Naomi Campbell slams supermodels

[radolgc]

very very true people)) you all said it right) The real supermodels will remain the names we all know and no matter how many come and go, they can never reach that level. Those models from the 90s were extra special and they became ICONS. Only Gisele is becoming close to that term and eventhough she is one of my most favorite models and I adore her, i still think she also can never reach the status of the former supermodels. This term existed only then and it will never come back! As they said Kate and Gisele were the last supermodels...the rest are Cindy,Linda,Naomi,Christy,Helena,Claudia,Karen Mulder,Tatjana,Stephanie,Eva H.,Carla and maybe Shalom,Nadja and Amber. Then came models that could not even be called beautiful(such as Erin O'Connor or the belgium wave) and the term supermodel died more than 10 years ago! No matter what opinions we all have, there will never be models such as Linda,Cindy,Christy or Naomi! Sure all the new models do the same type of work and make probably even more money, but they are just models doing great!

 

[Scott]

who cares really? supermodels are boring and generic to look at. i prefer to see character and personality in my stories and on the catwalks.

and actually rad,it all began in the late 80's when kristen mcmenamy,kirsten owen and stella tennant came along. they were around during that whole 'supermodel' craze.

 

[radolgc]

of course it all began in the late 80's, but with none of the models you mentioned...and Stella came officially in 1993 or 94 and none of those 3 models you speak of(Kristen,Kirsten and Stella) had any supermodel status at that time...Kirsten never got it, Kristen got it in 1992 and Stella can hardly be called supermodel...I love her, do not get me wrong, but by the meaning people normally put in the word supermodel, nor Kirsten, neither Stella can ever get even close to it!
And if supermodels were boring as you say, they could never be called supermodels
But we can all get lost in personal opinions and the debate can go on and on forever, so watever we all say, after all most of us know who the real supermodels are and those names will remain in model history forever and will never change!
Maybe in 200 years nobody will talk about it, but as you say who cares...well, all of us DO care, because we care to express our opinion here and this is what forums are about after all

 

[KhaoticKharma]

There haven't been any supermodels since Gisele- thank God.

The Age of the Supermodels ended for a reason. The fashion tides changed; in the eighties, models like Cindy Crawford and Paulina Porzikova looked more like movie stars than actual movie stars did. US Vogue moved to celebrity covers over model covers for a reason- readers want beautiful women that they aspire to look like, even though in the back of their minds they know that no Chanel tweed jacket or YSL nail polish is going to achieve that. Quite frankly, I'd rather look like Blake Lively or Zoe Saldana over Vlada or Siri any day. Girls like Gemma, Lily, and Agyness, as popular as they were in the fashion industry, cater to a very specific niche audience with their looks. Even Karlie (who I am a fan of), who Vogue is trying to shove down everyone's throat, has very eclectic looks, and not just in the "something's a little off" Lauren Hutton sort of way. Until models look like scary Amazon goddess again, I don't see supermodels really happening. Just consider who is arguably the most "name" model of the last year or so: Crystal Renn, who has appeared on numerous talk shows AND appeared in top magazines and had some enviable catwalk appearances. And she definitely has that Cindy/Gia old school appeal, traditional beauty. Even Heroin Chic Kate has a traditionally beautiful face.

I personally don't think I want a return of supermodels. There is something discomforting for me about giving someone millions of dollars and infinite praises purely based on their looks.

 

[IAmLordZen]

I'd say Natalia Vodianova is well in the league of supermodeldom too.

 

[LabelWhore4]

^Naw, not even close when it comes to name recognition.

 

[diorelle]

Not a big fan of the girl but Rosie Huntington-Whiteley seems to be on her way, major movie role, VS etc. Probably won't reach the caliber of the Supers but a lot of normal people who aren't interested in fashion would know her name.

 

[Squizree]

I'd say Natalia Vodianova is well in the league of supermodeldom too.

No way. Not even close.

Natalia is too conservative to be a supermodel. There's a special attitude that must accompany a model if she wants to be a supermodel. She needs to be extremely stuck up and very condescending towards others.

I personally think Sienna Miller is more supermodel than Natalia.

 

[radolgc]

I personally don't think I want a return of supermodels. There is something discomforting for me about giving someone millions of dollars and infinite praises purely based on their looks.[/quote]


I do not think you should critisize people for being beautiful! Beautiful people will always get tons of money just cause they are beautiful and I see nothing wrong about it! Models get much more, because except for beauty they have much much more...as Shalom once gracefully said:

"YOU NEED TO HAVE BEAUTY AND BRAIN IN THIS BUSINESS"

Not that i care for their brain, their beauty is sooooo inspiring and more than enough that there is funny to expect anything more from them(although they deliver that "more" a lot,too).

Nowadays even ugly models get tons of money and nobody can ever change that! It is a huge industry with lots of work for many people!
Supermodels deserve every penny they got! The majority of people envy it too much and this is where all those negative comments come from.

And after all in the human funny world, it is ALL ABOUT THE LOOKS, no matter what people pretend to say)

 

[Les_Sucettes]

There haven't been any supermodels since Gisele- thank God.

The Age of the Supermodels ended for a reason. The fashion tides changed; in the eighties, models like Cindy Crawford and Paulina Porzikova looked more like movie stars than actual movie stars did.
I personally don't think I want a return of supermodels. There is something discomforting for me about giving someone millions of dollars and infinite praises purely based on their looks.

