Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Magazines' started by TZ001, Apr 10, 2019.
Anyone else could have done this same cover. Pretty blah.
Don't like it for Kim K alone but besides that I wish it was more springy, more lively colors.
This looks like an October cover to me.
Decent cover. Nothing more, nothing less...
The time to be outraged by Kim K on the cover of Vogue is passed now. She has been validated by the entire industry 4-5 years ago.
I don’t know if she sells that much but she has the influence to make people go buy that issue.
Anna is business woman and it’s a clever business move to have her on the cover of the May/Met Gala issue even if IMO, it would have been more clever to have Rihanna on it as we all know she is the only celebrity that people cares about when it comes to the Met Gala.
Totally unexpected and totally in love! I can’t wait to own this issue!
Moderators Note: Stay on topic.This thread is about the contents of this issue - not other potential cover stars.
Any posts about who you think *should* be on the cover will be deleted. Don't put your account at risk.
Kim Kardashian West photographed by Mikael Jansson and styled by Tonne Goodman:
The styling is so lazy.
It’s not a bad editorial.
But it feels like a mash up of what Testino, Klein, Leibovitz and M&M would do for a cover feature.
I looove the b&w shots, and the one with the nude dress really make her justice!
Btw, someone asked for a Karl tribute, she's wearing Chanel on the cover... maybe for the same reason.
It’s beautiful and yet dry and boring..Much like Kim and her fashion sense to be honest.
I really don’t buy the minimalist thing the West are doing. It seems very fake...
It’s an ostentatious minimalism.
I can only imagine how frustrating it must be to style her. I mean, they are so into their brand...
And the most random use of Chanel ever.
I'm surprised to see Kim here. I know the Kardashians are omnipresent in popular culture, but I think the time for Kim to be on the cover of Vogue and it be either controversial, provocative or relevant, is over. I wouldn't welcome it at all but Kylie Jenner would definitely check all those boxes for Vogue right now. I do think it's a nice enough cover but Kim looks a lot better in the shoot, which is quite lovely - if not a bit dull.
Very excited about RuPaul! I was actually thinking the other day about how iconic it would be to see Ru on the cover of Vogue and that the new MET Gala theme would make perfect timing; although I think Edward would be the one bold enough to do it. Drag is really popular nowadays and it has such a unique, over-the-top and celebratory take on fashion - it would be so much fun to see that showcased on the cover of a top-tier fashion magazine. A feature is amazing nonetheless and I can't wait to see it!
I'm sure he meant in such a blatant way, which is what the choice of Kim Kardashian, OG on American Vogue, after all these years really illustrates. It's like whoever they originally wanted called in sick. We all know Vogue kept her at arm's length after all the babies, the beauty line, the continued fashion validation. And now, when nobody is out looking for her, here she is. It's just too odd.
Exactly. The editorial itself is passable, I suppose. Like Mikel said, a mash-up of Testino and Leibovitz. But the styling is brazenly lazy. It looks to me like Kanye was involved here. It reeks of his brand of overblown minimalism. She may not be wearing actual Yeezy, but this colour scheme is all him. And considering how disappointed he was with Carine and Gan's HB shoot, I'm sure he wanted to be involved every step of the way with this very important Vogue cover. Like your usual egomaniac. Glad they didn't use the burgundy dress shot for the cover.
What is happening with Mikael Jansson though? Is this what Vogue-level success does to your creativity? This cover looks like it was shot by M&M, yet the splashed water was done better by Solve Sundsbo for Kendall's HB cover, and the editorial is pure Testino meets Leibovitz. That's only this cover, we've not even gotten to last month's group cover which also looked like a badly copied Leibovitz job, or his equally questionable work for British and French Vogue. Someone's clearly in desperate need of a creative rehab just to get his signature back!
I kinda like the cover, reminds me of the infamous Gucci SS 1997 show.
The hair ruins this but overall it's not bad
It's just fine and nothing more. I don't think Kim trying to influence federal decisions to distract from her husbands MAGA image should really be constituted as "taking a stand." Would've liked to see the actual co-chairs on the cover dressed to the nines in campy couture, but print is dying and Condé Nast needs to sell magazines so I get dumping a bucket of water on Kim. Just wish Vogue wasn't so transparent, there are hardly any more artistic decisions that don't revolve around money anymore. So much for a magazine that used to provide an accessible look into the fashion world for the everyday woman.
Still, could be exciting to see the RuPaul feature (if she bothered to do drag for it since Ru is famous for no longer showing up in Drag unless she's getting nice check)
Everything feels 4-5 years old. Even the RuPaul feature should have happened 4-5 years ago; his show is way past his prime.
They could have brought in Mugler with all that social media touting she was doing a month ago...This is a barely passable cover - dead passport photo expression, the dullest looks from the collections, randomly wet yet shot for the most part indoors. I'm not saying Kim doesn't deserve to be on the cover, on the contrary, she is a cultural icon whether you like her or not.
But dang it Anna bring some glamour to her! You hoard the top looks from designers and *THIS* is what you put her in? Where is Rick Owens? Versace? Balmain?? I'm mean let's make it as camp as possible if we're going there. Boring.
Boring and bad. Yikes.
June can never come soon enough to archive this in my memory... the further back the better... the cover shot is actually not bad (more suitable for a different magazine) but the editorial is so unimaginative, lazy and boring.
Really? Anna must be as bored (or more?) as I am with every single magazine daring to publish banal crap these days. Admittedly none of this is that awful, but the casting of Kim, the dead stare, underdeveloped concept all feels very desperate, but in a lazy way.
This...is not what saves magazines from dwindling numbers and closures by the dozen .