PDA

View Full Version : Vanity Fair Cover Controversy


young_gunner913
Feb 3rd, 2010, 02:37 AM
One thing magazines love to do is call dibs on who will be the new "It" celebrities in the year to come. Sometimes they pick stars whose careers are destined to take off, occasionally they make incredible calls with near-nobodies who later become A-listers, and usually the majority of their picks fade into oblivion. While we'd like to think celeb bible Vanity Fair puts a great deal of thought and planning into its annual "New Hollywood" issue, this year the editors really limited their scope when it came to choosing the next big stars. (Or perhaps they overemphasized the "Fair"? ) Every woman on its new cover is extremely thin and very, very white. Unless Vanity Fair considers one redhead to be diversity, we feel the need to cry foul.

The cover of the March issue features Abbie Cornish, Kristen Stewart, Carey Mulligan, Amanda Seyfried, Rebecca Hall, Mia Wasikowska, Emma Stone, Evan Rachel Wood, and Anna Kendrick. Many, if not all of these women have good reason to grace the Vanity Fair cover, and to be a part of what they have dubbed "the fresh faces of 2010." Evan Rachel Wood has garnered critical acclaim since her Golden Globe-nominated performance in 2003's "Thirteen" as well as loads of media attention from her highly publicized romance with rocker Marilyn Manson. Kristen Stewart was catapulted to fame by the mega-successful "Twilight" franchise and will star as Joan Jett in the upcoming film, "The Runaways," while Amanda Seyfried's career was put in motion after her role in 2008's "Mamma Mia!" But WAIT: Vanity Fair already had both Stewart and Seyfried on an August 2008 cover touting "Hollywood's New Wave." And this was also a white-girl-only cover. Were there no promising young actors of color who could have been featured in either issue?

Though it's true, Young Hollywood is predominantly Caucasian, we can think of a slew of non-white, non-rail thin actors who made a splash this year (Gabourey Sidibe from "Precious" anyone?). In the accompanying article, Vanity Fair writer Evgenia Peretz calls out the young cover stars by their best attributes: "downy-soft cheeks," "button nose," "patrician looks and celebrated pedigree," "dewy, wide-eyed loveliness," "Ivory-soap-girl features." Roles for black, Asian, and Latin actors are scarce in Hollywood, but surely Sidibe, Zoe Saldana of "Avatar" and "Star Trek," and Freida Pinto of "Slumdog Millionaire" are having their moment. Vanity Fair may have been looking for the most promising batch of talent for their issue, but they should have been looking for a diverse group of women as well.

We reached out to Vanity Fair for comment, but as of publishing time they did not respond.
To see the pics: http://shine.yahoo.com/channel/beauty/vanity-fairs-quot-new-hollywood-quot-issue-completely-lacks-diversity-578862/
________________

While I like some of the actresses who made the cover, I completely agree that Gabourey Sidibe, Zoe Saldana and Freida Pinto were greatly over looked. It would have been nice to see at least one girl who doesnt look like Children of the Corn on the cover but Vanity Fair doesnt agree. :o And besides, the movies that Gabs, Zoe and Freida were in alone nearly trounce all the movies of the girls who made the cover combined.

shap_half
Feb 3rd, 2010, 03:08 AM
One thing magazines love to do is call dibs on who will be the new "It" celebrities in the year to come. Sometimes they pick stars whose careers are destined to take off, occasionally they make incredible calls with near-nobodies who later become A-listers, and usually the majority of their picks fade into oblivion. While we'd like to think celeb bible Vanity Fair puts a great deal of thought and planning into its annual "New Hollywood" issue, this year the editors really limited their scope when it came to choosing the next big stars. (Or perhaps they overemphasized the "Fair"? ) Every woman on its new cover is extremely thin and very, very white. Unless Vanity Fair considers one redhead to be diversity, we feel the need to cry foul.

The cover of the March issue features Abbie Cornish, Kristen Stewart, Carey Mulligan, Amanda Seyfried, Rebecca Hall, Mia Wasikowska, Emma Stone, Evan Rachel Wood, and Anna Kendrick. Many, if not all of these women have good reason to grace the Vanity Fair cover, and to be a part of what they have dubbed "the fresh faces of 2010." Evan Rachel Wood has garnered critical acclaim since her Golden Globe-nominated performance in 2003's "Thirteen" as well as loads of media attention from her highly publicized romance with rocker Marilyn Manson. Kristen Stewart was catapulted to fame by the mega-successful "Twilight" franchise and will star as Joan Jett in the upcoming film, "The Runaways," while Amanda Seyfried's career was put in motion after her role in 2008's "Mamma Mia!" But WAIT: Vanity Fair already had both Stewart and Seyfried on an August 2008 cover touting "Hollywood's New Wave." And this was also a white-girl-only cover. Were there no promising young actors of color who could have been featured in either issue?

Though it's true, Young Hollywood is predominantly Caucasian, we can think of a slew of non-white, non-rail thin actors who made a splash this year (Gabourey Sidibe from "Precious" anyone?). In the accompanying article, Vanity Fair writer Evgenia Peretz calls out the young cover stars by their best attributes: "downy-soft cheeks," "button nose," "patrician looks and celebrated pedigree," "dewy, wide-eyed loveliness," "Ivory-soap-girl features." Roles for black, Asian, and Latin actors are scarce in Hollywood, but surely Sidibe, Zoe Saldana of "Avatar" and "Star Trek," and Freida Pinto of "Slumdog Millionaire" are having their moment. Vanity Fair may have been looking for the most promising batch of talent for their issue, but they should have been looking for a diverse group of women as well.

We reached out to Vanity Fair for comment, but as of publishing time they did not respond.
To see the pics: http://shine.yahoo.com/channel/beauty/vanity-fairs-quot-new-hollywood-quot-issue-completely-lacks-diversity-578862/
________________

While I like some of the actresses who made the cover, I completely agree that Gabourey Sidibe, Zoe Saldana and Freida Pinto were greatly over looked. It would have been nice to see at least one girl who doesnt look like Children of the Corn on the cover but Vanity Fair doesnt agree. :o And besides, the movies that Gabs, Zoe and Freida were in alone nearly trounce all the movies of the girls who made the cover combined.

