W November 2010 : Kim Kardashian by Mark Seliger

[tarsha]

perezhilton via tanii94

 

[elsaskywalker]

oh god, the two pics are... disturbing. do not like that.
the cover's not bad anyway.

 

[AnaBGD]

Umm...no

 

[Deleted member 119799]

what is this

W is trying way too hard

 

[Ives927]

Stefano....really? Really?

 

[CrisGalaxy]

wow.... I knew that when it said Kim Kardashian for W it would be something bad but i never thought it would be this bad!

 

[testinofan]

All i so ugly very cheap for W

 

[Luxx]

I think her body is gorgeous and her face, when not painted within an inch of its life is very pretty, but she's just not giving the right energy for this and it doesn't feel all that artistic even with the Barbara Kruger text pasted on her. The concept is actually interesting - the silver paint, the voluptuous body, the use of an overexposed pop culture figure with that tongue in cheek text - it just doesn't mesh well. Her expression seems so lost and the pictures lack that sense of authority you'd expect from a shot like this.

I see what they're trying to do though, but it isn't working for me. I do love that they didn't airbrush out the nipples or try to cover them up - I hate when magazines do that.

 

[masquerade]

I really really hope Barbara Kruger had an active role in that cover and they didn't just steal her style.

I don't know I feel about this. When I see Kim Kardashian and Mark Seliger for W I just feel sad for the glory of what the magazine once was. The cover has potential and they tried for something different (at least right now, tons of magazines and papers hired Barbara Kruger to do just this kind of thing in the 80s).

I don't know, I am still undecided. Although, seeing that the article is by Lynn Hirschberg has potential if only for the potential wank. She is not one for fluff pieces.

 

[Jacque Marcel]

This is just sad all around. I'm sure it will sell which is what W wants.

 

[CrisGalaxy]

Also... why is the W logo always white?!

 

[tigerrouge]

Ah, a Barbara Kruger cover, I'll have to think about that... if the content is intelligent, this wouldn't put me off, but I'd like to know how the article is trying to frame the choice of Ms Kardashian.

 

[Luxx]

Just to play devil's advocate - if they did this same concept with a different person (and I'm not talking a model per se, because god the whole model vs. celeb debate is a dead horse, I just mean a woman who isn't Kim) and a different photographer, could it have worked? I think the answer is yes, personally.

 

[tarsha]

Also... why is the W logo always white?!

I think white color logo goes well with this background but I hate you W for doing this, I mean all the covers after July issue.

 

[Bertrando3]

Hate the logo as usual now, hate the cover and the editorial and really really dislike Kim K. I mean really Stefano? Kim trashy tv "star" on the cover of fashion magazine W ??? Gosh we're really facing hard times if supermodels or real stars aren't even gracing magazines' cover nowadays ... This new W direction is sooooooo far away from the chic magazine is used to be with supermodels-only on its covers.

 

[CrisGalaxy]

^ I just think they should change the color, its so boring. Thats the least good thing they could do

 

[Pedro]

these images deserve crude comments... what the hell was Tonchi thinking when decided to put this woman on the cover of W? photographed by one of the tackiest photographers? the result could only be disastrous...

 

[windlagoon]

when i saw the word "kim kardashian" i wasn't very happy about it. it turned out to be not so bad. the photography is nice but, i don't feel that she has the skill for this. it's bland. she looks good but it's not enough for me. the cover is smart though, very nice but a little...um...try-hard?

Just to play devil's advocate - if they did this same concept with a different person (and I'm not talking a model per se, because god the whole model vs. celeb debate is a dead horse, I just mean a woman who isn't Kim) and a different photographer, could it have worked? I think the answer is yes, personally.

i also thought about this, because kim kardashian isn't exactly the kind of girl who fashion lovers want to see on a magazine, so, just her name makes people say all those nasty comments without even trying to see the photos with a keen eye...but i admire the courage of tonchi putting her in the art issue, very bold. the new direction is very intriguing, but not boring. it doesn't exactly work for me, but at least it wasn't something plain and dead.

ps: you shouldn't judge a book by its cover...or a magazine.

 

[Pedro]

I'm really upset about this magazine that I used to love so much! I hate it this right moment!

Do you remember the spectacular Steven Meisel session for 1991 Vanity Fair of Ann-Margret body painted? simple and georgous!
Mr. Tonchi I'm truly disappointed with this sh*t that you named ART!

Source: ann-margret-from-sweden.com

 

[thankyouhon]

Seems like a cheap ploy to get publicity and sales. It's not artistic or what I would expect from W at all.