Cover: Blown

I just found a blog called "Inoubliable Model Army." The author is mainly interested in the world of high fashion and runways, but he has an affinity for the SI swimsuit issue. And he calls the 2012 cover a catastrophe.

I was cautious about the cover when it was first revealed, wanting a little more time to digest. I’ve had time, and I agree: It’s flawed.It seems like this image was stitched together from disparate elements instead of being selected for aesthetic value. People love Kate Upton! Kate Upton has become synonymous with breasts! The smaller the swimsuit, the sexier! You can’t go wrong with a blonde in a red bikini!

All of those things, taken separately, are perfectly logical. But the result is like design by committee. It’s too in-your-face, too cartoonish. It’s like making Jessica Rabbit into a real person. A sexy idea, but the result would be tinged with something “off.”

…Well okay, Heidi’s Jessica Rabbit is an exception. But even there, it’s played for novelty.
And besides, it’s Heidi Klum.

I don’t think it’s “the worst cover in SI Swimsuit history” like the guy at Inoubliable does. But I think he’s onto something with this description:

The image, featuring a heavily airbrushed Upton in an unflattering, awkward pose with her upper anatomy spilling out of a bikini top and bottom, would have been more appropriate on the cover of Hustler magazine.

Upton's cover photo falls victim to its own extremes, subscribing too hard to the philosophies of “bigger is better” (boobs) and “smaller is better” (bikini).

What other photos from 2012 would have made better covers? I think any of these would have been beautiful.Still sexy, still skimpy, still Upton-y. But less hysterical about it. (Heck, the issue came out on Valentine’s Day, and her bikini in that last photo is pink and covered in hearts. Perfect!)

Anyway, we have a lot more Kate in store for us, and I bet we’ll get at least one more cover out of her before SI is done with her.
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...