I think from new girls Cara must be the only one who is as recognisable as the Supers were... However, she seems to be into acting more these days...I guess it is much easier to be an actress these days and get modelling jobs;-)
The Return of the Supermodel?
- Thread starter eternitygoddess
- Start date
kokobombon
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2007
- Messages
- 18,691
- Reaction score
- 2,074
Sad thing is that talented models were replaced with celebrities on fashion covers and campaigns in the mid 2000s and now their offspring and these celebrity models are taking even more work from them.
Is harder and harder for a new model to mantain a certain resume these days, isn't it? so in that sense, I do agree that Karlie is probably the latest model that can be considered a super. But like I said, the term can no longer be applied as it used to...
Is harder and harder for a new model to mantain a certain resume these days, isn't it? so in that sense, I do agree that Karlie is probably the latest model that can be considered a super. But like I said, the term can no longer be applied as it used to...
I think this discussion is pointless.
The "supermodels" were a phenomenon specific to a certain era and they were in some ways a sign of the times.
With the rise of social media and insta-everything anybody can command attention (even if only for a day).
In my opinion there are no supermodels post-Gisele.
Girls like Karlie or Joan may be "famous" (which is NOT an accomplishment btw) but they are not supermodels like Gisele or Kate or Naomi were/are.
I don't think a model can will herself to become a supermodel.
No matter how hard a girl tries to work the social media circuit becoming a supermodel takes a heck of a lot more than media exposure.
I for one could care less if we don't have another supermodel. I support and follow the women who seem to invest themselves in the work of modeling and can sell the heck out of anything.
Models like Daria, Liya, Karen, Raquel, Natasha---these are women who command respect within the industry and have longevity + work ethic. It doesn't matter that they're not "famous" because their work speaks for itself and that is the ultimate accomplishment.
The "supermodels" were a phenomenon specific to a certain era and they were in some ways a sign of the times.
With the rise of social media and insta-everything anybody can command attention (even if only for a day).
In my opinion there are no supermodels post-Gisele.
Girls like Karlie or Joan may be "famous" (which is NOT an accomplishment btw) but they are not supermodels like Gisele or Kate or Naomi were/are.
I don't think a model can will herself to become a supermodel.
No matter how hard a girl tries to work the social media circuit becoming a supermodel takes a heck of a lot more than media exposure.
I for one could care less if we don't have another supermodel. I support and follow the women who seem to invest themselves in the work of modeling and can sell the heck out of anything.
Models like Daria, Liya, Karen, Raquel, Natasha---these are women who command respect within the industry and have longevity + work ethic. It doesn't matter that they're not "famous" because their work speaks for itself and that is the ultimate accomplishment.
dior_couture1245
Fat Karl
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2006
- Messages
- 9,225
- Reaction score
- 4,753
^^Absolutely agree. Gisele is the last supermodel in the true/classic sense of the word.
We don't live in a social climate anymore where a fashion model will be celebrated as superstars as they once were. You have to remember that the Supermodel era was in large part because Hollywood was not a glamorous industry in the early 90's....you had actresses like Laura Dern, Holly Hunter, Jodie Foster, etc. (all of whom are great, but definitely not glamorous or fashionable), so Christy, Kate, Naomi, Linda and Cindy all provided the world that unabashed, decadent glamour, beauty and scandal that Hollywood was not.
Now that celebrities and actors and actresses, reality TV stars and musicians all are so linked with fashion, a model doesn't really stand a chance to become a sensation in the same way as the original Supermodels. They just can't compete. Karlie Kloss can't outsell a magazine cover featuring Taylor Swift, no matter her efforts. The supermodel era was unique in that the models WOULD and DID sell more than their celebrity counterparts.
We don't live in a social climate anymore where a fashion model will be celebrated as superstars as they once were. You have to remember that the Supermodel era was in large part because Hollywood was not a glamorous industry in the early 90's....you had actresses like Laura Dern, Holly Hunter, Jodie Foster, etc. (all of whom are great, but definitely not glamorous or fashionable), so Christy, Kate, Naomi, Linda and Cindy all provided the world that unabashed, decadent glamour, beauty and scandal that Hollywood was not.
Now that celebrities and actors and actresses, reality TV stars and musicians all are so linked with fashion, a model doesn't really stand a chance to become a sensation in the same way as the original Supermodels. They just can't compete. Karlie Kloss can't outsell a magazine cover featuring Taylor Swift, no matter her efforts. The supermodel era was unique in that the models WOULD and DID sell more than their celebrity counterparts.
