Fug or Fab the Cover: Olivia Wilde on InStyle


fug-or-fab

So, InStyle continues its tradition of making celebrities look like the most calm and/or sanitized and/or Upper East Side version of themselves.

See? It’s a bit stiff and spit-shined, the way they seem to like it over there, but: Whereas a lot of InStyle covers do that in an extremely chilly way, this one exudes warmth. I actually think her hair looks fantastic — really shiny and thick. And her makeup is good, and while the jacket isn’t necessarily what I think of when I imagine Olivia Wilde’s personal style, it’s rather Blair Waldorf in a way that appeals to me. Everyone should have an inner Blair Waldorf, as long as we’re not talking about the cranium-devouring-headband part.

The other thing that made me appreciate this cover: When I was Googling it, I turned up an August 2011 Marie Claire cover she did — so, exactly two years ago — and it is glossy hellfire:

She looks like Drunk Jessica Biel — no, actually, she looks like Drunk Jessica Feel, who is the porn star knockoff of Jessica Biel, and stars in movies alongside a guy named Justin Limbersnake. So basically, if you were on the fence about liking this month’s InStyle cover, perhaps this old nightmare will heave you over onto the positive side, because look what it COULD have been.

react:
Leave a reply

Comments (45):

  1. lali
    +41

    Jessica Feel and Justin Limbersnake! My day is complete.

    As for the InStlye cover, I give it a Fab. Not only is she NOT wearing granny panties, she actually looks like herself.

    • HelenBackAgain
      +7

      Jessica Feel and Justin Limbersnake! My day is complete.

      Ditto. I’ll have to find some excuse to work that into conversation…

    • Cas
      +2

      I snorted at that. and drunk Jessica Biel

    • chepi
      0

      Many younger women are looking to date older guys, mainly because older guys are relatively more successful in career and understand better how to treat their women. Many couples of them work out fine and get along splendidly.. .—–seekwealthymen.Com—–.is a focused community for older successful men dating younger sexy women. If you are ready for a new adventure, give them a try
      szt4e

  2. Dizee
    +5

    She is so freakin’ gorgeous! But there is no way the top half of Olivia and the bottom half of Olivia are the same photo. That elbow on the knee looks… unnatural.

    • Meggiemoo
      +5

      Top and bottom are definitely not from the same photo. The angle of her torso to her lower half is really off.

  3. KitS
    +14

    My vote is: she looks good but are the editors of glossies SO desensitized to excessive Photoshopping that they don’t realize their cover models look completely unnatural? I think it’s the way her upper body meets her lower body. There are body parts (lower back? back of butt?) missing or something.

    •  amys
      +5

      Yes, it’s as if everything behind her right arm was erased. So stupid.

  4. Rachael
    +6

    It’s fine. She looks pretty. But it’s kind of — if Olivia Wilde were the trendiest one in her group of suburban moms, isn’t it? That’s NOT meant to be insult. It seems like a a very buttoned-up version of her, and not very much her style. I’m not crazy about it. Her hair does look fabulous, though.

    • Ericajeanine
      +1

      Yeah, I’m feeling like Olivia would have on a leather jacket with her jeans and not this plaid one.

  5. Goldfish
    +5

    First, you will not convince me that the earlier cover was not a drunk Jessica Biel.

    But the current one, I can’t give it a Fab. It’s that top. I am certain I saw the Butterick pattern for that same top in my mom’s sewing stuff when I was in grammar school, and I remember thinking, “Please, let that not be my Christmas present this year.”

    I do think that this cover portrays enough “I’m a real person,” mixed with a sufficient amount of, “I’m on a magazine cover, so, let’s not be disingenuous, stars are NOT just like us.” And that’s the mix I love in my celebs. I call it the Bullock Effect. The platonic ideal of a regular person we would probably like (whew. Friday).

    So, not a fab…but I will go with well-played, or well done. But I think it’s cruel that Jessica wasn’t the one who got to comment on the belt-bracelet. (brelt? beltlette?)

  6. Kate
    +5

    Still a lot of exclamation points. I don’t think that “278 pages” really warrants an !

  7. Kris
    0

    I saw this magazine on my coworker’s desk, and I could NOT place who it was… even after reading the whole cover. Suddenly, I was like, “OH, Olivia Wilde…” That being said, it’s 8 bajillion times better than the previous one of her! Holy mother! She should have sued them for that!!!

  8. Maria L.
    +7

    Wow. Those two covers make it hard to believe they are the same person. She is on my Irrationally Annoys Me list, I don’t quite know why. But I think she looks fine on her new cover, though its pretty meh as a cover goes.

    • HelenBackAgain
      +1

      She Irrationally Annoys Me, too. I don’t know why either. I don’t hate her acting, and as far as I know, she’s a perfectly nice person. But there it is anyway.

      And yeah, I’ll also go with “meh” for the cover as a whole.

      • Claire1
        +4

        I follow her on twitter….only because the hubs said “You have to follow Olivia Wilde and Rebecca Mader they crack me up”… so I did. They are very funny/real women, remind me of my real life girlfriends.

        • HelenBackAgain
          0

          Great, now I feel guilty, too! ;-)

          • Claire1
            +3

            I mean… I think she’s pretty forgettable as an actress…I’m always having to say “What was she in, again?” Granted, she’s a really pretty young woman, so the hubs can rattle off what movies we’ve seen her in….
            But her tweets are all over the place in a very real kind of way….and often goofy…sometimes thoughtful…and I like that she is happy with her job and proud of her work.
            Recently:

            “I get so damn flustered at the drive-through window, as if once the goods are handed over I have to peel out quick before the cops get me.”

