WSJ Magazine September 2016 : Meryl Streep by Brigitte Lacombe

[Marc10]

 

[tigerrouge]

Nice to see a cover that isn't afraid of the reality of a face. Because there's nothing there that needs to be airbrushed away.

 

[Deleted member 45369]

It's beautiful. I just wish the styling would've been better. A rich regal blue perhaps?

 

[Miss Dalloway]

Beautiful, real, and damn perfect! Wish more women were allowed to look like themselves on covers of magazines, this is superb! What a woman!

 

[Benn98]

Classic Lacombe! She's not overzealous with retouching her subjects. I cannot fault this, despite the animal print.

It looks like Meryl got photo approval again. She hardly ever shoots with anyone other than Brigitte (even for her film stills) and Annie. Nice to see such a thriving relationship.

 

[LuneMelt]

i love it

 

[Nepenthes]

In love with this! Meryl's grace and beauty really shine through!

 

[zzzyao76]

wsj.com

 

[honeycombchild]

I don't care if the styling is a little off, this is glorious. Allowing a woman to look like the fantastically beautiful woman she actually is rather than attempting to rework her face into something she absolutely isn't. I wish Meryl found herself on more covers. I'd love to see what publications like Interview or W would do with her. Providing M&M didn't get their hands on the shoot and render her doll-like.

 

[Bahiyya]

I can't express how much I appreciate this cover. What would it take for more magazines to go this route and abandon the alienating photoshopped faces...

This mag is already boughten.

 

[kokobombon]

Oh look, animal print on an older woman!
I love it though, specially her expression. It seems so simple but I feel like she´s conveying a thousand things.

 

[dodencebt]

This is fabulous! I have always loved Meryl, and it's great to see her front certain magazines from time to time although she is a very private person. I agree about the styling, though.

 

[ellastica]

I find this underwhelming.

These images definitely do not capture the best of Lacombe nor Streep.

This could've been shot by anybody. The sensual, cozy Lacombe warmth is missing.

Meryl has such an expressive face. Would've loved to see her sparkling eyes, her whole face emoting on the cover as vaguely touched on in the lounge shot.

Instead we get two different uncreative headshots with nearly identical static facial expressions resulting in an unwelcoming, off-putting, austere vibe.

Plus a nice washed out color scheme, unflattering Mrs. Robinson meets Canadian mountie styling.

Shame this wasn't better executed since WSJ deserves major props for representing talented, experienced women in front and behind the lens.

 

[vogue28]

I was half-expecting to see that Vanity Fair reprint from the thread title, ha!

WSJ always tend to have fantastic covers and I'm certainly not disappointed by this.

 

[MON]

What a stunning cover. It exudes power, authority, class, everything. I love it. The styling could be better. I agree with A.D.C., blue would have been perfect

 

[Kanna]

Leopard and grey is a great combo and Meryl looks chic and natual. Love both cover and ed.

 

[liaa]

Finally a real star on the cover of a magazine.
To be honest, i don't like the animal print. The cover looks nice though. Love Meryl, she has beautiful eyes.

 

[Velasco]

YESSS! I'm getting a "wealthy-Santa-Fe-Tom-Ford's-neighbor" vibe from this cover. Meryl is
The chameleon of Hollywood and could get get away with wearing just about anything. Absolutely LOVE this cover!

 

[happycanadian]

This is just absolutely everything.

LOVE this.

 

[Phuel]

It is nice to see a mature woman on the cover of a magazine. Meryl is beautiful of course, but... it's so conservative, so guarded and lacking in freshness-- everything this woman isn't.