I agree about Gabby -- especially after her amazing performance in "Precious", but Zoe was in a recent Vanity Fair cover (I believe from a couple of months ago), which could have had something to do with why she's been left out.

young_gunner913
Feb 3rd, 2010, 03:12 AM
I agree about Gabby -- especially after her amazing performance in "Precious", but Zoe was in a recent Vanity Fair cover (I believe from a couple of months ago), which could have had something to do with why she's been left out.

It says in the article Kiristen Steward and Amanda Seyfried were in the "Hollywood's New Wave" 2008 issue. so appearing on the cover multiple times doesnt seem to be a problem.

Bayo
Feb 3rd, 2010, 03:26 AM
I only recognize the name of one of those actresses, and I still couldn't pick her out of the line-up.

shap_half
Feb 3rd, 2010, 04:03 AM
It says in the article Kiristen Steward and Amanda Seyfried were in the "Hollywood's New Wave" 2008 issue. so appearing on the cover multiple times doesnt seem to be a problem.

There's a huge difference between two years and six months. The likelihood of the same subject making the cover of a publication twice in the same six month period is very rare (a year even). I believe Zoe was on 2008 cover, too (along with another minority America Ferrera)

young_gunner913
Feb 3rd, 2010, 04:12 AM
There's a huge difference between two years and six months. The likelihood of the same subject making the cover of a publication twice in the same six month period is very rare (a year even). I believe Zoe was on 2008 cover, too (along with another minority America Ferrera)

even if its rare, Zoe's two recent movies are the most successful of all the girls even mentioned. so i dont think it would be or should be impossible to have her on there. i mean if you want to talk about the new it girls of hollywood, Zoe is the definition.

pepaw
Feb 3rd, 2010, 06:17 AM
i think it looks bad aesthetically but i dont see too much wrong with it.

mandy7
Feb 3rd, 2010, 06:27 AM
http://shine.yahoo.com/channel/beauty/vanity-fairs-quot-new-hollywood-quot-issue-completely-lacks-diversity-578862/
________________
While I like some of the actresses who made the cover, I completely agree that Gabourey Sidibe, Zoe Saldana and Freida Pinto were greatly over looked. It would have been nice to see at least one girl who doesnt look like Children of the Corn on the cover but Vanity Fair doesnt agree. :o And besides, the movies that Gabs, Zoe and Freida were in alone nearly trounce all the movies of the girls who made the cover combined.
EXCUSE YOU!!?!?!

Amanda Seyfried......... Jennifer's Body >>>>>> All other 2009 movies
I only recognize the name of one of those actresses, and I still couldn't pick her out of the line-up.
that's cause all white girls look alike

/sarcasm

shap_half
Feb 3rd, 2010, 07:00 AM
even if its rare, Zoe's two recent movies are the most successful of all the girls even mentioned. so i dont think it would be or should be impossible to have her on there. i mean if you want to talk about the new it girls of hollywood, Zoe is the definition.

It just wouldn't happen. Zoe got a huge honor getting the SEPTEMBER ISSUE of Vanity Fair. For all lifestyle publications, September is ALWAYS the biggest -- more pages, more notoriety. It's a huge issue. There is no way she would get that and then this cover, too. It doesn't matter if she's the biggest white start to come to Hollywood since Julia Roberts. It just wouldn't happen. It has nothing to do with race or talent or popularity. She's not getting two covers in 6 months, especially if she already nabbed September.

And to be quite frank, Zoe is not on the same level as most of who's on the cover, acting talent wise. I say most because I'm not familiar with everyone's work, but Rebecca Hall, relatively unknown to many, will act circles around Zoe. And so will Anna Kendrick (a Tony nominee), Carey Mulligan, Evan Rachel Wood, Abbie Cornish and Mia Wowsikowska. I would have loved to include Gabby (or yes, even Freida but she's really from last year. I don't think I saw her in a single thing in 2009) in this, because there then would have been 3 2010 Oscar nominees. It's really a huge and unfortunate oversight on VF's part.

Привет
Feb 3rd, 2010, 07:22 AM
Abbie! :rocker2:

Anyway... I don't think Freida is really a "fresh face of 2010", and Zoe's been around for a fair while now too. Gabourey should have been included though, yes.

Dandy_Warhol
Feb 3rd, 2010, 07:43 AM
for starters, the list wasn't just made last month. at the very least it has been made two or three months ago so this might explain why Gabby and Zoe (eventhough she has made quite a flash in Star Trek) weren't included. Freida Pinto is not a fresh face and apart from having projects in development, she doesn't have a project that's currently showing or will come out in a few months. you also have to remember that it's also the actor's manager or PR agent and to some extent, the movie studios, that campaigns for these kinds of list so it depends on how good your agent is and how well connected he/she is to put you out there. believe me, there's a lot of campaigning and haggling behind all this. lastly, the girls on the cover/list are girls who have been heard of 6 months or a year before so eventually, no matter how they want you to believe, these girls are not fresh faces (go check their fimmography and list of projects in development).

LoveFifteen
Feb 3rd, 2010, 09:55 PM
When I saw the full picture, even before these articles about the controversy came out, I was surprised that everyone was white. That being said, how out of place would Precious's fat ass have looked in this picture?! :rolls:

miffedmax
Feb 3rd, 2010, 10:32 PM
I have to agree with you. I think this is more of a case of bias against big actresses than black actresses as Sidibe is the one who really broke out in the time frame that would get you on the cover of this issue.

This isn't to deny there's a dearth of good roles and recognition for women of color in Hollywood, but then things are better they were.

