CHUD.com Community › Forums › ARTS & LITERATURE › Books and Magazines › Dissection of Vanity Fair cover shot
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Dissection of Vanity Fair cover shot

post #1 of 13
Thread Starter 
I am a link

This observation made me laugh, any cover of this magazine is usually depressing to look at in my opinion.

Quote:
She has raised her left leg in the air, like a Labrador relieving itself in Hyde Park.
^choice quote.
post #2 of 13
I dont know that anyone with Koontz anything in their sig line should be paid attention to. Big yawn on this.
post #3 of 13
Kinda hard to tell anything from that pitifully small picture.
post #4 of 13
Even in a picture that small it's still fairly easy to admire Scarlett's cleavage of epic proportions.
post #5 of 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by g-dude
Even in a picture that small it's still fairly easy to admire Scarlett's cleavage of epic proportions.
Agreed.

Quick question: In that article, the name Ziyi Zhang appears...I thought it was the other way around...Zhang Ziyi? What's up with that?
post #6 of 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by embrodak
Agreed.

Quick question: In that article, the name Ziyi Zhang appears...I thought it was the other way around...Zhang Ziyi? What's up with that?
The "Americanized" version of her name is Zhang Ziyi (as she was billed in Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon), but she decided to start being credited with her name in the proper Chinese fashion, which is Ziyi Zhang (the surname goes first).
post #7 of 13
Are you sure that it's not the other way around? I thought she Americanised her name.
post #8 of 13
That article is a painfully subjective feminism-baiting rant. But The Guardian's all about "equal" liberal bias, so no foul.

It's odd though; if it were David Bailey taking the picture I'd undrestand. But no matter how bullish Graydon Carter is -- since this is celebrated female photographer Annie Leibovitz conceptualizing and shooting a cover for a magazine which has a notably feminine editorial staff (hard nosed media baronesses though they might be), [i]and[/]i readership, it's a pretty far fetched cry from a journalist who probably doesn't have half the clout these admittedly strewn and fawning starlets possess.

It'a a highly stylised tragic glamour shot. Deal with it.
post #9 of 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Strauss:Actor/Gardener?
I dont know that anyone with Koontz anything in their sig line should be paid attention to. Big yawn on this.

same could be said for people in arkansas, home of brother/sister love.
post #10 of 13
Thread Starter 
Ya'll just hurt because you wank off to these women, admit it.

You've got to admit, ignoring the fact that its completely garish in the first place, that the choice of women is also poor. The most talented of their age? Please...
post #11 of 13
Reading between the lines, and Claire Danes excluded, they're certinaly appearing in some of the most interesting picture around in this 12 month period.

But then again, I appreciate that this isn't a star-fucker fixated piece -- or publication -- that cares more about the looks than ability of contemporary talent.
post #12 of 13
Thread Starter 
Well in tandom to the Oscar whiney thread somewhere around here, I await a cover shot of not so stunning looking actors such as Paul Giamatti adorning the cover of Vanity Fair in the future...
post #13 of 13
Quote:
Originally Posted by mastronikolas
Are you sure that it's not the other way around? I thought she Americanised her name.
This is why I hate Americanized versions of Asian names. It happens so often that I don't know which is the surname.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Books and Magazines
CHUD.com Community › Forums › ARTS & LITERATURE › Books and Magazines › Dissection of Vanity Fair cover shot