Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Magazines' started by amby, Nov 13, 2018.
Why on earth will you allow the VOGUE masthead to fade into the background? Dont you want to sell?
That shot would have been lovely as an ad campaign, but never for a cover. Too odd.
The second cover provided no redeeming factor whatsoever. Tragic.
To the Vogue franchises now before us, and to those who are yet to come, please realize that the Vogue Italia formula was founded on creativity and artistry, not sheer laziness. Get it right.
Literal Warhol printed clothing shot in front of the Warhol Museum. Guess what's the theme.......
It's almost insulting that they needed to spell it out like this. Actually on another thought, this is perfect for their audience.
I can tolerate the second cover, I suppose. But both covers are terribly underwhelming and I'm actually big on Kirsten Owen. This edition should never have happened.
This magazine is bullshit
One thing we know for sure is that the ideas behind vogue portugual didn’t came from Jan. Bc his work with this edition is terrible
The type of people who would like this don't buy (printed) magazines. They are serving the wrong audience.
having a random dude dressing up as Andy is the biggest insult to the artist ever.
This is gonna be no for me dawg...
isn't it a wax figurine? anyways, i hate this. it sparks literally zero attraction or emotion.
Dressing a random guy up as Andy Warhol to give someone his 15 minutes of fame, sounds like something Andy would love. It’s hardly an insult.
But besides that, I think Royal-Galliano is right. It’s a wax figure.
These are both so terrible. Looks like a cover for Oyster magazine.
Is it normal to feel a bit scared before open a Vogue CS thread? Because that is happening to me.
The covers are... IDK, weird? I usually like this type of thing, but when is intriguing, this is poorly executed, really amateur.
Really? Who is the EIC of this monthly mess? What's the point?
This is so pretentious and ugly, how is that even posible?
Lol no, thanks Poland.
Is Kirsten Owen such a modeling icon that she deserves a Vogue cover in 2018? It's not like she's a Naomi or Christy or even McMenamy.
I would seriously like to know who was the culprit behind this "idea" of a ed...
And what intrigues me the most is the model choice. Why Kirsten? I love her, don't get me wrong, but it feels random. Did they check Nick Knight's More Beautiful Women to see if any of the models would be available, is that the connection?
I can't understand how a magazine with the name Vogue can be so mediocre. Vogue CS has been having a worst run than Vogue Poland - at least VPoland seems a bit less pretentious.
I love both covers and I love the fact that this magazine is all about Czech/Slovak people.
You didn't get it. Christy and Naomi are way too mainstream for Vogue CS
So if you’re a model of a certain generation or age you have to be an ‘icon’ to get a Vogue cover? Otherwise it’s not deserved? That’s ridiculous, and maybe even ageist.
Kirsten may not be on the same level as her peers, but she has been consistently working since the late eighties and she is still going strong. I don’t see how that’s not ‘deserving’ of a Vogue cover.