Dandy_Warhol
Feb 4th, 2010, 02:41 AM
When I saw the full picture, even before these articles about the controversy came out, I was surprised that everyone was white. That being said, how out of place would Precious's fat ass have looked in this picture?! :rolls:

for aesthetic reasons, yes it would look out of place :tape:

you also have to remember that Vanity Fair is quite an elitist magazine :o

Donny
Feb 4th, 2010, 05:54 AM
Vanity Fair has the creepiest covers, I swear.

Dunlop1
Feb 4th, 2010, 06:20 AM
This isn't to deny there's a dearth of good roles and recognition for women of color in Hollywood, but then things are better than they were.

No offense to you but this line of thinking is an anathema to me. It's complacent and myopic.
Things are better than they were and should continue to get better.
Latinos are the fastest growing minority, and soon will no longer be a minority group in the United States and they couldn't find one latina to be on the cover?
Although to be honest, I would rather the latina be on the cover of Fortune or Newsweek rather than Vanity Fair.

miffedmax
Feb 4th, 2010, 01:18 PM
Blame the neo-Whig in me.

However, I didn't mean to imply that things will get better merely if we stand around. Of course people will have to continue to work for change. On the other hand, I agree with the second part of what your posted. And my main point was that one cover of Vanity Fair is a tiny part of a symptom, not the disease itself.

LoveFifteen
Feb 4th, 2010, 02:57 PM
The girl from Precious has the last laugh. She's the one with the Oscar nomination. I have never even heard of half of these white girls. :tape:

Golovinjured.
Feb 4th, 2010, 04:18 PM
It looks like Gossip Girl minus Vanessa. :rolls:

Abbie! :rocker2:

Abbie :inlove:

When I saw the full picture, even before these articles about the controversy came out, I was surprised that everyone was white. That being said, how out of place would Precious's fat ass have looked in this picture?! :rolls:

:spit:

pov
Feb 4th, 2010, 04:26 PM
, but they should have been looking for a diverse group of women as well.

No source was provided for the article however my response is why should they have been looking for "a diverse group of women" Well just because the article's author(s) ( and those who share their point of view) would like them to do that Of course. lol. Some one else may think that they should look for "more lesbians" "more chunky people" etc . . . Yet almost none of these people would state things plainly "I'd like them to . . " That doesn't have the presupposition of moral justification that "should" does.

It gets tiring that magazines, groups, etc are so often hounded for showing, catering to who and what they want. It's also highly ironic that most of the complainers are completely self-serving. Not every thing has to meet some ideal of "diversity."

VF looked for what they wanted to portray and more power to them for that.

http://a323.yahoofs.com/phugc/XUfeTY1PniDb/photos/0a49582765d105f97577737e947316c1/mr_40fc4805acccb2.jpg?ug_____Dw7Ui_Dzr

BuTtErFrEnA
Feb 4th, 2010, 04:27 PM
No offense to you but this line of thinking is an anathema to me. It's complacent and myopic.
Things are better than they were and should continue to get better.
Latinos are the fastest growing minority, and soon will no longer be a minority group in the United States and they couldn't find one latina to be on the cover?
Although to be honest, I would rather the latina be on the cover of Fortune or Newsweek rather than Vanity Fair.

minority doesn't only refer to numbers :shrug: minority refers to the status you have...hence why blacks and latinos, while they may grow in number, will still be looked down upon because of status

pov
Feb 4th, 2010, 04:34 PM
minority doesn't only refer to numbers :shrug: minority refers to the status you have...hence why blacks and latinos, while they may grow in number, will still be looked down upon because of status
"looked down upon" ?? wtf?? :haha: By who? That statement shows that you are someone with ethnic issues. Of course you won't get how it shows that and I'll just keeping laughing.

KournikovaFan91
Feb 4th, 2010, 04:41 PM
The reason Gabourey Sidibe didn't make the cover is probably because these mags, like rail thin covergirls, as opposed to a race thing.

miffedmax
Feb 4th, 2010, 04:48 PM
That's about the most generic looking crop of skinny white chicks I've ever seen.

And I say that as a white guy who is pretty damn fond of slim white women. But that bunch is utterly interchangable.

In fact, I'm almost offended to see such horrible stereotyping of white people. I mean damn, why not just shoot a loaf of fuckin' Wonderbread?

darkchild
Feb 4th, 2010, 04:56 PM
The girl from Precious has the last laugh. She's the one with the Oscar nomination. I have never even heard of half of these white girls. :tape:

Carey Mulligan is nominated in the same category.
And Anna is in the supporting category.

HRHoliviasmith
Feb 4th, 2010, 05:14 PM
The reason Gabourey Sidibe didn't make the cover is probably because these mags, like rail thin covergirls, as opposed to a race thing.

then why isn't zoe zaldana on there? or thandie newton?

KournikovaFan91
Feb 4th, 2010, 05:22 PM
Are you serious, Thandie Newton had many chances in Hollywood, not a new star, she has been in Crash and Mission Impossible. She also turned down being an Angel in Charlie's Angels to be in Mission Impossible II. She is also not far off 40.

But having Kristen Stewart and Amanda Seyfried on the list is stupid, they aren't exactly up and coming.

LoveFifteen
Feb 4th, 2010, 05:39 PM
Carey Mulligan is nominated in the same category.
And Anna is in the supporting category.

Oh, is that the girl from Up in the Air? She was good. I liked her performance. But I never would've recognized her in this picture. I do recognize the girl from Mean Girls & Mamma Mia. And I recognize that emo twat girl from Twilight. :scared:

miffedmax
Feb 4th, 2010, 06:04 PM
Oh, is that the girl from Up in the Air? She was good. I liked her performance. But I never would've recognized her in this picture. I do recognize the girl from Mean Girls & Mamma Mia. And I recognize that emo twat girl from Twilight. :scared:

How? I honestly can't tell them apart. I could go stand outside my office for 2 minutes and round up seven or eight more interesting looking white wimmenz.

They are not worthy to carry the rackets of LOB.

Golovinjured.
Feb 4th, 2010, 06:09 PM
They're a pretty ordinary bunch. I mean, Kristin Stewart? I'd be :worship:ing VF if they'd chosen her BEFORE Twilight but she's obviously already pass her peak.