Last edited by a moderator:
CATO
Active Member
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2010
- Messages
- 5,631
- Reaction score
- 14
that so called "supermodel era from the 80´s" is history. that period will nowadays never come back.
i think we can today divide into groups:
- topmodels (who have much hight paid work for a short period of time)
- celebrity models(children from very important person, social media girls to win the support of the masses)
- veterans and flashcombacker models(are bookded for "that's what gives it that extra something")
- voles models (big brigade newcomers who are very involved to reach topmodel status for a brief span and is replaeced quick with a lots of new voles models ...)
i think we can today divide into groups:
- topmodels (who have much hight paid work for a short period of time)
- celebrity models(children from very important person, social media girls to win the support of the masses)
- veterans and flashcombacker models(are bookded for "that's what gives it that extra something")
- voles models (big brigade newcomers who are very involved to reach topmodel status for a brief span and is replaeced quick with a lots of new voles models ...)
obsession1990
Member
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2013
- Messages
- 613
- Reaction score
- 24
Gisele is a super-celebrity-men-hunter. DiCaprio was her first heavyweight prey (2000), then Chris Evans, Tom Brady...
VersaceVixen009
Active Member
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2009
- Messages
- 1,010
- Reaction score
- 4
I think only the ONE comparison we can make between the late 80s-early 90s and today is the element of individual recognition of models in the fashion industry. The way Naomi, Linda and Kate were instantly recognized and followed in a Calvin Klein show, girls like Gigi, Kendall and Karlie are recognized and followed in a Michael Kors show. However unlike those days, the recognition is not due to talent or being a muse, it's due to a celebrity following and a strong social media presence.. having 5 million people follow you on instagram is now what gets you to walk in shows and earn you campaigns. Although she's been incredibly successful prior.. lets face it.. Karlie got an even bigger career boom from being Taylor Swift's friend and being featured on Taylor's instagram. Gigi's known for her strong social media presence and has strong friendships with famous people. Kendall's been a huge celebrity and has a cult following and that's really what helped her launch a career. They don't serve as muses the way Linda, Christie, Cindy and Naomi did to Versace and Meisel, they serve as a marketing prop.
constanceMafioso
Member
- Joined
- May 25, 2010
- Messages
- 175
- Reaction score
- 0
It is the modelling industry that has changed. I think this perennial supermodel word needs a retooling because of the tech operated world of today or new business models that emerged. We've seen that with Zara with it's fast-fashion or also applications based on the Uber business model that do not require models to be necessarily sponsored by agencies anymore. I think the nostalgic will simply have to adapt to the fact that the criterias have changed from the early 2000's and that they can not be relevant anymore in today's industry.
Actually, the quote from Karlie below raises an interesting point as of finally, what if the supermodels of today are simply just the ones to have the most followers on social medias ? In that case then, how logical it would be to use past criterias for a present situation ?
I think where she really has interesting points.
Social media equalizes and increased polyvalence : I find it interesting that models have been able to regain power with the help of social media. I found certain initiatives very interesting (e.g. like the the cooking show Jourdan held on YouTube) which provided a different look on models which is a big blow and counter-argument for those who advocated that they were just walking cloth-hangers. It showed that they can have very nice photography taste, gastronomy or some other things that I regularly see on Instagram.
They can draw a big amount of non fashion fans and it really participates in its democratization. For example, my cousins hated fashion because of the conformism that they thought it to have but adored Cara Delevingne's personality and started following her at the point of also starting to like fashion.
Also, "social media supermodels" have really made the links between different domains [travelling, gastronomy, lifestyle...] and modelling more visible and that were difficulty perceptible in magazines especially for the younger generation who do not like to read but are very aware of videos and pictures. And, yes also, it is FREE.
I think the today's "supermodel" has to be extremely polyvalent and flexible to engage and interest an audience while also being good at her main job.
Today's supermodel = having a solid social media account : I don't think you can occult the business side of fashion as much as certain fans are trying to do. At the end of the day, brands ARE brands and their goal is to market their products to largest possible audience [this even if they would not have the means to purchase immediately]. And that's the where the "social supermodels" play a very big role. Many of the big luxury brands are very "uptight" on social media by fear of ubiquity, diluting their brand etc. and using the social media power of the girls to possibly monetize that public in the future is an interesting method.
I actually think it's a win-win. Modelling as a whole regained power and the brands can diffuse to their audience without taking big risks with their image or with their finance.
