Rosemary Mac Cabe

Hemlines, heels and haute couture – your daily dose

Cover girls: Emma Stone, Mila Kunis and Kim Kardashian

Are magazine covers still news? Do we – and when I say “we” I mean fashion-lovers, fashion-blog-readers – really care about who covers which magazine? Apparently so; study after study suggests that we buy magazines depending on who is on …

Tue, Jul 3, 2012, 10:30

   

Are magazine covers still news? Do we – and when I say “we” I mean fashion-lovers, fashion-blog-readers – really care about who covers which magazine? Apparently so; study after study suggests that we buy magazines depending on who is on the cover. So what about these three cover girls?

I love Emma Stone, but feel that this cover, shot for US Vogue, falls short. It looks a bit like an underwear commercial to me, or an interiors shot. I don’t love the underwear, which is neither sexy nor cute. It just feels a bit . . . meh.

Mila Kunis on Glamour is definitely a step up, although this cover reminds me very much of Jessica Simpson in US Elle, and from that point of view it feels a bit dated. It’s just the pure denim-on-denim Americana vibe, and of course I hate that Mila Kunis is in Glamour talking about her weight. I mean, why?!

I’m really torn about this cover, because on the one hand I’m totally on board with this whole Kimye vibe – seriously, I think they deserve each other, and I don’t even mean that in a 100% nasty way. On the other hand, I’m tired of pastel lipstick and feel as if Kimmie could have toned down the eyeliner a bit.

Thoughts?