LoveFifteen
Feb 4th, 2010, 06:14 PM
Kristin Stewart has passed her peak and will never win another Major .... role.

miffedmax
Feb 4th, 2010, 06:28 PM
Kristin Stewart has passed her peak and will never win another Major .... role.

I'm sorry, but KS's mouth reminds me of a cyberman from Dr Who.

(Yesss!!!! I just outgeeked all the Twilight geeks! I fucking win!!!!!)

Ferg
Feb 4th, 2010, 06:54 PM
Gabby Sidibe is a better actress then most of the girls on the cover anyway.

Ryan
Feb 4th, 2010, 08:48 PM
Why does there HAVE to be diversity? If the people there think these are the up and coming actresses, that's their prerogative. I doubt they deliberately chose not to put a girl in their because she was black/asian/indian, so why force diversity just for the sake of it?

Wigglytuff
Feb 4th, 2010, 09:13 PM
http://a323.yahoofs.com/phugc/XUfeTY1PniDb/photos/0a49582765d105f97577737e947316c1/mr_40fc4805acccb2.jpg?ug_____Dw7Ui_Dzr

ok, i dont even care that they are all white, i think the "children of the corn" meets "deadly zombies" look to the cover is far more frightening. this looks like the poster to a horror flick not the cover to a fashion mag.

they are not just white, they have a pasty, scary, dusty, chalk-white-with-creepy-smile look.

edit: i realize they cant actually be zombies, because zombies eat brains. and i dont think these twigs have eaten anything they didnt throw up later in MONTHS. http://sguforums.com/Smileys/TLVsmilies/vomit.gif

Wigglytuff
Feb 4th, 2010, 09:22 PM
Why does there HAVE to be diversity? If the people there think these are the up and coming actresses, that's their prerogative. I doubt they deliberately chose not to put a girl in their because she was black/asian/indian, so why force diversity just for the sake of it?

than you are insane or blind or both.

one word: Precious.

Gabby can out-act most of these girls IN HER SLEEP. and everyone knows it. even the vanity fair people knew it.

but even still i dont think thats first failing of this cover: the first failing is that it is so far removed from reality. most women do not, thank god look like that, they are not even the best up and comers that look like that, they are not the best up and comers period. that it ignores the reality that there are upcoming actresses that out act these light weights is part of its creepy nonreality.

shap_half
Feb 4th, 2010, 10:25 PM
than you are insane or blind or both.

one word: Precious.

Gabby can out-act most of these girls IN HER SLEEP. and everyone knows it. even the vanity fair people knew it.

but even still i dont think thats first failing of this cover: the first failing is that it is so far removed from reality. most women do not, thank god look like that, they are not even the best up and comers that look like that, they are not the best up and comers period. that it ignores the reality that there are upcoming actresses that out act these light weights is part of its creepy nonreality.

They are the best up-and-comer girls with potential bankability. And you make it seem like these girls are terrible actresses. The single oversight in this cover is Gabby who produced amazing work in Precious. But beyond that I can't really imagine one way or the other to remove on girl here over another.

young_gunner913
Feb 4th, 2010, 11:19 PM
Why does there HAVE to be diversity? If the people there think these are the up and coming actresses, that's their prerogative. I doubt they deliberately chose not to put a girl in their because she was black/asian/indian, so why force diversity just for the sake of it?

because to be quite frank its just another middle finger to minorities. it just projects the idea that white people are the only ones who will be on the covers of magazines and can be dubbed the next great generation while blacks, mexicans, and asians will always be there to be the sidekicks. very few of these girls are the next big thing, most of the girls on the cover have been around the buisness doing major projects for the past 5-6 years. traditional casting is one of the biggest problems in the acting world since more and more actors of different races are attempting to go into the acting world. and another big problem is that the reason that lots of young talented ethnic actors have the mind set of "why even try" since they're not white and they know how much harder it will be for them to break through. vanity fair's "all white, all right" cover doesnt help dispell ideas like that.

Slutati
Feb 4th, 2010, 11:33 PM
I only know the chick from Mean Girls and the one that's doing Marilyn Manson. :lol:

Wigglytuff
Feb 5th, 2010, 12:00 AM
They are the best up-and-comer girls with potential bankability. And you make it seem like these girls are terrible actresses. The single oversight in this cover is Gabby who produced amazing work in Precious. But beyond that I can't really imagine one way or the other to remove on girl here over another.

as others have stated many of the creepy alien looking things on the cover have been around for a while, they have had their chance, if you want look at REAL up and comers their might be 3 girls here worth including.

and not including Gabby is a MAJOR peoblem. she is THE up and comer right now. she is the break out star.

gabby can out act most of these girls in her sleep and she doesnt make the list? that makes this list BS.

creepy movie poster is all it is

woosey
Feb 5th, 2010, 12:11 AM
vanity fair does these types of covers all the time. they almost always have white girls on the cover - like other actors don't exist or won't break through.

i don't scour ever vanity fair cover, but i'm wonder whether halle, zoe, jennifer hudson, joy bryant, angela bassett, nia long were ever on similar covers they've done in the past. maybe zoe or joy was but the others i'm almost sure not.

rated_next
Feb 5th, 2010, 01:00 AM
that's a great list of young actresses

Anna Kendrick and Carey Mulligan are already nominated for Oscars
Rebecca Hall was in Vicky Cristina Barcelona and Frost/Nixon
Amanda S was huge in Mamma Mia and she's got a few movies coming out in 2010. Plus she's great on Big Love.
Abbie C should've been nominated for an Oscar this year for Bright Star
Mia W will be huge after Alice in Wonderland. She's was fantastic in In Treatment and in That Evening Sun.
Evan Rachel Wood has been in soooo many good movies, starting with Thirteen and ending with The Wrestler in 2009.
As much as I dislike Kirsten, she is huge now with Twilight and she was good in Into The Wild.
And Emma was in Zombieland and Superbad.

