Just a heads up, ladies – Missing picture!
Where’s the pic??
Fixed! Stupid button didn’t get checked.
Oh my. Her face on the cover looks like a melting Dali painting.
Exactly. My first thought was fun-house mirror. They widened it beyond recognition, then drooped the features starting with her eyes. HORRIBLE (pronounced the french way. with no “H” sound).
I think Anne’s eyes are just like that for real. She is beautiful all the same.
This whole editorial was embarrassing. The other photos in the shoot make her look like Liza Minnelli, in both appearance and attitude. And there’s nothing wrong with Liza, obviously, but she’s not exactly the go-to muse of choice for women who, you know, AREN’T kooky sexagenarians.
Per the Golden Globe – if we’re talking showy death scenes in Les Miz, Eponine’s is the tearjerker. (At least it was when I saw it in DC previews with Frances Ruffelle). Maybe there’s a dark horse who ate more like a normal person…
Yes, but the Globes will never give it to someone who isn’t already a celeb, is the thing. If Lea Michele had gotten that part, we’d have a horse race
Also, Fantine’s is still pretty sad — the whole “take my child” aspect of it.
Although I WILL say that for TV the Globes are the captains of nominating (and then sometimes giving it to) actresses who are first-timers, like Keri Russell and Jennifer Garner. But for the movies, I think Samantha Barks would have to be REALLY REALLY REALLY REALLY REALLY unbelievable to eclipse Hathaway.
Oh, not doubting the sadness. Just pointing out Fantine’s death isn’t the only major one. You spend more time with Eponine (at least in the show as it runs), and while “I Dreamed a Dream” is really powerful, but “A Little Fall of Rain” is such a tearjerker.
But as Samantha Barks did not go on the “two oatmeal paste squares a day diet”, I would say Hathaway most likely has it in the bag.
I wouldn’t doubt Samantha Barks. Supposedly she has been slaying them in this role on stage and in front of producers. I don’t know a lot about the musical itself, but I have read an awful lot about what a powerhouse Samantha Barks is in this role.
Neither of us are saying Barks isn’t going to be amazing. But the Globes LOVE awarding big name celebs. They really can not resist it, ESPECIALLY if said celeb really agitates for the part. THAT is what Barks would be up against, not the performances. I hope she’s amazing and I think it is obviously a show-y part. It’s that the HFPA is really going to want to starf*ck Anne.
Jennifer Louise from St. Louis Hudson has an Oscar FOR ACTING, so whatever Anne wins she won’t be the worst actress ever to have won it.
I love the “BE MERRY!” right by Anne’s picture, since merriment is absolute last thing I think of when looking at that cover. Also, knowing Vogue, there is only one tasteful gift for $10, and the rest are at least $350.
Hilarious observations. I rarely buy fashion magazines, because I know the one piece of clothing in the entire magazine I have my heart set on will be $3500.
Jesus. That is one nasty cover photo. She looks like she’s been drugged, and is about to start drooling. Or like she’s the village idiot, who’s been dressed up and is about to start drooling.
She’s got such a gorgeous face so that cover is just an atrocity. They made it look like her eyes are melting off of her face.
I like her facial expression on the cover. It makes me think lady with class instead of spoilt aristocrat. But each their own.
For reasons I can’t quite put my finger on, I have never been a fan of Ms. Hathaway. I think the cover picture is just about how I picture her – sneering, condescending, etc.
Gotta admit I have the same reaction. She’s pretty and she can act, but she always comes off as smug (on screen) and I end up rooting for Meryl Streep or the Parkinson’s, etc. So I guess I get that “ugh, the smugness!” vibe from her crazy magician pics, too.
I’ve loathed her since day one for the exact reasons you list. She’s the most self-conscious, self-congratulatory actress out there now. Her acting skills are on par with a high school drama department queen. And this idea that she’s such a great beauty and fashion icon is ludicrous.
Anne Hathaway is kind of a mystery to me. