The extra models include (from left) Arizona Muse, Edie Campbell, Imaan Hammam, Fei Fei Sun, Vanessa Axente and Andreea Diaconu. Besides the egregious use of Photoshop (will someone explain what happened to Joan, Fei Fei, Karlie, Cara and Imaan’s arms?), this casting left almost everyone thoroughly unimpressed.
“They really are scraping the bottom of the barrel here,” Tinsley V wrote.
The shot evoked quite a specific image for t-rex: “It looks like a pasty conga line. Terrible.” At least conga lines are fun?
Gabriel29 was mostly dissatisfied with the casting: “I don’t know if it’s the lighting, but this cover just has zero excitement or diversity. Just compare the September 2004 cover where each model was special, unique, and stood out! The 2014 girls look like filler runway models in comparison.”
To tigerrouge, the cover seemed a little out-of-season: “Maybe I’ll feel different once I have this issue in my hands, but I’m bored by this already. I don’t get any feel of autumn from it, and while it’s nice to see models on the front – if only for a change – I’m not that interested in the actual shot. I’d have been more impressed if this had been the choice for March, there’s a sense of light in the image that I associate more with those months.” This seems to be a symptom plenty of magazines have been suffering from. Vanity Fair‘s September issue cover is emblazoned with ribbon lettering, evoking more of a holiday feel, and Emma Stone‘s May 2014 Vogue cover looked more appropriate for October.
As Royal-Galliano put it, the cover is “an example of how a model cover doesn’t necessarily mean it’s better than a celeb one.” Touché.
Let us know what you think of Vogue‘s foldout in the comments, and join the discussion in our forums.
