UK Vogue January 2010 : Rachel Weisz by Tom Craig

Forums New posts
More Dash Than Cash : Pretty Tough
Model: Alexa Yudina
Photographer: Ami Sioux
Fashion: Lucinda Chambers
Click to expand...

marc jacobs ? meets pat mcgrath backstage @ Dior ?

nice .... on the paper.

it's not the first time they do that "recession" editorial ?
statement ?
 
I wonder if they revive the 'More Dash Than Cash' section for each recession, because it's an established feature in the history of the magazine, but even though I can remember the 90's version, I can't remember if it coincided with the recession of that time. I have a book of the collected advice from the late 80's/90's issues, I must dig that out to see when it was published.
 
I bought the issue, seen as how my subscriber's copy seems to not be arriving, and I quite liked all the front of house stuff in this issue.

They seem to be more and more influenced by Harper's layout however, but they are getting better. The pastel pages are really nice.
 
honeycombchild said:
They seem to be more and more influenced by Harper's layout however, but they are getting better.
Click to expand...
And so they should. HB has been outclassing them left and right.

The issue is light and rather thin but much better in term of contents than some meatier issues they've been putting out this year.
It's still not dazzling and I still think this publication is on its creative last leg.
I am willing to do some scans, you can place requests in my profile comments space.
 
If Vogue wasn't Vogue and I hadn't been buying it for all these years, I would definitely buy Harpers, it has its faults but I definitely think its a very cleverly edited magazine with some very interesting content. I just don't think I have the space for another 10 years worth of hard copy.
 
Vogue UK tend to make some terrible mistakes...letting Alex Curran anywhere near this magazine is one of them. :ninja: An almighty one at that.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Not only featuring her - but probably patronising her as well. I don't like the tone of those articles where UK Vogue deigns to feature certain women and talks about them with thinly-veiled distaste. If you're going to write about someone different, do it with respectful curiosity, because we don't need Vogue to poke fun at these women, we can do that better ourselves. We look to the magazine to give us a new angle on them.
 
"Alex goes east"
Model: Alex Curran
Photographer: Jason Bell

alexvogue2.png
alexvogue.png


Source: lorenachouza.files.wordpress.com

I like it.Nice to see her with minimal make up, defininitely not her comfort zone but i think she pulled it off
 
tigerrouge said:
Not only featuring her - but probably patronising her as well. I don't like the tone of those articles where UK Vogue deigns to feature certain women and talks about them with thinly-veiled distaste. If you're going to write about someone different, do it with respectful curiosity, because we don't need Vogue to poke fun at these women, we can do that better ourselves. We look to the magazine to give us a new angle on them.
Click to expand...

Yes, it reminds me of the Victoria Beckham issue. Those kind of articles kind of represent Vogue's frustration and annoyance at their own irrelevance to most of the public. While they write in a sneering manner, the fact they are forced to write about those women just shows they are inferior to tabloids who are able to create celebrities.

And like you said we would want a new angle - which UK Vogue can't offer because there is no vision. It's more recycling of tabloid material with just a little twist to make it comfortable for their target readers. I can imagine Carine having a lot of fun with wags, celebrating their look to excess. Italian Vogue would have them in some kind of thought provoking editorial full of social commentary. The best Alexandra can do is stick the wag in the middle of some stables...and that's about as interesting and edgy as it gets.
 
tigerrouge said:
Not only featuring her - but probably patronising her as well. I don't like the tone of those articles where UK Vogue deigns to feature certain women and talks about them with thinly-veiled distaste. If you're going to write about someone different, do it with respectful curiosity, because we don't need Vogue to poke fun at these women, we can do that better ourselves. We look to the magazine to give us a new angle on them.
Click to expand...

I think it's another great of example of Alexandra backing up her own point. She said in that reccent interview Vogue wasn't to her taste, it wasn't something for her, she saw it as a collection of things (or something along those lines) I feel it's very clear they don't want her in there, and very clear she's not to Alexandra's tastes, but they've included her anyway. It's sad. There's no point of view anymore.

I totally agree. Why bother featuring someone if you're going to very clearly show such distaste for them. Especially someone who for the most part, is not someone Vogue readers are going to care about anyway.
 
Vogue UK needs a revamp for sure.
 
shutterbug said:
I think it looks like they enlarged Rachel's eyes. :doh:
Click to expand...

Throughout the editorial, they've enhanced her eyes so much with make-up, they dominate her face and unbalance her beauty a little bit. I can see the style they were going for, but Rachel's got quite a quirky face, and once you start messing about too much with one feature, you lose the harmony and she can start to look harsh instead of soulful.

I did like seeing her - but I just wish the first issue of the new decade was something more exciting than this.
 
UK Vogue has so been SOOOOOOOOOOOO boring for years.I only ever looked forward to Stella Tennant editorials.that is IT.I'd never buy one with that Jagger girl on it either.Out with Shulman!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 3 (members: 0, guests: 3)

New Posts

Forum Statistics

Threads
212,625
Messages
15,191,628
Members
86,534
Latest member
itgetsworse

Share This Page

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "058526dd2635cb6818386bfd373b82a4"
<-- Admiral -->