UK Vogue February 2009 : Cheryl Cole by Regan Cameron

[Miss Dalloway]

I think Cheryl is a pretty girl, but thats it, nothing more. And i think the cover is horrendous.

 

[Humperz]

i dont like the cover but the editorials inside aren't bad by any means. This is simply another step forward for her in becoming a British A class celeb of which we have very few.

 

[RiskyRiksh]

she'd better smile!
She looks much more beautiful with her smile.

 

[Les_Sucettes]

I love Girls Aloud! They (well, their songwriting team) are responsible for some of the best pop songs of the last decade
.

I respect your opinion although I strongly disagree. It's actually funny how this group that in a certain way is so loved in Britain has no international appeal whatsoever.

GA are actually responsible for one of the songs I hate the most, ever.

I think it's not fair comparing Victoria B with Cheryl, yes they both make tacky a way of life and even then Vogue chose them to grace their cover, But Victoria is an International celebrity, someone that can command headlines anywhere in the world it makes perfect sense to me to see her in Vogue, particularly because she does have a track record in fashion, Cheryl in the other hand is the British "Flavour of month", I know we are in recession, but please, Vogue competing with OK is going too low.

 

[tigerrouge]

It's strange, I think Girls Aloud are pop perfection, and each girl is a character, same as the Spice Girls, yet they went worldwide, and Girls Aloud haven't.

I'd have liked to have heard from all five of them, with an interview about their individual styles. The redhead one, Nicola, has created a beauty range for pale girls, and has in the past has received criticism (and abuse) for supposedly not being as pretty as the others, so she's got some interesting things to say about image.

 

[Miss Dalloway]

It's strange, I think Girls Aloud are pop perfection, and each girl is a character, same as the Spice Girls, yet they went worldwide, and Girls Aloud haven't.

I'd have liked to have heard from all five of them, with an interview about their individual styles. The redhead one, Nicola, has created a beauty range for pale girls, and has in the past has received criticism (and abuse) for supposedly not being as pretty as the others, so she's got some interesting things to say about image.

I'm sorry but i very much disagree with that! How on earth are the Girls Aloud and Spice Girls the same? What characters do you speak of? GA all look the same, no variety there, they are all sex kittens, with the same "i'm so hot" face expressions all the time!The difference does not go beyond colour of their hair,lol.

And there is the fundemental difference with Spice Girls, and why they have been far more successful worldwide, they were never just about sex! They had a message, a great energy and fantastic silly songs that have survived the test of time. Every single girl was individual, hence their names. GA have good POP tunes, but will anyone care about any of them lets say 12 years later? Will Cherly be getting the Vogue covers like VB is? Will little girls, even after all that time be dressing up as them? As they do with SG, bobs and LBDs ala Posh, pigtails ala Baby or the Union Jack Dress ala Ginger.etc for Halloween's (like i see girls every year do)? Um no, i do not think so, because Spice Girls connected to so many more people, they were not just pin up poster girls the guys put up at their garage,lol.

And let me just say, that i dont hate any of them (GA), they arent famous here (unlike SG), but i do like their songs, and yes, i already watched some of their interviews and performances, but seriously they are NOT the same.

 

[tigerrouge]

I don't think any girl band will be as globally popular as they were, but I do think there is a deliberate attempt to give each person in Girls Aloud a visual character. Nadine is known for her legs, Sarah for her party girl attitute etc. Sadly, as you say, it is a more sexualised version, not the fun cartoons of Scary and so on.

 

[Northern Star]

She hit someone YEARS ago, she did the community service or whatever it was, and since then she's had HUGE success. I'm not sure why you're focusing on that. Everyone's "forgotten" about it for a reason: it's not important.

I agree, I don't understand why this is still an issue It shouldn't have happened, and I am certainly not making excuses for her behaviour.....but....she was 19 or something and she's 26 I believe now and in that time people change dramatically and she's never done anything remotely like that since, unlike Naomi who for a time couldn't seem to stop herself.
Please I really think this should be left, not forgotten, just left.
Also I gotta add how bloody annoying are toilet attendants anyway???????
Please no-one make anything out of that last comment, only joking......but not really.

 

[Miss Dalloway]

I don't think any girl band will be as globally popular as they were, but I do think there is a deliberate attempt to give each person in Girls Aloud a visual character. Nadine is known for her legs, Sarah for her party girl attitute etc. Sadly, as you say, it is a more sexualised version, not the fun cartoons of Scary and so on.

Yeah i agree, they do attempt to make them all have each person, but its not the same, because they are all basically an eye candy (very good eye candy),and SG were never about that.

 

[Miss Dalloway]

God this discussion makes me feel sooooooo old i know nothing about Girls Aloud, never even heard one song from them, i usually change the chanel as i did with the Spice Girls haha, but they were hard to avoid, because even if you disliked them, they have always been somewhere in the background (no Christams party at work can be escaped without their songs ) so thank god its not the same with them.And i remember watching them on Oprah when they showed their US Vogue cover,hahah.

And Star, i agree toilet attendants i came across have mostly been rude.

