US Vogue January 2008 : Kate Hudson by Patrick Demarchelier

[SnejanaIsMyMuse]

Seriously.I think Us Vogue is due for a new editor in chief.Anna has done enough damage.I only wish the foreign editions were cheaper, but good things cost money.

Hell ,even Teen Vogue is more concerned with fashion, and at least they feature up and coming models and a variety of designers.

To anyone who adores Vogue or this issue, stop reading:

This is just so frustrating. Anna Wintour has the capability to hire the greatest up and comers and models other than Trentini and Raquel, and whisk them off to exotic locations, yet all she does is smack them in front of a grey or white background and tell them to jump.

I am seriously sick of the lack of creativity in this magazine. Such a dissapointment. Vapid stares and pointless hops are just plain stupid!

 

[dior_couture1245]

^^I was thinking the exact same thing, too! Since when is a teen magazine more fashion oriented than Vogue?!....well, when Anna is in charge...

 

[SnejanaIsMyMuse]

Seriouly.Vogue Us is so dull in almost every way.I don't understand how anyone can like it.

 

[nicolefan]

that double page shot of kate & ryder is gorgeous! thanks for posting the kate feature Faith Akiyama

 

[deflyricist2006]

I absolutely love the cover of Kate. I thought I wasn't going to, but I was pleasantly surprised. Next month, hopefully, Hilary Rhoda (or sometime this year of 2008!)

 

[Party_Vixen]

I bought this magazine every month for 2 years, but I haven't picked up an issue in 6 months. Until the magazine changes it's a complete waste of my $5.00.

 

[SnejanaIsMyMuse]

$5? I wouldn't spend that much on this.I can get Vogue Espana for $5.50 at Wal Mart ,and that is way more worth it than buying Vogue Us.

Looking back at the early 2000's the magazine seemed to be more varied, and there were actually models on the cover.True ,Carmen and Gisele were on a lot of them, but it beats the same dull celebrity cover now a days.

Not to mention there are so many models to choose from it's ridiculous that the same get shown every month.Malgosia, Tanya ,Vlada, Marina ,Meghan, Maryna, Kinee, Anja, Iselin, Masha, Hye, Denisa, etc.Give them Vogue US editorials, and give Caroline a break from jumping.She is a good model when utilized well.

 

[LibertyRose]

For January, this isn't a bad issue.

The cover was awful and for once it's not because of the over-airbrushing of the subject or the cluttering texts but because the blouse (Dries' first in recent history, if not ever) is plain ugly. For all the heat that US Vogue's casting of models and cover girls has generated, I'm amused that what turns me off about this issue is fashion itself. Hudson is a professed Dries lover, but I don't know if anyone's grandmother would want that pattern as table linen.

The Trentini and Zimmermann shoot was okay. Would've been unbearably boring if anyone but McDean (or Demarchelier) shot it. The only thing that separates this editorial from a Spiegel's catalogue is the outrageous hair and makeup. That's US Vogue's only way of making something conservative (cardigan + shift dress) seem hip.

I can appreciate the thoughts that went into the composition in the Meisel and Natalia ed but would like it better if her skin doesn't look so icy and untouchable. Meisel tries so hard to achieve the porcelain effect we see in classic portraits that his models look about as lively as well-preserved corpses.

It's obviously a milestone for Chanel's burgeoning career, but sorry to say that the edit looks like an Allure outtake.

What I really like about the issue is the layout of the Best Dressed spread. For all its ambition at being grandiose and all, what US Vogue does particularly well, in my opinion, is a juicy section that's thrown in the back like an afterthought called Vogue Index. The Best Dressed spread borrowed some elements from Vogue Index (the collarge format) and the levity of that made these twenty or so pages a delight to flip through.

 

[j'adorekapusta]

how come?

i know it may be a bit offtop (then feel free to delete my comment) but... i was looking at the new issue of vogue us while browsing the latest issue of russian vogue. what amazed me is how totally different these two look and feel. check this:








(vogue us to the left, vogue russia to the right)

now tell me: what's wrong with anna w?

note: vogue russia does use f/w clothing.

 

[tocceve]

should they be similar? I don't get your point

 

[Kimkhuu]

why is she wh*ring out her son like this?! Poor kid..... The cover is of such bad taste... The styling is so american vogue; cheap and tacky!

 

[SnejanaIsMyMuse]

should they be similar? I don't get your point

I think I get the point.

The point I got was that both Us Vogue and Russian vogue have the same resources and capabilities ,yet Vogue Russia(and almost all of the international vogues for that matter) do way more creative things with it's magazine? That was my interpretation.

I understand that Anna Wintour might think that americans want their fashions relatable and wearable ,but the way Vogue Us presents them is so uttterly boring for the most part.Not to mention an issue can't go by without certain models or designers being featured in them.You can tell that what goes into the magazine is highly restrained, or the things that aren't are simply edited out.Probably why Meisel mostly sticks to basic studio shoots for Vogue Us ,it's basically all he is able to do(or all of his creative energy goes into Vogue Italia, which makes sense when you consider how much more Vogue Italia means to the fashion industry in comparison to Vogue Us).