            “Corporations may claim advertising doesn’t have negative effects on children but I grew up thinking my cereal was speaking to me so..”

            • Amberoni13
              +1

              I just call her 13, because otherwise I would seriously mix her up with Biel and a bunch of other forgettable actresses.

        •  Miriam
          +4

          I love that she called out Ann Coulter on Twitter. Ballsy!

  9. Goldfish
    +1

    Ha! But I will give “Cool, it’s a belt!” a pass, because it sounds sarcastic without one.

  10. Meggiemoo
    +25

    What new way could there be to wear jeans? Backwards? On your arms as sleeves? As a scarf?

    • Kate
      +13

      This sounds like a challenge Miley Cyrus/Rihanna would gladly take you up on.

    • Claire1
      +2

      That could SO be the Fug Girl’s next challenge!
      “How to wear jeans in a new way”
      GO!

  11. Brenna
    +8

    I realize I’m 12, but Justin Limbersnake is making me laugh like a loon.

  12. Reg
    +3

    I actually think on Marie Claire she looks like photoshopped to look younger JLo in all Jlo’ness.
    I really like the Instyle cover, but agree with others that something is veryyyy off abt the lower half of the body. As if they used a manequin for legs and behind.
    The face and the hair are perfection though. I want them!

  13. HelenBackAgain
    0

    At least on the InStyle cover, she’s recognizable as herself.

    Herself ten years ago, mind… why exactly do they need to “youth up” someone who isn’t even thirty yet?

    Also, is one of the New Ways To Wear Jeans being that they are actually spray-paint? If those are in fact real fabric pants, they’ve got to be killing her – and there’s nothing new about wearing jeans far, far too tight.

  14. Donna
    0

    On first glance, I thought this was a Tina Fey cover. Also, the other one: totally Nyquil Jessica Feel. Mouth agape, eyelids that feel like concrete, can’t wait to hit the pillow.

    • jenlwb
      +1

      My first thought was- that’s how Liz Lemon would look if they dressed up her work wardrobe!

      But seriously, 13 looks great there.

  15. fashion don't
    0

    The In Style photo is doing her no favors at all. I totally expected a full out fug of this one.

  16. fashion don't
    +4

    And maybe it’s the fact that it’s nine million degrees out and I just can’t with the boucle cardigan, super tight jeans andthe hair in the face. Try again in October maybe???

    • Katharine
      0

      It’s winter here! so Olivia Wilde! doesn’t look so out of place sartorially (but take point for Northern hemisphere!). What does look strange is the clamped legs, as if she urgently needs a bathroom, but is smiling tentatively and concentrating on holding on. Or maybe it’s a yoga! pose?

      Those exclamation points are dopey!

  17. Elizabeth
    +10

    “New ways to wear jeans”? Has “on your legs” become passe, or something? I am confused.

  18. Tiffany
    +3

    I actually like this cover a lot (for being a cover, mind you).
    She looks happy and she isn’t glaring at me.
    Her hair looks amazing and I think it adds some depth to the photo the way it swooshes over her hand.
    She is actually sitting on something, they aren’t making her float on air.
    I think her make up looks great and her face hasn’t been photoshopped beyond recognition.

  19. Sajorina
    +2

    I love the InStyle cover (which I accidentally typed as “InnStyle” and thought it would be awesome if Olivia Wilde was on the cover of a magazine that features the world’s best Bed & Breakfasts)! I think she looks beautiful and the styling is refreshing! My only quibbles are that she’s not wearing earrings and that the “what to wear now!” bubble is next to her face and not on the right bottom of the page over her legs, where it should be! But I covet what she’s wearing! FAB!

    The woman in the Marie Claire cover does not look like my dear Olivia at all! FAIL! By the way, the knockoff porn stars’ names are GENIUS!

  20. Feendog
    +1

    Thought the first cover was Giada de Laurentiis. Second one was definitely Jessica Biel.

  21. Berry
    +3

    Surely those two covers don’t feature the same person? And surely neither of those people is actually Olivia Wilde? My tiny mind is boggling so hard.

    Love Limbersnake though.

  22.  Vandalfan
    +2

    Oh!!! The exclamation points!!! How else can one possibly convey enthusiasm!!!?

    Also, who are the two ladies on the covers, and why are we discussing Olivia?

  23. TonyG
    +2

    In that first cover, which is meh, she looks as if she could be Jane Seymour’s daughter.

    In that second cover, also meh, she looks as if she could be Paulina Porizkova’s daughter.

  24. Kerina Pharr
    +2

    I’m not sure the positioning of her buttocks/legs is ACTUALLY physically possible. This reminds me of all the buzz in the news a few months ago when people started pointing out how female superheroes were expertly drawn in poses to reveal both butt AND boobs at the same time.

  25. Trina
    0

    I seriously thought this was Amber Heard when I first got this in the mail. Then I looked at it again and was shocked that it wasn’t Amber Heard.

  26. Tessa
    0

    Unh… what is it with magazines turning people into weird abstract paintings with photoshop. Stop it!

    Olivia’s face does look like her in the InStyle picture, but the rest is a mess. The odd bent pose and fake shadows; also – her arms and legs are almost fully visible, yet they cut off her hands and feet.