Fug or Fab the Cover: Carey Mulligan on Vogue


When Carey was cast as Daisy in The Great Gatsby, it seemed perfect. There is something about her that really lends itself to this role, at least conceptually (we’ll see when it comes out), and the 1920s garb seemed like a great match to her cherubic face. Which is why, for me, this Vogue cover is a discordant disappointment. And further, does it strike anyone else as unimaginative — basically, a glorified poster for the movie? We’re going to see PLENTY of Carey Mulligan in period costume when the movie comes out; wouldn’t it be cool to see her another way, especially if you don’t know much about her? Or even to see Carey Mulligan, period, and not Daisy Buchanan? I understand it as a publicity push, I guess — that movie is the big thing that’s going on with her right now — but I’m not sure I concur with it from an editorial/art direction point of view. Zzz, basically.

Let us discuss — and also, pat yourself on the back if you predicted this in our Vogue Cover Predictions post. Jessica got it right. I will buy her a cocktail for you.

[Photos: Vogue]

react:
Leave a reply

Comments (69):

  1. CakesOnAPlane
    +7

    after seeing how soft and ethereal she was on that gorgeous harper’s cover (http://wpc.4d27.edgecastcdn.net/004D27/2013/Editorials/CareyMulliganHarpersBazaarUKJune2013Prada/Carey+Mulligan+Harpers+Bazaar+UK+June+2013+Prada+1.jpg) this is such a letdown. Her face is too good to be covered in that slap.

  2.  theotherjennifer
    +1

    what did they do to her face??

  3. Christa
    +1

    I think if you are going to go that harsh with the make-up you should take it in the opposite direction and go dark and punk. That would have been a cool contrast to the Daisy look. Here she looks like Daisy in Oz.

  4. sophie
    +5

    I am not a fan of the Vogue -”in character”-shootings… Didn’t like the Michelle Williams one as Marylin Monroe either. They don’t work outside the movie, I think.

    • Annie E
      +4

      Right. And everyone who is considering picking up a copy of Vogue is not going to be convinced to buy the magazine because Michelle Williams or Carey Mulligan is in character on the cover. It’s a really boring way to do a cover, I think.

  5. goldfish
    +4

    I confess, I adore that cover. The green is striking but draws the eye to her face, which is flawless. The cap, hat, whatever tones her down, also. But mainly the green dress, I heart it. That’s Baz Lurhman — cartoon colors, which the trailers have also shown. So I’m sure this was a tie-in.

    • ErinE
      +4

      I agree. I heart Baz Lurhman, although I get that his style doesn’t appeal to everyone. I am dying to see the movie and think Carey looks gorgeous and perfect for Daisy.

  6. greatwhitenorthchick
    +1

    The glow-in-the-dark colour of the cover dress just strikes a false note. I guess it’s very Baz, though. Doesn’t make me want to see the movie.

  7. anna s.
    +9

    I fault the chartreuse and the makeup. The cover is discordant and disappointing because all of the colors are working against her delicate bone structure, and as a result she looks like she’s playing dress-up in someone else’s 1920′s styling.

  8. girlygirl
    +3

    i had the same reaction. poor girl may be tired or something, but she looks distant, unfocused, checked out…amazing clothes and jewelry though.

  9. zaf
    +5

    I swear that staircase was in Auntie Mame…

  10. Emma
    +3

    Her hair looks green.

    • anna s.
      +4

      Blame Photoshop. I suspect that the layer designed to make the dress’s green color pop also gives her chlorine-hair because they applied it to the whole photo instead of doing a quick selective matte so that it only applied to the dress.

  11. Mjx
    +9

    That green is a serious slap across the eyes. It’s also a colour that almost never looks good unless you have a very deep, rich skin tone, and, as it does most people with lighter skin, makes her look kind of like she’s been boiled with kale and parsnips for several hours, which is a hell of a shame.

  12. jai
    +2

    Yew. Chlorine Pool Hair is fashion now?

  13. Miranda
    +7

    Add some flowers to her cap and it explains the chlorine hair: This is actually her promoting the Esther Williams biopic.

  14. Jenny
    +1

    so disappointing when you think of all it *could* have been. and can we talk about the photoshopping of her left, upper arm? terrible.

  15. Stefanie
    +3

    The fancy swim cap is mashing the top of her head down so much her face looks out of proportion. I completely agree with everyone about the green as well. She’s looking sickly. Carey is way prettier than this cover.

    Has anyone seen the Tiffany Gatsby Inspired collection? SWOON. Jewels. I love jewels.

    • Karen G
      0

      Yes, I LOVE the Tiffany Gatsby collection!