Alizé Molik
Feb 5th, 2010, 01:10 AM
than you are insane or blind or both.

one word: Precious.

Gabby can out-act most of these girls IN HER SLEEP. and everyone knows it. even the vanity fair people knew it.

but even still i dont think thats first failing of this cover: the first failing is that it is so far removed from reality. most women do not, thank god look like that, they are not even the best up and comers that look like that, they are not the best up and comers period. that it ignores the reality that there are upcoming actresses that out act these light weights is part of its creepy nonreality.

ok i totally agree that hollywood and mainsteam american fashion magazines don't give a shit about minorities but I think you're overstating Gabby's acting abilities. She as chosen for that role and suited it perfecty and I've seen that movie just yesterday and her performance is really powerful. However, I don't think she's going to be the next merryl streep. We have to wait and see what her next move will be, she may never take another role for many years!

also, I don't know why your expecting a magazine like Vanity Fair to be a realistic account of anything. It was started as a glorification of New York high society and hasn't ventured much further from utter rubbish ever since.

Wigglytuff
Feb 5th, 2010, 01:19 AM
ok i totally agree that hollywood and mainsteam american fashion magazines don't give a shit about minorities but I think you're overstating Gabby's acting abilities. She as chosen for that role and suited it perfecty .....

what is that supposed to me? gabby is really nothing like precious, but she is a great actress, i think you are taking from her, her talent.

but she is not the only one. there are many many many many many far more talented young actress than the zombie twigs featured in this issue.

miffedmax
Feb 5th, 2010, 01:28 AM
Yeah, and a lot of them are also zombie twigs.

Hollywood is about as opposite of a meritocracy as you can get.

juki
Feb 5th, 2010, 01:30 AM
I'm sorry, but KS's mouth reminds me of a cyberman from Dr Who.



Heh. Speaking of Dr. Who, Carey Mulligan starred in the best episode of Dr. Who ever, "blink". :worship:

miffedmax
Feb 5th, 2010, 01:42 AM
And I didn't even recognize her.

I pass the Geek Crown to you, at least temporarily. :bowdown:

shap_half
Feb 5th, 2010, 02:51 AM
because to be quite frank its just another middle finger to minorities. it just projects the idea that white people are the only ones who will be on the covers of magazines and can be dubbed the next great generation while blacks, mexicans, and asians will always be there to be the sidekicks. very few of these girls are the next big thing, most of the girls on the cover have been around the buisness doing major projects for the past 5-6 years. traditional casting is one of the biggest problems in the acting world since more and more actors of different races are attempting to go into the acting world. and another big problem is that the reason that lots of young talented ethnic actors have the mind set of "why even try" since they're not white and they know how much harder it will be for them to break through. vanity fair's "all white, all right" cover doesnt help dispell ideas like that.

but vanity fair has done this exact same issue with minorities on the cover.

shap_half
Feb 5th, 2010, 02:59 AM
what is that supposed to me? gabby is really nothing like precious, but she is a great actress, i think you are taking from her, her talent.

but she is not the only one. there are many many many many many far more talented young actress than the zombie twigs featured in this issue.

please name them? you make it seem like there's such a great injustice and that not one person on this cover deserves to be there.

both carey mulligan and anna kendrick are nominated for this year's oscar (and anna has been nominated for a tony, the second youngest ever). rebecca hall is also a great talent.

obviously gabby put up a great performance in precious but that's one role. many said the same thing about evan rachel wood in thirteen and scarlett johanson in lost in translation. and they've both been in middling movies and put up mediocre performances since. it's not always clear that you're going to go anywhere because of one performance. gabby did an extraordinary job in precious but who's to say what the future holds. yes, it's a great shame she didn't make the cover, but let's not make it seem like she's the second coming.

and what is this can out act someone in her sleep? based on her performance in precious? maybe we should wait until she produces more before you start throwing out exaggerations like that. i'm sure people were feeling similarly when they gave anna pacquin and adrian brody their oscars.

woosey
Feb 5th, 2010, 04:05 AM
Why does there HAVE to be diversity? If the people there think these are the up and coming actresses, that's their prerogative. I doubt they deliberately chose not to put a girl in their because she was black/asian/indian, so why force diversity just for the sake of it?

lol. you think they would actually not deliberately put someone in there who is not white?

they are saying there are not talented actors out there who are worth being on their cover or worth paying attention to.

unbelievable. i worked in print media and currently work in communications/marketing. the question of diversity always comes up. if you have images that are most universally white it is quite intentional. make no mistake.

woosey
Feb 5th, 2010, 04:08 AM
but vanity fair has done this exact same issue with minorities on the cover.

most "minorities" are not interested in being ghettoized with a "minority" cover.

most want to be mainstreamed and be accepted as a talent in their own right. they want roles that don't demand they be a certain color. in short, they want the same consideration as their white counterparts. they do not get that.

i've never seen a cover of vanity with like a dozen black women or a dozen asian women. they do these types of all white hollywood covers all the time. they far outnumber those in the reverse.

woosey
Feb 5th, 2010, 04:10 AM
They are the best up-and-comer girls with potential bankability. And you make it seem like these girls are terrible actresses. The single oversight in this cover is Gabby who produced amazing work in Precious. But beyond that I can't really imagine one way or the other to remove on girl here over another.

bankable?

if they are up and comers, it's hard to determine the extent to which they are bankable.

angelina jolie is bankable. sandra bullock is bankable.

these girls... time will truly tell.

young_gunner913
Feb 5th, 2010, 04:20 AM
but vanity fair has done this exact same issue with minorities on the cover.

when has vanity fair ever gotten a group of miniorty actresses together and dubbed them the "new wave" or "fresh faces" of hollywood?

woosey
Feb 5th, 2010, 04:24 AM
ok i totally agree that hollywood and mainsteam american fashion magazines don't give a shit about minorities but I think you're overstating Gabby's acting abilities. She as chosen for that role and suited it perfecty and I've seen that movie just yesterday and her performance is really powerful. However, I don't think she's going to be the next merryl streep. We have to wait and see what her next move will be, she may never take another role for many years!

