of the "regulars" this is more than their standard torso shot and is a little more interesting

 

[clo]

I think Keri is very beautiful and this cover isn't bad at all. I can't wait to see the feature on Keri, since the cover looks so promising.

 

[StarsInHerEyes]

Cover in HQ and another pic:

Keri Russell looks gorgeous on the cover of Lucky magazine’s March 2010 issue, on newsstands this week!

The 33-year-old Extraordinary Measures actress, who wore a bustier dress by Ali Ro on the cover, shared that while she defined her style as “urban western” when she covered the magazine five years ago, she’s attracted to the ’40s tomboy look now!

“I’m into the sexy masculine thing,” Keri shared. “All the clean lines and tailoring are so classic. I look for those details on dresses and skirts, too.”

You can win Keri’s cover look, valued at over $2000, at Lucky.com!

justjared

 

[clo]

Thanks for posting the cover and the other pic in HQ, StarsInHerEyes! I like both pics!

 

[MON]

Love the cover

 

[pacersfanatic36]

Isn't Lucky one of the magazines struggling to survive with a huge loss in ad pages? It wouldn't hurth them to get some different people on their covers.

I'm not sure about a loss of ad pages, but I think the circulation figures are fairly steady (around 1.1 million). On the other hand, good circulation figures weren't enough to keep Domino afloat. Lucky should still probably shake things up a bit.

Hmm, I did notice their issues getting thinner and thinner. While I do agree that they need more variety when it comes to their covers, I still think there would be something missing. They've taken out a few of their features, like their Shopping with... (i think?)
Although I realize that Lucky is supposed to be a magalog, it wouldn't hurt to have a few articles of some sort in there.

At the very least, I'd like more than a couple sentences from their cover subjects. No other magazine cares about Amanda Peet as much as I do, and I'd like to hear more than a few words about her style. I think Lucky would also be filling a nice niche. For all of the media devoted to celebrity fashion, I feel like there are few outlets that actually ask these women about their style. For instance, I'd love to hear more about Amanda's relationship with stylist/best friend Tina Chai. That would be a great cover article (certainly better than 2 studio shots and a few soundbites).

As far as missing features, this issue doesn't have the Spring/Fall special that they usually do (where 4 or 5 great looks of the season are highlighted). I like the feature, but I guess it could be a little stale and repetitive. There are a few other small changes, but my post is getting a little long!

 

[quimby]

I noticed that their features are looking a lot more like editorials. They used to have lots of features shot with a plain studio background, and now they seem to be all on location with "atmosphere." I took that to mean that they're pretty successful and getting more money allocated to them. But dunno.

I kinda miss the old amateur feel of the magazine, when they'd survey and photograph members of their own staff to fill out the pages.

 

[fashionista-ta]

^ It seems like it's been awhile since they've done that 'woman on the street' feature, where they hit the street with a rack of wrinkled clothes

I'm still finding it useful ... the last pair of shoes I bought I found out about in Lucky, and they were only available coastally, so I could've trolled the malls for months and never found them.

 

[quimby]

^ I loved those women-on-the-street feature! And the transparent scrim that they would use as background.

But my favorite feature is when they have 3 or 4 artsy people explain their wardrobe. The career woman feature with the 7 days of outfits was pretty good, too.

I wish they'd stick to real people instead of using models looking vacantly off into space.

 

[pacersfanatic36]

quimby, that was one of the changes I noticed. Overall, the magazine looked more expensive (all of the runway shots, the photoshoots in the fancy house, etc.). And, the collage-like layouts reminded me of high fashion magazines. I also miss the old amateur feel!

^ It seems like it's been awhile since they've done that 'woman on the street' feature, where they hit the street with a rack of wrinkled clothes

That's missing as well! I never liked that feature, though. The idea always seemed better than the execution (I never liked the women's outfits, and they never seemed markedly different than what the editors put together). While they're deleting things, can they please cut Jean Godfrey-June's The Beauty Closet? It is always a self-indulgent, namedropping, rambling mess. How is the fact that Uma Thurman's brother is her yoga teacher relevant to anything? That's seriously what she talks about this month.