 

[tigerrouge]

One aspect of what I was saying is: consider male celebrities who have similar incidents in their past or who have simply been accused of violence without it even being proven. The incident or slur tends to stick around their reputation for years. So it seems to me.

So I'm looking at Cheryl, and I do wonder, are people more inclined to forgive female violence, if she's young, beautiful and popular. Naomi may have fallen out of favour with the fashion world, but so do a lot of older models, has age got more to do with that?

I am interested in how people rationalise things, how they perceive male violence and female violence, what society rewards and condemns. Cheryl is a very interesting person, in terms of that.

 

[Northern Star]

Without getting too OT, you have raised an interesting point here.
But I would imagine it seems to be more, if not acceptable, kind of expected that male celebs may express their volatile behaviour and actually get away with it, with very little lasting consequence. Russell Crowe for example.

 

[DiamondSea]

The assault conviction is relevant to the thread because Cheryl was asked about it in the Vogue interview

I can count the Spice Girls' decent songs on one finger They had a message? Girl power? ...Really?! I think it's a bit much to say that they were individuals because one liked sports and another had red hair etc. However, I do agree that the Union Jack dress, for example, has become iconic.

Most of the credit should go to Xenomania, but Girls Aloud have at least 10 perfect pop songs imo.

 

[MissAnia]

[dailymail]

 

[tigerrouge]

We're deprived of editorials, we're trying to fill a vacuum! I'll take as many shots of Cheryl as there is, since subscription copies have yet to materialise, with news of ads etc.

But I would imagine it seems to be more, if not acceptable, kind of expected that male celebs may express their volatile behaviour and actually get away with it, with very little lasting consequence. Russell Crowe for example.

Though Russell Crowe has formed the lasting reputation of being a bad-tempered man who is difficult to work with.

One person I was thinking of is Sean Penn, who can work as hard as he likes at acting and directing, but he'll always be remembered for his dislike of photographers, and characterised as an 'angry man'.

I think some male celebrities can turn violence into an astute career move, by playing on the image. Vinnie Jones was quite aggressive in his footballing days, and he then utilised this 'hard man' attitude to great effect, when landing roles in movies. Of course, it can also backfire, because he has recently been involved in that bar brawl in South Dakota and could face jail, if convicted. Will his image work against him?

 

[ash92]

^^God, is that one of the editorial photos?
Let me give my 2 cents worths.
I thought that the cover was OK, it definitely wasn't weird or anything. At most, it's what People or US Weekly would print out, but this seems to be of a higher standard.
As I see more photos of the editorials inside of Cheryl, I'm beginning to not like the content of it. The photo where she is lying down with the pink clothes with all the glittery hangings, IMO, is just plain tacky, even for British Vogue. Then this latex jumpsuit came out, and I just uttered a silent prayer.

 

[helmut.newton]

Shes 'the most popular television star on British TV'? REALLY? Can someone British actually confirm this?

I would have thought Alexa Chung was more popular. She's definitely more appealing and more fashionable. I wish they would have chosen her!

I can't believe Vogue chose a girl based on the controversy surrounding her rather than because she is a genuinely interesting person with something valuable to say.

 

[AD011620]

Shes 'the most popular television star on British TV'? REALLY? Can someone British actually confirm this?

I would have thought Alexa Chung was more popular. She's definitely more appealing and more fashionable. I wish they would have chosen her!

I can't believe Vogue chose a girl based on the controversy surrounding her rather than because she is a genuinely interesting person with something valuable to say.

She is quite big to be honest! Especially after judging X Factor, which was followed by silly ''National or British Sweetheart'' ackowledgements... later monuments, etc... a little bit hysteric if you ask me. Unfortunately Cheryl is the worst singer in the band;-) but anyway she is very popular and their last album is really good....and poor Dannii Minogue who without doing anything wrong had to cope with the whole hatred coming from Cheryl's ''sweethearted'' fans... for the sake of fairness it needs to be said that she has more achievements than Victoria B and is certainly more beautiful... she is fashionable but not necessarily well styled... she is just beautiful and basically loooks good in everything...

 

[dumbfairy]

Shes 'the most popular television star on British TV'? REALLY? Can someone British actually confirm this?

I would have thought Alexa Chung was more popular. She's definitely more appealing and more fashionable. I wish they would have chosen her!

I can't believe Vogue chose a girl based on the controversy surrounding her rather than because she is a genuinely interesting person with something valuable to say.

I think Cheryl has more main stream attention,Alexa hasn't been as much in the glare of the general publics eye I don't think. Which is a shame. Because Cheryl sitting on a chair giving her 2 cents worth to some singers shouldn't really credit her with a Vogue cover.

And I am one of those people who won't forget the fact that she commited assult,because it's not something that should ever be forgiven,least forgotten.

BUT...from what I could see in the video (How boring is Alexandra?!) Anna S looks great

 

[miss_nyc]

I imagine that Victoria Beckham did extremely well for Vogue last year, so them doing Cheryl is a win win situation.

I love Victoria, but at the time of VB's April Vogue cover subscribers threaten to cancel their subscriptions. Apparently the magazine received record number of complaints.

Readers said that if they wanted a magazine with Posh on the front, they'd buy Heat magazine. ouch!