US Marie Claire November 2014 : Cameron Diaz by Michael Thompson

[serendipity8777]

fashionscansremastered.net

 

[serendipity8777]

Creative Director: Nina Garcia
Fashion Editor: Alison Edmond
Hair: Kevin Ryan
Makeup: Brigitte Reiss-Andersen
Manicure: Sheril Bailey


fashionscansremastered.net

 

[Benn98]

Another red cover for US! Bazaar, InStyle and now this.
Cameron looks hot here, but when hasn't she? This image could've been shot a decade ago and we wouldn't be able to tell the difference.
Love that it's a full body shot, and the minimal text works well with it.

 

[Miss Dalloway]

^ Actresses like her, and Paltrow.etc they simply don't understand the power of turning down magazines. Just look at Angelina, and few other famous women. I am so sick of seeing her everywhere for well over a decade now, give us a break!
And i like Cameron, but yeah overexposure is never good! This cover doesn't work, the angle, the dress....at least they did try something different.

 

[justaguy]

Awkward pose and not one of Cameron's best covers.

 

[Srdjan]

Lately I love seeing Cameron on the covers, this one is nice too, although the chair she is sitting on is a bit invisible so it looks like Cam is floating.

 

[GIVENCHYlover]

Weird dresss...she looks really good.

 

[VogueGirl8910]

Striking cover, but her face is too photoshooped.

 

[kokobombon]

I like the styling and layout, very 2000s

 

[Deleted member 45369]

This does seem very retro. I can't believe the 2000s are now a decade that can be referenced!! On a side note.. Michael Thompson has been all over the place lately hasn't he? To me his recent shoot for Elle and now this demonstrate the power of Conde Nast. Somehow photographers always turn in their best work for conde nast. Maybe because they're afforded resources they are not elsewhere. Thimpsons Vanity fair cover with Gwyneth is still one of my favorite covers of all time.

 

[nataliaapple]

Don't like. Something's off.

 

[Deleted member 1957]

looks dated

 

[lavieenrose]

looks dated

There is a fine line between retro and dated. If the reference is too recent, you risk falling in the latter. The fact that she looks pretty much the same on this cover as she did in the early naughties amplifies that effect.

 

[Deleted member 1957]

There is a fine line between retro and dated. If the reference is too recent, you risk falling in the latter. The fact that she looks pretty much the same on this cover as she did in the early naughties amplifies that effect.

It looks like a late 90s, early 2000s Vogue cover in a rather safe way than exciting way

 

[ellastica]

FIRSTLY I HATE ALL CAPS COVER LINES!!!!

Completely defeats the point of emphasizing select lines of text, you morons.

LOOK SEXY NOW!
HOT AND HAPPY!

right...sounds like some Fratboy wrote these cover lines.

Is FSR a member of TFS? the scan quality is always topnotch but his/her affinity for slightly over doing the Saturation washes the skin in not so flattering Oompa Loompa-eque ruddy cast.

So far so-so...

 

[Handbag Queen]

Same people on covers all the time.........zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

 

[Deleted member 45369]

Same people on covers all the time.........zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

I feel you on this! It's like the same people from 1999 are all still getting covers today! I say 1999 because it seems that the big celebs prior to that don't seem to get much recognition aside from maybe Sandra Bullock. Maybe it's because that was the start of the celeb takeover? But either way 15 years later to still be getting an endless rotation of Cameron, Gwyneth, Cate etc says a lot about the state of magazines.

 

[GlamorousBoy]

oh god, another boring and ordinary cover of this boring and ordinary woman

 

[Zorka]

PERSONAL EFFECTS
Photographer: David Schulze
Stylist: Catherine Newell-Hanson
Hair: Andre Gunn
Make-up: Talia Shobrook
Model: Jamily Meurer



Marie Claire US 11.2014. Digital Edition