While fashion has strong traditions that it is struggling to keep up with, things are only just starting to get completely deregulated and modelling is probably the easiest place to start for entrepreneurs who have ideas, hence, redefining the notion of supermodel that emerged 15 to 20 years ago.
Source : Harper's Bazaar
Actually, the quote from Karlie below raises an interesting point as of finally, what if the supermodels of today are simply just the ones to have the most followers on social medias ? In that case then, how logical it would be to use past criterias for a present situation ?
I think where she really has interesting points.
Social media equalizes and increased polyvalence : I find it interesting that models have been able to regain power with the help of social media. I found certain initiatives very interesting (e.g. like the the cooking show Jourdan held on YouTube) which provided a different look on models which is a big blow and counter-argument for those who advocated that they were just walking cloth-hangers. It showed that they can have very nice photography taste, gastronomy or some other things that I regularly see on Instagram.
They can draw a big amount of non fashion fans and it really participates in its democratization. For example, my cousins hated fashion because of the conformism that they thought it to have but adored Cara Delevingne's personality and started following her at the point of also starting to like fashion.
Also, "social media supermodels" have really made the links between different domains [travelling, gastronomy, lifestyle...] and modelling more visible and that were difficulty perceptible in magazines especially for the younger generation who do not like to read but are very aware of videos and pictures. And, yes also, it is FREE.
I think the today's "supermodel" has to be extremely polyvalent and flexible to engage and interest an audience while also being good at her main job.
Today's supermodel = having a solid social media account : I don't think you can occult the business side of fashion as much as certain fans are trying to do. At the end of the day, brands ARE brands and their goal is to market their products to largest possible audience [this even if they would not have the means to purchase immediately]. And that's the where the "social supermodels" play a very big role. Many of the big luxury brands are very "uptight" on social media by fear of ubiquity, diluting their brand etc. and using the social media power of the girls to possibly monetize that public in the future is an interesting method.
I actually think it's a win-win. Modelling as a whole regained power and the brands can diffuse to their audience without taking big risks with their image or with their finance.
While fashion has strong traditions that it is struggling to keep up with, things are only just starting to get completely deregulated and modelling is probably the easiest place to start for entrepreneurs who have ideas, hence, redefining the notion of supermodel that emerged 15 to 20 years ago.
Source : Harper's Bazaar
Last edited by a moderator:
billiejbob
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2015
- Messages
- 355
- Reaction score
- 292
Gisele is definitely a supermodel...or even one step above a supermodel...an ubermodel. Top paid model in the world, done pretty much every runway/campaign possible, very well known household name. More importantly she's a muse to all the big name designers, photographers, and editors.
Even Naomi Campbell and other 90s supers acknowledge Gisele's power as a supermodel/ubermodel.
giselle is definitely the biggest model ever. however, i wouldnt say she is a muse to all big designers and photographers.there are quite a few big designers that she hasn't worked with eg gucci, prada, and many more.
commercially, miss bundchen is massive. artistically she is not on the same level of linda, daria or kate moss.
dior_couture1245
Fat Karl
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2006
- Messages
- 9,225
- Reaction score
- 4,753
^^Thats not true. Whether or not she's been in an ad campaign or not, she still walked for Prada several times in the late 90's/early 00's, and same for Gucci. Gisele in her earlier days was very high fashion and walked very big shows - Balenciaga (she was also the campaign girl for Balenciaga several times), McQueen, Dior by Galliano (she was also the campaign girl for Dior dozens of times throughout Galliano's entire tenure), she was a big campaign star for Marc Jacobs at Louis Vuitton, she's a HUGE part of the Dolce & Gabanna brand, and she had a major solo YSL campaign in 2007, among many others. And that's not even mentioning her numerous Meisel lensed Vogue US moments for a good decade worth of time and all of her Mert & Marcus moments, AND Inez & Vinhood have been photographing her for forever - for editorials, campaigns and otherwise.
I would definitely classify Gisele as a supermodel in the sense that she possesses both major commercial marketability and major legitimate high fashion desirability.
I would definitely classify Gisele as a supermodel in the sense that she possesses both major commercial marketability and major legitimate high fashion desirability.
Last edited by a moderator:
dior_couture1245
Fat Karl
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2006
- Messages
- 9,225
- Reaction score
- 4,753
^^Not to mention, her major Vogue Paris presence felt throughout the 00's. She must have had at least 6 or 7 covers during Carine's tenure. She was also a fixture of W Magazine pre-Stefano...and from what I have read, she had 10 Vogue UK covers in the span of 4 years early in her career - which apparently not even Kate Moss had ever achieved. Her magazine covers total close to 600, second only to Princess Diana. She's an ultimate Mario Testino muse AND her recent ties to Chanel and Karl suggest her still potent high fashion pull.