      I liked the cover actually. The third picture though looks more like Juliette Lewis to me than Carey Mulligan.

  16. Stefanie
    +3

    And that second photo? Very cool shot but I would have never EVER guessed it was Carey. Even in the high def original it looks nothing like her.

  17. Karen
    +3

    Don’t like the cover; it’s garish. Saw a preview for the movie and it looks pretty garish, so clearly we’ve got a theme going here. And since “garish” is pretty much the last word you would use to describe the book (which is a masterpiece), this does not bode well for the quality of the movie.

    Like the last photo, though.

    • Tiffany
      +2

      I feel like the garish aspect plays well into the books themes about the upper class and “new” and “old” money. Gastby was written as ostentatious, because he was new money. Bright and shiny on the outside, hollow on the inside. I feel like this is actually the perfect book for a Baz film.

  18. Deborah
    0

    Ugh, chartreuse is never a forgiving shade at the best of times. The dress has shaded her entire face and hair in I-Have-The-Stomach-Flu green.

  19. Helen
    +5

    The whole thing looks like a black-and-white that’s been badly colorized.

  20. Katty McNiley Ripley
    +6

    HATE IT with all the forces in my body!
    In the cover she looks more like Jack Lemmon in drag in Someone Like It Hot…

    Why Wintour, why?

  21. Sandra
    +4

    I covet the dress in the third photo, even though I am not tiny like Carey and would probably look like a be-dazzled Heffalump in it.

    And now, just for giggles, would somebody with some graphics skills please photoshop Cary Elwes’ face on to these pictures? I know it was way last week, but that still brings a smile to m face.

  22. tigers4us
    0

    There are going to be some comparisons with Mia Farrow, whose look made her the epitome of Daisy (IMHO). I agree that Vogue went too heavy on the makeup, but the costumes and jewelry look fantastic, as were the costumes and jewelry from the 1974 movie.

  23. Tess 
    0

    I realize “soundtrack” can be written as 1 or 2 words, but I find “sound track” so jarring! And her dress seems too big.

    • G
      +3

      Too big through the chest and oddly off-center so it makes her chest look peculiar. But too small around the waist. Crossways wrinkles are always a bad sign.

      Can’t Vogue afford a decent tailor to fit the dress to the model?

      That’s more of a crime for a magazine trying to sell clothes than their questionable style choices.

  24. themis
    +7

    She looks apologetic. Like she could feel, in her bones, this would not be a good idea.

  25. Alyjack
    +8

    What irritates me is that that dress isn’t even a 20′s silhouette – it’s a 1940′s shape. If they are gonna do the period getup, at least get something that looks like the correct period.

  26. TonyG
    0

    I like the photos because they capture different emotions. I think the really bright green on the cover is a great counter-point to a slightly sad face on the cover — it’s like she’s smiling through some pain there, which to me, is interesting. It’s as if there’s some kind of dramatic tension going on there between her facial expression and the brightness of everything else on the cover. I think that the cover works for that reason. The inside photos show different sides, I presume, to her character. The stoic, portrait, and the unmitigated glee of the last picture are great contrasts. So, I say well done!

  27. MP
    0

    I’m glad to see I’m not the only one who would have liked it if it wasn’t for the cap and weirdly colored hair…

  28. Charlotte
    +1

    That dress is great. I love the color, though maybe not on her. But everything going on above the neck is a hot mess, and judging by her facial expression, Mulligan knows it. She would have looked so much better with minimal eye makeup. And the less said about that wannabe turban, the better. Somewhere Joan Collins is chortling to herself.

  29. googler
    0

    When I saw this cover, the first thing that struck me was how matronly she looks. The makeup aged her about 20 years. That’s all on the stylists, because she’s about as fresh-faced as you can get. This is Carey Mulligan, folks, there’s so much material to work with! And this is Vogue, they really could do so much better!

  30. susannestyle
    +4

    nothing against Carey, but I wish Michelle Williams had been cast as Daisy. seems to me she would be perfect in that role!

    • googler
      0

      Interesting. I always pictured Daisy as a young Liz Taylor type.

      • Tiffany
        0

        I feel like Liz Taylor seemed too strong and independent to be a good Daisy.

        • googler
          0

          That’s true, but she also had the dark beauty, irresistible to the opposite sex, ok with affairs and love of bling $$$$$$$$$$ that I associate with Daisy.

    • Helen
      +5

      I just don’t think the film should have been remade at all.

      • mary lou bethune
        0

        The previews make me have a nervous breakdown. Just too much. But the good actors could rescue it. Carey is a great actress so it may be fine. Mia Farrow had the fragility and the haunted beauty.