also, I don't know why your expecting a magazine like Vanity Fair to be a realistic account of anything. It was started as a glorification of New York high society and hasn't ventured much further from utter rubbish ever since.

so are you saying that because she's dark, overweight and black that she doesn't have to stretch too far to "act" the character of precious out?

to me, you're saying it wasn't a stretch. but why?

do you assume every black girl like gabby necessarily comes from this type of background and so only needs to draw from their experience.

when julia roberts did pretty woman nobody said, the role as a prostitute "suited her perfectly."

frankly, there are lots of actors whose work has been relatively sparse since their awards/nominations -

hilary swank (people always complain she doesn't act much)
holly hunter
keyshia castle hughes
janet mcteer
they gave anna paquin a award when she was a damn girl.
marsha mason
rosie perez
mare winningham
minnie driver

people can be awarded for that piece of work, not a body of work. that's what the life time achieve honor is supposed to be about.

Sam L
Feb 5th, 2010, 12:13 PM
One thing magazines love to do is call dibs on who will be the new "It" celebrities in the year to come. Sometimes they pick stars whose careers are destined to take off, occasionally they make incredible calls with near-nobodies who later become A-listers, and usually the majority of their picks fade into oblivion. While we'd like to think celeb bible Vanity Fair puts a great deal of thought and planning into its annual "New Hollywood" issue, this year the editors really limited their scope when it came to choosing the next big stars. (Or perhaps they overemphasized the "Fair"? ) Every woman on its new cover is extremely thin and very, very white. Unless Vanity Fair considers one redhead to be diversity, we feel the need to cry foul.

The cover of the March issue features Abbie Cornish, Kristen Stewart, Carey Mulligan, Amanda Seyfried, Rebecca Hall, Mia Wasikowska, Emma Stone, Evan Rachel Wood, and Anna Kendrick. Many, if not all of these women have good reason to grace the Vanity Fair cover, and to be a part of what they have dubbed "the fresh faces of 2010." Evan Rachel Wood has garnered critical acclaim since her Golden Globe-nominated performance in 2003's "Thirteen" as well as loads of media attention from her highly publicized romance with rocker Marilyn Manson. Kristen Stewart was catapulted to fame by the mega-successful "Twilight" franchise and will star as Joan Jett in the upcoming film, "The Runaways," while Amanda Seyfried's career was put in motion after her role in 2008's "Mamma Mia!" But WAIT: Vanity Fair already had both Stewart and Seyfried on an August 2008 cover touting "Hollywood's New Wave." And this was also a white-girl-only cover. Were there no promising young actors of color who could have been featured in either issue?

Though it's true, Young Hollywood is predominantly Caucasian, we can think of a slew of non-white, non-rail thin actors who made a splash this year (Gabourey Sidibe from "Precious" anyone?). In the accompanying article, Vanity Fair writer Evgenia Peretz calls out the young cover stars by their best attributes: "downy-soft cheeks," "button nose," "patrician looks and celebrated pedigree," "dewy, wide-eyed loveliness," "Ivory-soap-girl features." Roles for black, Asian, and Latin actors are scarce in Hollywood, but surely Sidibe, Zoe Saldana of "Avatar" and "Star Trek," and Freida Pinto of "Slumdog Millionaire" are having their moment. Vanity Fair may have been looking for the most promising batch of talent for their issue, but they should have been looking for a diverse group of women as well.

We reached out to Vanity Fair for comment, but as of publishing time they did not respond.
To see the pics: http://shine.yahoo.com/channel/beauty/vanity-fairs-quot-new-hollywood-quot-issue-completely-lacks-diversity-578862/
________________

While I like some of the actresses who made the cover, I completely agree that Gabourey Sidibe, Zoe Saldana and Freida Pinto were greatly over looked. It would have been nice to see at least one girl who doesnt look like Children of the Corn on the cover but Vanity Fair doesnt agree. :o And besides, the movies that Gabs, Zoe and Freida were in alone nearly trounce all the movies of the girls who made the cover combined.


Yeah this whole thing was pathetic. Some deserves to be on there like Abbie Cornish and Carey Mulligan but there are some real questionable ones who could easily be replaced with likes of Zoe, Gabby and Freida.

But the fact is that the roles are scarce for non white people (male or female). That's the reality. Maybe when that fact changes then these covers will reflect that.

Sam L
Feb 5th, 2010, 12:18 PM
most want to be mainstreamed and be accepted as a talent in their own right. they want roles that don't demand they be a certain color. in short, they want the same consideration as their white counterparts. they do not get that.

That's the key issue here isn't it? Let's take an example here. Up in the Air featured three white characters played by George Clooney, Vera Farmiga and Anna Kendricks which could've been played by a person of any background. So why then that roles that could be played by people of any background aren't? When you see a black person or asian person on the screen, it's almost like they expect something in the script to make a comment about their race (that is, live up to a stereotype). Only then, they can land a role.

shap_half
Feb 5th, 2010, 12:21 PM
bankable?

if they are up and comers, it's hard to determine the extent to which they are bankable.

angelina jolie is bankable. sandra bullock is bankable.

these girls... time will truly tell.

that's why i said potential.

miffedmax
Feb 5th, 2010, 12:21 PM
so are you saying that because she's dark, overweight and black that she doesn't have to stretch too far to "act" the character of precious out?

to me, you're saying it wasn't a stretch. but why?

do you assume every black girl like gabby necessarily comes from this type of background and so only needs to draw from their experience.

when julia roberts did pretty woman nobody said, the role as a prostitute "suited her perfectly."

frankly, there are lots of actors whose work has been relatively sparse since their awards/nominations -

hilary swank (people always complain she doesn't act much)
holly hunter
keyshia castle hughes
janet mcteer
they gave anna paquin a award when she was a damn girl.
marsha mason
rosie perez
mare winningham
minnie driver

people can be awarded for that piece of work, not a body of work. that's what the life time achieve honor is supposed to be about.

