Vanity Fair April 2025 : Gwyneth Paltrow by Ned Rogers

[tigerrouge]

My subscription copy arrived mangled on one side - just the section with Gwyneth's face - so even the printing press had an opinion on this cover.

Out of all the images in her editorial, I love the one where she's looking at herself in the mirror - and not just because you can't see her face, but because I always like the psychological side of looking at a picture of someone looking at themselves, even if there's no real depth in the image itself.

While the last few issues have been very thin, I feel that Vanity Fair has rediscovered itself in recent months. There's no point in pretending to be something that you're not - when the point of your existence is to be all about the 1%, profiling the people who work at the top of their industries, whether that's shining a light on their past misdeeds or promoting whatever they're currently working on.

 

[Cocteau Stone]

Gwyneth giving Lorazepam chic.

I don’t know what it is, but she has the expression of a defeated woman. Like all the joy has been sucked out of her.

 

[fashionlov]

I like the Gwyneth Paltrow cover, and it's nothing extraordinary but the other covers are on such a low level (yes Vogue France by Carin Backoff I'm talking to you)

 

[MModa]

My subscription copy arrived mangled on one side - just the section with Gwyneth's face - so even the printing press had an opinion on this cover.

Out of all the images in her editorial, I love the one where she's looking at herself in the mirror - and not just because you can't see her face, but because I always like the psychological side of looking at a picture of someone looking at themselves, even if there's no real depth in the image itself.

While the last few issues have been very thin, I feel that Vanity Fair has rediscovered itself in recent months. There's no point in pretending to be something that you're not - when the point of your existence is to be all about the 1%, profiling the people who work at the top of their industries, whether that's shining a light on their past misdeeds or promoting whatever they're currently working on.

I agree that the photo of Paltrow looking at herself in the mirror is beautiful. However, I love all of the photographs. Airbrushing aside, they are beautifully executed. The photos have an old-hollywood feeling that I enjoy seeing. Also, the cover with the rich colors looks stunning on the newsstand.

 

[jjjmmm]

Too bad Testino is cancelled because he could have executed much better what this cheap photographer always does. George Cortina is good but he can't save this alone. His collaborations with Testino really were special.
The cover is specially atrocious, Tina Brown or Graydon Carter had a much better eye than Radhika (I'm happy she is leaving Vanity Fair, her tenure there has been really mediocre.)

 

[justaguy]

The editing on this cover reminds me of the disastrous May 2008 issue of American Vogue.


vogue

 

[MModa]

The editing on this cover reminds me of the disastrous May 2008 issue of American Vogue.


vogue

For me, the big difference is that her head looks photoshopped on this cover. I did not like this cover then and I do not like it now.

 

[jeremydante]

Yeah, the face isn't giving.
Styling feels off for me; but lighting is decent.

Good to see her on a cover, honestly.

 

[Melancholybaby]

For me, the big difference is that her head looks photoshopped on this cover. I did not like this cover then and I do not like it now.

Whereas her head doesn't look photoshopped in VF??


Vanity Fair Digital Edition via blueorchid

 

[MModa]

Whereas her head doesn't look photoshopped in VF??


Vanity Fair Digital Edition via blueorchid

No, to me it does not. However, it looks very airbrushed and not appealing.

 

[fashionsavvvvvy]

EJG is doing Meisel better than Ned Rogers