        • Esme
          0

          Maybe, but she was HORRIBLE as Daisy–that ’74 flick was such a dog.

  31. Dee
    +1
  32. Tiffany
    0

    To me, I think her lips are just too dark of a red. It kind of looks like she is a kid playing in her mom’s make up.

  33. kindakute
    +8

    I can’t believe I am saying this but I am so over Vogue. (reader since the 80′s) They have become dated and predictable. This cover is a ridiculous mess almost if not worse then Hathaways oozing face melt. I would give anything to have models, actually models on the cover of magazines once again. Seeing tired, over exposed celebrities on the cover of EVERY SINGLE EFFING magazine cover MUST STOP!!! I’m BEGGING!!!! Bring me some fresh new faces or Karli, Coco and or any other gorgeous model ANY DAY!!! Unfortunately I don’t see this happening soon.

  34. Jules
    0

    That hat looks like it was made using a cheap bin liner.

  35. Claire1http://gofugy
    +1

    It looks like my kiddo colored over a picture with her markers.
    :(
    I’m sure it’s “artistic” but not in a way that makes me want to shop which is what I want from a fashion rag.

  36. Jo
    +1

    Weirdly photoshopped cover makes her look exceptionally thin(she’s small not emaciated). Wish their was another aesthetic for women other than thin and/or hungover for magazine covers. *sigh*

  37. Katharine
    +3

    I love chartreuse, but man, everything piled onto this tiny girl in the cover shot is totally wearing her. And I agree with Anna S. about the indiscreet use of Photoshop filters greening everything. I also agree with Alyjack in an indignant “Twenties WHAT?”

    More, her mouth looks tight and she looks cranky. Not that it matters, because with all the super-saturated dress and pounds of pseudo-period Statement Jewellery, you only see her face on the third or fourth eye-pass over the cover anyhow.

  38. Holly Hamilton
    +4

    Her head looks moldy and/or covered in seaweed. Not my favorite look personally.

  39. Guerra
    +2

    Sad little girl playing dress up is all I can see

  40.  jay
    +3

    when I first saw this, I actually flinched involuntarily because it looks like someone poked her in the eyeballs, three-stooges-style, right before they took the picture.

  41. Sajorina
    +2

    I love the furniture & jewelry on the cover, but I don’t like the dress, the thing on her hair & the makeup! So, it doesn’t work for me as a whole! I love the 2nd picture, but if you hadn’t told me it was Carey, I would’ve guessed it was Michelle Williams! The 3rd picture is LOVELY… I adore the dress, the furniture, the styling & that smile!

  42. ChristieLea
    +1

    If the first picture is from The Morning After, then the third is clearly from The Night Before, right when the bootleggers showed up with the latest shipment. It’s joyful. I love it.

  43. amanda
    +2

    I just want to go on record as saying I think she is HORRIBLY cast as Daisy. She’s way too young and naive looking. Daisy, in my opinion, is obviously very beautiful, but needs to have something sort of tragic and jaded about her. I will totally see this movie, but I’m prepared for it to be a complete disaster, mostly because of what I think will be a mis-match between Carey and Leo. Oh, and this cover is weird.

    • Esme
      0

      I agree with you; I love Carey as an actress, but she is WRONG for this role. Seems too juvenile.

  44. ANNNNNNNNNNNAAAAAAAA
    +2

    I really hate this color green on blondes and I wish it would go the hell away, already. Also, is she CRYING?

  45. 'Mela
    +2

    Like a child playing dress up.

    Vogue’s race is run.

  46. Aria
    0

    I like it from the neck down- i.e., the dress, necklace, bracelet-rings. I think the earrings are unncessary and distracting, the make-up is too heavy, and HATE the swimcap with the little curls poking out. The other two pics are just “meh” to me.

  47. Wanda
    0

    Aw, this was an incredibly nice post. Spending
    some time and actual effort to create a very good article… but what
    can I say… I hesitate a whole lot and don’t manage to get nearly anything done.

    Here is my site; tree service in Richmond

  48. Petra
    0

    Its not my first time to go to see this web page, i am
    visiting this web page dailly and obtain good data from here everyday.

    My web page Thyromine review

  49. testington
    +1

    I never think she photographs that well, she is so cute on screen but in pictures she always looks kind of sullen and blah.

  50. bekabot
    0

    She looks like Myrtle Wilson, not Daisy Buchanan. A Myrtle Wilson who’s been on a hard, strenuous, successful diet; a Myrtle Wilson who has partially succeeded in her quest to look like her rival Daisy. But Myrtle Wilson nonetheless.