She's got it.
She's got it.
Last edited by a moderator:
Phuel
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 18, 2010
- Messages
- 5,777
- Reaction score
- 8,936
^^^Absolutely.
Gisele's not just a Super, she's an Uber. I don't care for her, but there's no denying her versatility that spans from high fashion Gaultier and McQueen to commercial Sports Illustrated and Victoria's Secret appeal. That's a league of her own.
I don't think a Super has to be a kind of muse to designers and photographers. Claudia was as flat and one-note as they come (until Kendall came along), and people accept her as a Super.
Gisele's not just a Super, she's an Uber. I don't care for her, but there's no denying her versatility that spans from high fashion Gaultier and McQueen to commercial Sports Illustrated and Victoria's Secret appeal. That's a league of her own.
I don't think a Super has to be a kind of muse to designers and photographers. Claudia was as flat and one-note as they come (until Kendall came along), and people accept her as a Super.
obsession1990
Member
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2013
- Messages
- 613
- Reaction score
- 24
The supermodel phenom was about the IT girls models who first were the most sought after in the fashion industry and then jumped into tv news, films, newspapers, not-fashion magazines, charity shows, tv shows. They became big celebrities. They worked as tv hosts, presenter festivals. They did it ALL.
obsession1990
Member
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2013
- Messages
- 613
- Reaction score
- 24
Adriana, Heidi, Gisele, Doutzen as the victoria's secret household names gained a worldwide celebrity status even so they failed to transcendence in the level the 80s and 90s supers did.
I think these actual models are more celebrities than supermodels. Of course the internet and social media made a big difference. I wonder if instagram, twitter and fb don't exist theey would be that famous.
I think these actual models are more celebrities than supermodels. Of course the internet and social media made a big difference. I wonder if instagram, twitter and fb don't exist theey would be that famous.
obsession1990
Member
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2013
- Messages
- 613
- Reaction score
- 24
Even the worldwide presidents and loyalty has recieved the supermodels. They were photographed together, they had share dinners with, they were solicitated to form part of Unicef and other big international social campaigns. It is not enough to walk in every big brand to become a supermodel. I think that phenom won't repeat again, ever... (and that's a little sad)
fashionista-ta
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2005
- Messages
- 17,333
- Reaction score
- 845
Well, of course, because there aren't any men, and certainly no well-known men, who want to date models. No, they have to be hunted.
Oh, wait ... isn't Leonardo known for the long string of young models he's dated? Not to mention a lengthy list of musicians, actors, etc. who are or have been married to models.
berkeleygrrrl
Member
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2005
- Messages
- 266
- Reaction score
- 0
Maybe it's overlooked b/c it's obvious, but the supermodel phenomenon of the '80s/'90s was partly owing to the appearance around the same time of an exceptionally BEAUTIFUL crop of girls, it attained critical mass and suddenly attention was paid to models and modeling in a way it hadn't before...and hasn't since.
Gisele is for sure a supermodel but not the biggest model ever. Three models on the top of my head that are bigger than Gisele are Claudia, Cindy, and Kate. Claudia is probably the biggest model because the entire world was obsessed with her. She was high fashion and commercially successful. I remember in the 90s she was paid 3 million dollars to be in a commercial and in 1996 she had made something like $12 million dollars. That is a lot of money for back then.
Cindy existed more along the commercial lines but we all knew who she was. Cindy had fans who were women but had a strong male fan base. Claudia was shy and mysterious but Cindy was always on the front burner. People were captivated with her. She is the most similar to the Gisele like modeling although I think she was a better model. Whereas Gisele has Adriana and Alessandra as her sexy counterparts, Cindy had Stephanie and Helena. The difference is that while the Brazilians all appeal to the same market; the 90s girls all had different target markets. Stephanie did lots of high fashion but she was undoubtedly marketed to the men, Helena always had a much more feminine appeal. Helena was sexy in a more exotic way that women ate up. Cindy's appeal was more down home and universal.
The argument for Kate isn't that she changed the fashion industries view on beauty, she changed the world's view on beauty. In the fashion industry, Amber was the first waif and it was her who made fashion obsessed with the waif.. Kate was definitely peak 90's cool and she made being thin the thing. Since Kate, there have been a few curvy girls on the runway but for the past 20+ years, the Kate Moss ideal has been the thing.
