UK GQ August 2016 : Kelly Rohrbach by Norman Jean Roy

[vogue28]

Moderator Note:

As per popular request, the mod team have decided to give a select few menswear/interest fashion titles (UK GQ, US GQ and Esquire), their very own thread in the Magazine section for a two month trial. Therefore, please feel free to discuss the August 2016 cover of UK GQ with Kelly Rohrbach on the cover below!

 

[Piet Retief]

Kelly's eyes look rather weird to me but otherwise I really like this cover

 

[Wolkfolk]

We should definitely give more credit to the magical effects of DiCaprio's penis for a model career.

Her expression is completely off, no life in the eyes whatsoever. And her foot irks me. Shame because it could've been a simple yet cool cover.

 

[mepps]

It really irks seeing women on the covers of Men's fashion mags.
Especially when they are almost always presented as "babes" for the boys.
This would have been a decent Maxim cover, even with her wonky eyes.

 

[katcty]

I'm willing to forgive the awkwardness because she looks really good here. I get sparks of Marisa Miller here.

 

[Benn98]

We should definitely give more credit to the magical effects of DiCaprio's penis for a model career.

Her expression is completely off, no life in the eyes whatsoever. And her foot irks me. Shame because it could've been a simple yet cool cover.

The wonky eye really ruins the cover for me, otherwise the shot looks inoffensive. Makes more sense as part of an edit than the cover.
Will Baywatch really be a big deal this summer?

 

[Hchloe]

I thought it was just an unflattering shot so I googled her and umm.......

 

[Scotty]

It really irks seeing women on the covers of Men's fashion mags.
Especially when they are almost always presented as "babes" for the boys.
This would have been a decent Maxim cover, even with her wonky eyes.

Well, it's GQ after all. they always put "babes" on covers. GQ's content is usually pointless, there's really no fashion or models.. which is why i prefer the GQ Style edition.

 

[kokobombon]

Well, it's GQ after all. they always put "babes" on covers. GQ's content is usually pointless, there's really no fashion or models.. which is why i prefer the GQ Style edition.

I was thinking exactly this when I read that they´re giving the mag its own thread... what are we going to talk about? there´s zero interesting content.

 

[honeycombchild]

If that's the requirement of having a dedicated thread then I'm afraid a lot of magazine's threads would need to go. Love, British Vogue... It is true that a large proportion of women's magazines get their own threads despite consistently appalling content whilst the men's magazines don't really ever get a look in.

 

[kokobombon]

^a lot of female mags like GQ have collective threads.
Mags like UK Vogue or LOVE also have fewer comments because the forum it´s not what it used to be (banned members, people don´t post as often)... so imagine how many pages of discussion a mag like this will get?

 

[Bertrando3]

If that's the requirement of having a dedicated thread then I'm afraid a lot of magazine's threads would need to go. Love, British Vogue... It is true that a large proportion of women's magazines get their own threads despite consistently appalling content whilst the men's magazines don't really ever get a look in.

My thoughts exactly. Plus GQ itself, just as a reminder, is NOT a fashion magazine, it´s a lifestyle/health guide. I think that´s the problem and the reason we asked for a men´s section of the men´s magazines here on tFs. British GQ always shows sexy girls and actors/singers but the FASHIONNNNNN with a capital F is when a magazine offers 5-6 REAL fashion stories with MODELS and when the magazine also has fashionable sections. Take for example:

- Harper´s Bazaar Men Thailand
- Harper's Bazaar Man Korea
- Harper's Bazaar Men Serbia
- Numéro Homme
- L´Officiel Homme
- Made in Brazil
- Neo 2 Spain
THEEEEEEEEEEEESE are Men´s fashion magazines where we can all talk about fashion and relevant models and brands and photographers. But GQ, Esquire, to me at least, are not fashion magazines and should not have their own threads anyways.

 

[KoV]

Town & Country and Vanity Fair aren't fashion magazines, but they have their own threads as well. Interview and W often feature fashion content, but they're just as focused on film/music/art/celebrity. I don't really read Esquire, but virtually every issue of GQ has a couple fashion editorials. High fashion? Nope. But there's a spectrum of what fashion can be. Clothing/shoes/accessories are a huge part of GQ's content. And really, if you don't care about the magazine, just don't open the thread. It's there for the people who do. I couldn't care less about some of the international editions of Vogue that get their own threads month after month, but I certainly don't suggest marginalizing those magazines and ruining the fun for those who DO care about them.

On the topic of this cover, her expression, particularly her eyes, are atrocious. I guess they figured the target audience for the magazine wouldn't care about that? Haha.

 

[Piet Retief]

Editorial Preview

 

[IndigoHomme]

That pic would have been a better cover

 

[Benn98]

Crikey, she's really no oil painting. This looks like a test shot to me. Very unrefined.

 

[MON]

I really want to like this. The mood is lovely. However:

1. The placement of her left arm.. it feels like it's floating, rather than it being actually on top of the other.
2. Her legs looks asymmetrical. The one the left one feels like it's just the thigh then the foot. She deserves better than this.

The preview image is stunning! Stunning! It should have been the cover!

As for the thread issue, yes GQ +++ rarely have 3++ fashion editorial content, but it still has features worth talking about. And a GQ editorial is sometimes even better than other contents posted here (which, btw, gets 2 pages of the same old month after month comment). There's A LOT to talk about regarding men's magazine (e.g. a.] do these eds reflect today's men's fashion - if yes, then is it a good trend? - if no, then what can be done, ++++).

 

[Bertrando3]

As for the thread issue, yes GQ +++ rarely have 3++ fashion editorial content, but it still has features worth talking about. And a GQ editorial is sometimes even better than other contents posted here (which, btw, gets 2 pages of the same old month after month comment). There's A LOT to talk about regarding men's magazine (e.g. a.] do these eds reflect today's men's fashion - if yes, then is it a good trend? - if no, then what can be done, ++++).

I guess so yeah, I just wish those big magazines like GQ push way harder to promote men´s fashion Vogue does. But yeah fashion in general has always and will always be better catered for women. The contents though could be focused way more on fashion, because cars/cigars/sexy girls and technology do not make up for the huge lack of fashion pages in a mag such as GQ. Hence why I always prefer the new digital magazines of today because they understand the men´s fashion and its target way better.

This cover for example does not convey anything special and the editorial will be dull as usual, I wish British GQ had more spice, it all looks bland and way too conservative and cold. I also agree that the other pic was better.

 

[honeycombchild]

GQ doesn't want their content to feature too much 'fashion', it's a very deliberate move. Esquire has more of the trend lead editorials and Details was perhaps the most trend lead of all the mainstream menswear magazines and sadly it folded. GQ has a lot of pressure from its advertisers too to focus on a lot of suiting, watches and such, as that's where the money is for them.

 

[Piet Retief]

Editorial Preview in higher quality
Ph: Norman Jean Roy



gq-magazine.co.uk