POP Fall/Winter 2006 : Kate Moss by Mert & Marcus

[Royal-Galliano]

Thanks so much Susie! It's a brilliant issue!

 

[susie_bubble]

Berlin Rocks: No, it's not. There's an edit with Natasha Poly, Agyness Deyn, and someone else.

 

[Lena]

even though the cover(s) seem too 'interview' and kate is szzzzzz, the issue is very interesting, some real great photos there..
love the 20s/turn of the century direction, great styling

karma for our susie

 

[ladyflash]

My favourite from the Hell's Angels editorial is the Lily Allen picture. <3

 

[bluejeans]

kate moss, again. it's like groundhog day. the boxing one is actualy a nice cover despite the fact it's miss moss again. no idea what they were thinking withe the angel one. just wrong.

 

[contiguous]

I feel as if the Hells Angels spread is very Paolo Roversi. Mert and Marcus tend to rip off other photographers a lot. The City Slickers edit in W (august?) was really Guy Bourdin and Helmut Newton, now this has Roversi's soft focus trademark.

 

[masquerade]

So you can see Agyness' pubic hair. She says she is only 15. Is that legal?

thats the first thing i thought too. even if its legal, i dont want to see that, its wrong in my opinion

other than that, the issue is great. i like tanya and hilary's pictures. i like them all really, i feel like mert and marcus always do their best and most innovative work in POP

 

[Saracita]

^ Agyness is 20. But it's still gross.

 

[masquerade]

shes twenty? so shes lying about her age? i have no problem with a 20 year old doing that, but even then if she is 20 and saying she is 15 its weird

 

[Saracita]

I think it's a misprint/mix-up (Tanya). Or possibly some weird expression of humor from Agyness. She's had her real age printed in UK Vogue, on MDC etc, and it really wouldn't make any sense for her to claim she's 15.

 

[|PerfectTonight|]

I believe she's joking! However naked is out, sorry!

 

[qaiade]

I'm starting to think that Kate Moss is violently allergic to clothing...

 

[|PerfectTonight|]

Yeah or the clothes are simply too big for mer! :lol Karma

 

[melt977]

This is a "review" from today's Observer (from the Guardian online edition)

Why Pop is lost for words

[FONT=Geneva,Arial,sans-serif]James Robinson
Sunday September 3, 2006
The Observer

[/FONT]
To the uninitiated, it is the mag with Kate Moss on the cover. To the fashion world - and those who aspire to be a part of it - it is already a well established must-read. The 14th issue of fashion mag Pop, founded by stylist Katie Grand, features a 'world exclusive' photo shoot with Moss, dressed in boxing gear and striking a provocative pose. Costing £5 and running to 322 glamour-infused pages, Pop, 'the world's first super-glossy', has expanded exponentially as its reputation in the fashion world has grown.


Finding the editorial in Pop takes patience. Like many other 'style' mags, a huge proportion of its pages carry ads for luxury goods and fashion houses. Prada, Christian Dior, Louis Vuitton, Armani - readers must negotiate these, and more, before stumbling on any editorial (page 50) - and there are a further 12 pages of ads before the second article. But images, not words, are Pop's currency, and even the adverts are part of its aesthetic.

Like i-D and Dazed and Confused before it, Pop punches above its weight. According to one rival magazine editor: 'It doesn't do the same job as Vogue but it's as important for different reasons. The fashion industry loves it because it likes to see what people are doing and to check out new ideas.'

The title used to come out twice a year bi-annual; now it's published three times a year. 'There is obviously support from advertisers,' said one industry source.
Every stereotype about the fashion industry is confirmed in the pages of Pop; strange fashion shoots with a mustachioed men in tights; shots of fashion-conscious New Yorkers. The prose is breathless. A profile of KCD, 'the most powerful PR agency in New York fashion', begins with: '[co-owner] Julie Mannion is probably the luckiest woman in the world'. With articles like that, who needs advertorials?

But Pop wasn't created to prick the fashion world's pretensions. It is the industry talking to itself, and its global appeal is another example of the power of Britain's creative industry.
'It's one of the most exciting fashion magazines in the world and it's British,' said a rival editor. 'We should celebrate it.'

 

[Senna]

Thank you so much for the scans susie_bubble! Great pictures. I really hope I can get my hands on one here in Holland..

 

[Pedro]

I feel as if the Hells Angels spread is very Paolo Roversi. Mert and Marcus tend to rip off other photographers a lot. The City Slickers edit in W (august?) was really Guy Bourdin and Helmut Newton, now this has Roversi's soft focus trademark.

Finally someone who agrees with me! They are copying everybody! And if that was not enough, Mert & Marcus decided again to copy Weber and Meisel for the new Calvin Klein ad campaign (with Natalia Vodianova and Bev) !!!!

 

[iluvjeisa]

Finally someone who agrees with me! They are copying everybody! And if that was not enough, Mert & Marcus decided again to copy Weber and Meisel for the new Calvin Klein ad campaign (with Natalia Vodianova and Bev) !!!!

And how does their work compare to Meisel's in your opinion? I can't see much of a difference as far as inspiration goes. Have you seen his circa 1994 Italian Vogue covers? *cough-Bourdin-cough*

That said, I think the triple Ms are all good, although M&M still don't have the same atrocities to their credit (see Meisel's awful Italian Vogue August editorial).

 

[Pedro]

And how does their work compare to Meisel's in your opinion? I can't see much of a difference as far as inspiration goes. Have you seen his circa 1994 Italian Vogue covers? *cough-Bourdin-cough*

That said, I think the triple Ms are all good, although M&M still don't have the same atrocities to their credit (see Meisel's awful Italian Vogue August editorial).

I agree that once in a while every great photographer goes find inspiration in other photographers, in paintings, in obscure magazines, etc … Even Steven Meisel, whose talent and hard working is a clearly evident, sometimes seeks inspiration from others. That’s a normal thing! The difference from Meisel and the couple M&M is that when Meisel reinterprets the originals, he always creates something new and exciting. On the other hand M&M constantly lack of vision tend to always stick to others, spread after spread, without anything new or good enough to offer.

 

[qaiade]

When Mert and Marcus use aspects of other photographers work they borrow only from the surface: they use Bourdin's color theory and textures, but leave behind the violence. Their women are inspired by Newtons's. As for paolo roversi, his work has way too much emotion for their's to have anything to do with it. On a side note Mert and Marcus should sue Camilla Akrans.

 

[Alien Sex Friend]

only this ed in pop?? shame
don`t like mert and marcus