On the other hand, I wish they'd revive Fashion Week (which featured 7 days worth of a woman's outfits). It introduced me to one of my greatest fashion influences, Carolina Herrera Jr.

^ I loved those women-on-the-street feature! And the transparent scrim that they would use as background.

But my favorite feature is when they have 3 or 4 artsy people explain their wardrobe. The career woman feature with the 7 days of outfits was pretty good, too.

I wish they'd stick to real people instead of using models looking vacantly off into space.

I think I was composing my post while you posted your second one. It looks like we're on the same wavelength.

 

[fashionista-ta]

^ I bought some nail polish once on the strength of Jean Godfrey-June's column ... special trip and everything, got the last bottle (LE). The only problem was, the color she described was the color it is in the bottle, not when you put it on

I dunno ... I think it's kind of well written and mildly entertaining (I can't completely disagree about self-indulgent of course ), but shouldn't the two or three products she's pushing each month really be amazing when you try them?

I'll tell you what I could really live without ... the outfit on the back page each month. That is like my 'what not to wear' ...

 

[ChrissyM]

^^i've actually picked up a styling inspiration or two from that hand drawn last page feature

i like that they do those little features on how to wear a piece now and later...
makes you get creative and inspired by the pieces in your wardrobe and think more about certain pieces as being "seasonless"

they definitely seem to be doing less in terms of their shop by city features...
but maybe that's just more suited to being online?

 

[pacersfanatic36]

Firstly, I'd like to say it's great that people are actually responding to this thread! I know people in this forum think Lucky is useless and lowbrow, but I like it .

I didn't mind Jean Godfrey-June in the beginning, and I think she does recommend a nice variety of products. She seems passionate as well, which can be nice to read. But, sometimes, she strikes me as a huge braggart (with her $700 haircuts and all). I've also been disappointed by a few of her recommendations (one wrecked my skin, and I never have reactions to products). She just leaves me with this icky feeling sometimes (like she's only recommending these uber-expensive products to flaunt that she can afford them. Because, as we know, they don't always work).

As far as Andrea Linett and the back page, our styles are really dissimilar and I wouldn't miss the feature if they dropped it. But, she seems really nice and friendly in the online Style Advice videos (not aloof or cooler-than-thou like I imagined). I like the outfits she puts together as well and have taken ideas from her there.

^^they definitely seem to be doing less in terms of their shop by city features...
but maybe that's just more suited to being online?

I agree. They probably think the ad space is more valuable, too.The market editor who handled the feature, Gigi Guerra, left and now works for Madewell. Looking back, I feel so many cities were left unexplored and others (like NYC and London) were repeated constantly. I know they're fashion meccas, but still.

 

[fashionista-ta]

^ Well, I don't know if that's what she's flaunting Isn't the whole point of her job that she never has to pay for anything? And she can call up (no, she can have someone call up) and ask for more because it's going to be in the column? I don't remember the $700 haircut, but if you never pay for a beauty product, and who knows, maybe get other stuff free too, maybe a $700 haircut becomes no BFD

 

[quimby]

I pretty much would never wear the outfit on the back page either, as I'm not a eclectic-bohemian-rocker-chick cowboy, but I always like the romantic way that she described the outfits.

It reminds me of the old J. Peterman catalogues (yes, the one that Elaine in Seinfeld worked for) that had hand-drawn illustrations and would explain how a particular outfit could be worn under your safari tarp in Africa as you ate spaghetti by moonlight.

(off topic, but I googled the catalogue and it's back up! i just ordered one )

 

[pacersfanatic36]

fashionista-ta, you're probably right! The $700 haircut was from Sally Hershberger's salon, if anyone was curious.

quimby, I just looked at J Peterman's website, and the writing is hilarious. I only know it through Seinfeld, so I thought the depiction was an exaggeration. I guess not!

 

[CaraMia]

I'll tell you what I could really live without ... the outfit on the back page each month. That is like my 'what not to wear' ...

Haha I thought I was the only one that felt this way!!

 

[Gary101]

JustJared

 

[loladonna]

^Finally a fresh cover!