Anna Paquin's been in a pretty decent number of movies, including all the X-men movies and recently got a Golden Globe for her portrayal of Sookie Stackhouse in [I]True Blood[I]. All our careers should be so sparse. (I'm actually a bigger fan of Rogue than I am Paquin, so I know this by osmosis).

And speaking as somebody who works in advertising/marketing, I think we tend to actually be MORE sensitive about inclusiveness because when we screw up and aren't reflective of diversity, it's dollars out the door for our clients. I really don't think anyone at VF decided to do an "All Skinny White Girls Cover." They probably picked a bunch of "safe" calls on who's going to have a decent career. Again, the cover is the symptom. Hollywood itself is the disease, as it's obvious there aren't enough good roles for black, Asian and Hispanic actresses for at least one or two of them to be a safe bet, too.

shap_half
Feb 5th, 2010, 12:28 PM
That's the key issue here isn't it? Let's take an example here. Up in the Air featured three white characters played by George Clooney, Vera Farmiga and Anna Kendricks which could've been played by a person of any background. So why then that roles that could be played by people of any background aren't? When you see a black person or asian person on the screen, it's almost like they expect something in the script to make a comment about their race (that is, live up to a stereotype). Only then, they can land a role.

Anna Kendrick's character was said to have been written for her by Jason Reitman. So there's that.

shap_half
Feb 5th, 2010, 12:29 PM
Anna Paquin's been in a pretty decent number of movies, including all the X-men movies and recently got a Golden Globe for her portrayal of Sookie Stackhouse in [I]True Blood[I]. All our careers should be so sparse. (I'm actually a bigger fan of Rogue than I am Paquin, so I know this by osmosis).

And speaking as somebody who works in advertising/marketing, I think we tend to actually be MORE sensitive about inclusiveness because when we screw up and aren't reflective of diversity, it's dollars out the door for our clients. I really don't think anyone at VF decided to do an "All Skinny White Girls Cover." They probably picked a bunch of "safe" calls on who's going to have a decent career. Again, the cover is the symptom. Hollywood itself is the disease, as it's obvious there aren't enough good roles for black, Asian and Hispanic actresses for at least one or two of them to be a safe bet, too.

Rogue has always been my favorite X-man. :)

mandy7
Feb 5th, 2010, 01:26 PM
Abbie Cornish => don't really know her at all.
Kristen Stewart => hate her in twilight.. but i get why she's on this cover
Carey Mulligan = good
Amanda Seyfried = Needy Lesnicky. Matt (thread starter) knows.
Rebecca Hall => did Vicky Christina Barcelona, loved it, so not gonna bash her.
Mia Wasikowska = Alice in wonderland, nuff said
Emma Stone => was in Superbad, therefor is awesome
Evan Rachel Wood = a whore, but not a bad actress
Anna Kendrick = good

so i don't mind the girls who are on there.
and even though there (according to some) should have been some other girls on there,
that's no reason to hate on these girls.

about Zoe Saldana, already had a cover 3 months back right? so, yeah, why put her on there again
about Gabourey Sidibe, i liked precious, i did, but she was not THAT good, she was good though.
but like someone mentioned before, i think it's her size, not her skincolour that's the reason she's not on this cover
and i think someone mentioned thandie newton, well, she's been around for ages, so wtf.

miffedmax
Feb 5th, 2010, 02:11 PM
Anna Kendrick's character was said to have been written for her by Jason Reitman. So there's that.

Parts are often written with a specific actor in mind, even if that actor ends up turning down the role.

I have a novelist friend who even "casts" his books with actors, even though so far not one of his books has been optioned, let alone made into a movie.

Ferg
Feb 5th, 2010, 02:14 PM
Why cant all directors be like Tarantino! :hearts:

miffedmax
Feb 5th, 2010, 02:26 PM
Because then who would he steal his ideas from? ;)

Nah, I love his stuff, too. And he always doe great casting.

LoveFifteen
Feb 5th, 2010, 03:25 PM
I need to see Precious.

HRHoliviasmith
Feb 5th, 2010, 03:28 PM
It's too bad there aren't more Asian actresses. It's sad.

off topic sorta but Lucy Liu is one of my favorite actresses EVER. I love her so much. :sobbing:

LoveFifteen
Feb 5th, 2010, 03:31 PM
http://i418.photobucket.com/albums/pp266/LoveFifteen1129/Vanityfairgirls.jpg

miffedmax
Feb 5th, 2010, 03:57 PM
:lol:

I've been drooling at Lena and Vee's legs too long, 'cause none of those girls have enough calf to be interesting. It's like a fuckin' tofu bar and I want some meat.


http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_lgrG2xMG3Gs/SKc_c-toC-I/AAAAAAAADKc/dPw-AlE9jLg/s1600/elena_dementieva_nice_backshot.jpg
There. That's better. :drool: :hearts:

Dodoboy.
Feb 5th, 2010, 04:42 PM
You know what!

If i was an Editor, i would get Precious girl, and bung her in front of my magazine ASAP! Ultimate checkmate, would be genius!

Golovinjured.
Feb 5th, 2010, 04:49 PM
So you'd only put Precious girl (I don't know her name) on the cover? How is THAT diversity?

Dodoboy.
Feb 5th, 2010, 05:02 PM
Good point, but with that cover i'd be simply focusing on the fact that she was omitted from their cover, and she is probably the one most deserving.

young_gunner913
Feb 5th, 2010, 05:03 PM
off topic sorta but Lucy Liu is one of my favorite actresses EVER. I love her so much. :sobbing:

meh, i like i zhang ziyi and gong li better. :p

Golovinjured.
Feb 5th, 2010, 05:08 PM
Lucy Liu is HOT.

miffedmax
Feb 5th, 2010, 06:06 PM
Zhang Ziyi is uber hot. She's so hot that I waived the minimum height requirement.

woosey
Feb 5th, 2010, 07:41 PM
that's why i said potential.


it's entirely possible that an asian or black actress could be bankable as well you know.

they selected white actresses for this. i guess they are the only ones who have the potential to be bankable.

