Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Magazines' started by MissMagAddict, Sep 5, 2018.
Nice cover and i love the cinematic atmosphere but the whole marketing "all female issue" tactic has been done many time before so Tonchi is really late...
First or second shot alone would've been perfect. It's impactful and to the point.
I'm not sure I get the gimmick. It reeks of Alexandra Shulman's 'model-free' issue, or Vogue Italia's 'Black issue.' Hypocritical at best. But W needs any bit of attention it can get so it makes sense for them to hop on that hype! There genuinely is a women problem in fashion, special editions like these are not the solution though.
"Tonchi said he wanted Blanchett for this issue, not only because she’s beautiful and a talented and admired actress, but because he got the sense that she was being sidelined by mainstream fashion, with talk among colleagues that she is “too old, or too classy for covers.”
How deluded! Cate Blanchett of all people. The only 'older' woman, other than Nicole Kidman, who would generally be considered for magazine covers due to her style, her career, her fashion and beauty endorsements. Jesus.
it was all food until I got to the "the female gaze" font, very amateur imo.
The middle pic would have been a great cover.
The "female gaze" nonsense from Tonchi and that horrible font should be flushed.
He's just looking for attention for this dying magazine that no one cares about.
Cate is great, but she can't save W. No one can.
I meant "good"
Lol I also rolled my eyes so hard I saw my brain when reading that statement. Magazine covers alone, let's compare how many she's gotten to someone like Viola Davis, Laura Dern, or even Toni Collette who has been recognized again by Hollywood's ageism for her work in Hereditary. I love Cate, but that statement's stretch rivals a velour tracksuit from Juicy Couture's
Cate looks like she's setting fire to the bottom of the magazine... I feel like I'm getting a message no-one intended to send.
It does look like an adequate 'final issue' cover now that you mention it!
He cannot possibly be serious! No one can be this clueless. Does she endorse this idiotic view?
I also have a problem with him considering Cate Blanchett an "older" woman, just because she's older it doesn't mean Hollywood or the fashion world had to readjust the perception they had of her, or that the roles she plays are radically different than the ones she played in the past. Certain actresses like Tilda Swinton for example, way older than Cate, are playing roles in their 50's that they used to play in their 30's, without that meaning that in their 50's they are being given youthful roles. And they manage to do this, because in fact they are not that "old" and do not look old and because of the type of actresses they are they can maintain an out of time quality that does not work for most of their peers.
So besides the obvious reasons (she's the face of an Armani perfume FFS), it's also a bit of a cop out that he decided to choose precisely one of this few to represent the marginalised "older" woman.
He is ridiculous, Cate has done over 200 original cover shoots in her career!! She loves doing photoshoots, and fashion, she has actually reached a level of overexposure on covers where i am sick of seeing her face, and it's becoming actually too much! So for him to even claim that is just laughable. Of course because all editors hype their cover stars, but this attempt is pathetic!
I will say i love this cover, everything about it.
^Very true. Like Celebrities models (Kendall, Gigi and co), editors should learn to close their mouth.
Second cover, photo by Rineke Dijkstra, styling by Sara Moonves.
Source @wmag Instagram.
That female gaze font looks like it belongs on a trailer trash tramp stamp or the neon sign outside a tacky bar, the fact thay they actually chose to make it white with a black outline makes my skin crawl with horror. If they think at all...what were they thinking? The images are mediocre, where is Charlotte Wales when you need her?
That is so ridiculous and funny considering she is on the covers of Bazaar Australia and UK just in the past two months.
And we all know it has nothing to do with promoting age, body size or diversity; it's about who has a new movie, record or other project to promote. That's all the magazine industry is about these days.
I know people love her but I'm bloody sick of seeing her.
Lady Gaga is getting good buzz for her new movie so I'm expecting Gaga overkill in the next few months.
Someone should start a thread to determine who is the most overexposed celebrity of the year.
I like Cate Blanchett, love the current cover of British Harper's Bazaar but as per usual with W Magazine lately this is just all sorts of naff and completely uneventful.
Wow, such a pleasure to see a cover shot by Rineke Dijkstra. Too bad the shot is ruined by the lay out.
This magazine is such a joke.
All this FEMALE GAZE bull....give me a break. Who the hell cares if the results are this uninspired and mediocre and irrelevant? Give me something exceptional...I don't care the gender of the subject or creator...half the population on this planet is female, nothing inherently special or deserving about being one - it's a 50-50 chance you're born a woman. TALENT and VISION, on the other hand...now that I am all for celebrating and rewarding - again - regardless of one's gender. Neither TALENT or VISION is on display here (or ever has been, for that matter, at W since McCarthy's departure), so Tonchi & Co. can shove it.
Can't wait for this magazine to fold...which seems inevitable.
source | twitter | wmagazine
I would’ve preferred a female gays issue and honestly who is Tonchi trying to fool? Cate hardly goes a month without fronting something or the other. Isn’t she washed out on the cover of UK Bazaar this very month?