There is a whole world out there full of interesting and new models, fashion icons, designers, photographers, stylists ,celebrities, etc., yet Vogue Us still hasn't gotten the picture ,which is sad.I long for a day where Vogue Us can be as interesting,varied, and beautiful as it's sister Vogues, but until Anna cleans up her act or a new editor in chief is in charge, I won't hold my breath.

 

[Miss Dalloway]

^^Every Vogue is Political to extent.We all heard about the Sozzani scandal,and how she operates,its just not as obvious as with Anna.At this point its just to damn predictable and tired.
But you know what;why should she change Vogue when its successful and they sell?Conde Nast is happy with results,people buy it.
For me Anna Wintour is pass being editor-in-chief she is more like a buisness woman now,and its sad because Us Vogue is not mainly about fashon anymore and it should be!
I personaly think its time for Mrs.Wintour to go,new fashion excited eic is long overdue.

 

[iluvjeisa]

^They should care about it if they value Vogue's position in fashion. I blame Bazaar/Hearst as well. It's not as if they put up any competition. It's just a boring stale mate....They need a new fresh editor in chief and contributing editors for which the EIC has a lot of respect. That's the formula that worked before, it'll work again.

 

[Miss Dalloway]

^^Thats true,but i guess they dont see it like that,and i couldnt agree more about HB.I think that Glenda has damaged Bazaar's reputation considerably more than Anna has US Vogue's though,well imo anyway.HB to me looks like its stuck in time,like when you look at magazines in 80s;same layouts,boring non fashion oriented content completly lifeless publications.And i dont get how can they allow that to happen in this day and age,when fashion excites people and there is more diversty in dressing on offer.Very sad.

There has to be some irony in the fact that Anna was brought at US Vogue to replace Mirabella,and install life back to Vogue,after all those beige years.Just to be decades later accused of the same thing.

I hope it improves in 2008.

 

[SnejanaIsMyMuse]

I hope it improves too.I've noticed that Vogue Us relegates newer models in the accessories edit near the back(Shannan Click in July, Pat Schmid in September 2006, Suvi in November).It's good that they're in there somewhere I guess ,but give them an only girl edit or something instead of sticking them in the back.Or better yet give them a cover for heaven's sake!

All and all it needs a revamp, make it into a covetable Vogue instead of the one that is labeled as the boring vogue.

 

[Deleted member 45369]

^^Thats true,but i guess they dont see it like that,and i couldnt agree more about HB.I think that Glenda has damaged Bazaar's reputation considerably more than Anna has US Vogue's though,well imo anyway.HB to me looks like its stuck in time,like when you look at magazines in 80s;same layouts,boring non fashion oriented content completly lifeless publications.And i dont get how can they allow that to happen in this day and age,when fashion excites people and there is more diversty in dressing on offer.Very sad.

There has to be some irony in the fact that Anna was brought at US Vogue to replace Mirabella,and install life back to Vogue,after all those beige years.Just to be decades later accused of the same thing.

I hope it improves in 2008.

All of Vogue's editors have been very successful, that's why there've only been seven(all with very long tenures) However the bosses at Conde Nast have always known when it was time for fresh blood and were never hesitant to replace someone if they thought Vogue was losing ground. I mean they fired Vreeland! Certainly the most iconic editor of all time and they did the same with her successor after 17 years, so whose to say Anna can't get the boot also. Vogue was very successful during the last days of Mirabella's reign so it wasn't the money but the lost of creativity that did her in. But on the other hand those were the days publishing houses cared about their heritage and prestige today nither Conde Nast and especially Hearst seem to care about anything but the ad rates.

 

[Miss Dalloway]

^^I hope they do,there has to be something done,although its not true that Mirabella's Vogue was doing great in her last 5 years.At that time ELLE had higher circulation and completly surpassed Vogue,and even though they should have fired her years ago they didnt despite the bad performance of the mag under her guidance.While Annas Vogue still has the highest circulation on the market.And you are very right that these days its all about ads,and how many issues gets sold.History of the magazine and prestige seems to matter little if not at all.Shame!

 

[SnejanaIsMyMuse]

I hope there's something that can be done.There's a lot of potential but it's being wasted.

 

[Deleted member 45369]

^^I hope they do,there has to be something done,although its not true that Mirabella's Vogue was doing great in her last 5 years.At that time ELLE had higher circulation and completly surpassed Vogue,and even though they should have fired her years ago they didnt despite the bad performance of the mag under her guidance.While Annas Vogue still has the highest circulation on the market.And you are very right that these days its all about ads,and how many issues gets sold.History of the magazine and prestige seems to matter little if not at all.Shame!

I think Vogue had maintain it's leadership but Elle had come along and made a strong surge which awakened the top brass that something had to be done to fend them off. But like the original poster stated Hearst and the others aren't really putting up much of a fight. As for Glenda I really blame hearst more than I do her, Anna has her pick of the very best photogs and basically has them do the same thing over and over again, Glenda to be honest isn't given much to work with and still manages some decent issues or the occasional dose of excitement because she's less utight about trying new things ex. The Simpsons edit! But I agree that a stronger editor would demand more from Hearst like Tilberis did.