I agree. It was simply ridiculous. People seem to have conveniently forgotten(or were not even born) that supermodels ended because they became tacky and outdated, a reflection of an era. They are from a time when models thought it was perfectly normal to act the dumb woman in soft erotic movies because the general public was interested in seeing them in steamy situations. There was no question that this women could be more, than some spoiled rotten femme fatales, and everyone was happy about it. They were payed obscene amounts of money to visit "fashion weeks" in the middle of nowhere, were they were the only attraction and then they would stagger totally drunk on the catwalk. Linda Evangelista "graced" my city with her presence back in my country and made a total fool of herself.
I think the big models nowdays are infinitely more interesting than any of those woman ever were. They seem to understand that modeling is not forever and their range of interests and work is much more diverse.

 

[Squizree]

It reminds me when Linda Evangelista said "I won't get out of bed for less than $20,000". It's such an arrogant way to behave and even though she was beautiful, comments that stupid and stuck up could never just slide by without making you look like an as$hole. Yet you still see people praising Linda and Naomi for being "divas" Anyone can be bitchy, demanding and abusive.
Luckily today's models are a bit more normal. That's why we don't have real supermodels anymore.

 

[IAmLordZen]

No way. Not even close.

Natalia is too conservative to be a supermodel. There's a special attitude that must accompany a model if she wants to be a supermodel. She needs to be extremely stuck up and very condescending towards others.

I personally think Sienna Miller is more supermodel than Natalia.

haha, I mean not counting the diva attitude most people associate with the originals, I think her global fame and career has earned her the right to be called one.

 

[Scott]

rad,i was referring to your comment about erin o'connor and the like. quirky models came many years before those models made their marks. and they were also around during that whole supermodel craze. and have we forgotten that quirky models actually have been very famous before this too....peggy moffitt,twiggy,jean shrimpton etc?

and please,can you refrain from using the term 'ugly'? it's rather offensive if you ask me.

to me that whole supermodel phase was needless because only very few could actually express themselves. models are supposed to be like actors in that they are supposed to carry a certain mood and theme,and to tell you the truth when i look back at those days it's not like that at all with many of those girls(linda,nadja,tatjana patitz and to a certain degree christy and eva are the only ones that truly stand out in my mind)...more like commercial advertising that story telling.

 

[Jessica18Toronto]

I would agree that Natalia is close.

 

[radolgc]

wow, you people seem to really hate supermodels and the 80s and 90s times in fashion!
I do not know why you attack them and hate them so much! Whatever you say, they existed and they have left their mark in history!
and Scott, I was using the word "ugly" because my vocabulary is not so reach with words and I am too lazy to look up in the dictionary and the word ugly is not offensive, it is just a word that describes somebody's opinion as I was expressing mine. No matter how much I like Erin O'Connor and the rest of the models in the world(trust me, i am probably one of the biggest lovers of models here) i do think she is rather ugly and many other models also are. I think it is much more offensive to call Linda Evangelista "arrogant" for being honest and funny and having a great sense of humor. And I wish she was serious when she said that "she would not get out of bed for less that 10 000$(NOT 20 000$).
She had a great point there and later she explaned clearly what she meant for all of you who thought she was arrogant!
I will write now what she said and you will see how right she was...and trust me the models of today are much more "arrogant", the whole business is only about money and the models of today get much much more!!!
So here is what she said and it is on youtube by the way for those who would not believe me:
Linda: We do not make that amount of money every day, but when we work for companies that make millions of dollars per year and have a million dollar budget for the advertising campaign, our little 10 000 is justified!!!

Hell yes it is!!! Of course they deserv e every dollar they ever got! After all companies use their faces and bodies to sell their products and they must pay them! And their products sell after all and Linda and all the others deserve even more!

This supermodels debate becomes very boring already

 

[LabelWhore4]

haha, I mean not counting the diva attitude most people associate with the originals, I think her global fame and career has earned her the right to be called one.

But people generally don't even know who she is. Maybe in Russia she is kind of the 'hometown hero' and in England she is sometimes known because of her husband....... but that's it. I think it truly takes more than that. And thats why the last Super was/is Gisele.

 

[Squizree]

^Yeah I agree, that's what I mean. Natalia is probably a much better model than say Claudia Schiffer but on a global scale, she's practically a nobody.
I'll always love her though, she takes amazing photographs and has a fantastic catwalk.

 

[KhaoticKharma]

^ I was just about to say, it's amazing how many people consider Natalia a "supermodel"; none of my friends that aren't into fashion know who she is; I know people that I consider rather fashion literate that really only know her by face, certainly not by name. I'm assuming she's fairly high profile in Great Britain, marrying nobility and all, but in the States? Not way.

A supermodel, whether we snobs here at tFs like it, is not a great model that mainstream America doesn't know about (Natalia, Daria, Liya) or a socialite that started her career in glossies with fashion editorials and campaigns (Agyness, Lily), but somewhere in between. She's successful in both high fashion and commercial markets, able to hock rubber flip flops and Armani suits at the same time. She's beautiful enough to be relatable to the general public, but edgy enough to be convincing in an editorial on the pages of a magazine like Dazed and Confused or Interview. And she has the personality that could land her a movie role (regardless of her acting ability) or a hot rockstar boyfriend. The only woman in recent years that has all of these, in spades, is Gisele- period. And as I said earlier, I really don't think that has to be a bad thing. Supermodels were monsters.