Ferg
Feb 5th, 2010, 07:45 PM
it's entirely possible that an asian or black actress could be bankable as well you know.

they selected white actresses for this.

Indeed. :shrug: Will Smith was recognised as the most bankable actor of the past few years.

miffedmax
Feb 5th, 2010, 08:05 PM
Indeed. :shrug: Will Smith was recognised as the most bankable actor of the past few years.

Well, that's a topic for a whole other thread. As in none of these women can expect to have their bankability last a fraction as long as MR. Smith.

shap_half
Feb 5th, 2010, 08:10 PM
it's entirely possible that an asian or black actress could be bankable as well you know.

they selected white actresses for this. i guess they are the only ones who have the potential to be bankable.

Well then please name other actresses who should be on the cover. It is entirely possible for any young actress to be be bankable, but these are some of the ones with the most promise. I've mentioned time and again that Gabby should have made the list, but hers is the only oversight I'm willing to acknowledge. Zoe Saldana made the SEPTEMBER cover. Who else should be in it?

Ferg
Feb 5th, 2010, 08:24 PM
Well, that's a topic for a whole other thread. As in none of these women can expect to have their bankability last a fraction as long as MR. Smith.

True, true, I meant it merely as an example though rather then suggesting one of these ladies could do it!

woosey
Feb 5th, 2010, 09:06 PM
Well then please name other actresses who should be on the cover. It is entirely possible for any young actress to be be bankable, but these are some of the ones with the most promise. I've mentioned time and again that Gabby should have made the list, but hers is the only oversight I'm willing to acknowledge. Zoe Saldana made the SEPTEMBER cover. Who else should be in it?

the only one i can think of off the top of my head would be Anika Noni Rose - who was in dreamgirls and did the voice for princess and the frog (both movies made good money btw - that's bankability. lol)

but honestly, i don't know because i don't follow this. and that's the point. the issue should be putting people out there who are talented and who may be going places, regardless of color. the purpose is to tell people like me who i should be on the look out for. this list is telling me that the only people i should think of as being worth paying attention to are pale white girls - who by the way - i'm supposed to also regard as beautiful.

the problem with what you're saying is that you fall for the premise hook, line and sinker. you buy into the idea that these are the most promising actresses. why do you believe that? i mean really. do you think this is some scientific list they develop? it isn't.

i'll bet you anything that the majority of these girls are repped by either icm, caa, or williams morris. how do you know that someone at vanity fair didn't have lunch with a few agents at these places and say, 'what actresses do you think are potentially bankable?'

the folks at vanity fair obviously operate in a narrow and closed box. it's their prerogative. but that doesn't mean everyone else needs to accept the shit they shovel.

shap_half
Feb 6th, 2010, 12:07 AM
the only one i can think of off the top of my head would be Anika Noni Rose - who was in dreamgirls and did the voice for princess and the frog (both movies made good money btw - that's bankability. lol)

but honestly, i don't know because i don't follow this. and that's the point. the issue should be putting people out there who are talented and who may be going places, regardless of color. the purpose is to tell people like me who i should be on the look out for. this list is telling me that the only people i should think of as being worth paying attention to are pale white girls - who by the way - i'm supposed to also regard as beautiful.

the problem with what you're saying is that you fall for the premise hook, line and sinker. you buy into the idea that these are the most promising actresses. why do you believe that? i mean really. do you think this is some scientific list they develop? it isn't.

i'll bet you anything that the majority of these girls are repped by either icm, caa, or williams morris. how do you know that someone at vanity fair didn't have lunch with a few agents at these places and say, 'what actresses do you think are potentially bankable?'

the folks at vanity fair obviously operate in a narrow and closed box. it's their prerogative. but that doesn't mean everyone else needs to accept the shit they shovel.

no they obviously don't. vf has had many minorities on the cover of their magazine including zoe saldana in their biggest issue of the year in 2009 (zoe has also been on the cover of this very same issue a couple of years ago). and just because gabby didn't make the cover doesn't mean there's anything going on behind the scenes.

anika noni rose (who did a good job in dreamgirls -- really second only to eddie murphy in combining great singing with great acting, but this was years ago.) did voice for a cartoon. while that movie made great money, you can't actually determine her future in hollywood where only her voice was showcased.

and i'm not buying into anything. i've been following the movie industry for a while, and while it's a great disappointment not to see gabby on the cover, i'm not going to accuse a magazine doing something racially motivated. and i used to work for a magazine in the same building as vanity fair and know people who work there. they don't operate in a narrow and closed box

miffedmax
Feb 6th, 2010, 01:27 AM
the only one i can think of off the top of my head would be Anika Noni Rose - who was in dreamgirls and did the voice for princess and the frog (both movies made good money btw - that's bankability. lol)

but honestly, i don't know because i don't follow this. and that's the point. the issue should be putting people out there who are talented and who may be going places, regardless of color. the purpose is to tell people like me who i should be on the look out for. this list is telling me that the only people i should think of as being worth paying attention to are pale white girls - who by the way - i'm supposed to also regard as beautiful.

the problem with what you're saying is that you fall for the premise hook, line and sinker. you buy into the idea that these are the most promising actresses. why do you believe that? i mean really. do you think this is some scientific list they develop? it isn't.

i'll bet you anything that the majority of these girls are repped by either icm, caa, or williams morris. how do you know that someone at vanity fair didn't have lunch with a few agents at these places and say, 'what actresses do you think are potentially bankable?'

the folks at vanity fair obviously operate in a narrow and closed box. it's their prerogative. but that doesn't mean everyone else needs to accept the shit they shovel.

There's actually a hugely high chance that's exactly what happened, and a damn good chance that, for example, Rose's agent is still deaf in one ear from being screamed at

delicatecutter
Feb 6th, 2010, 08:40 AM
I think they should have included Serena on the cover! She was amaze as a basketball player or whatever she was on Law and Order SVU!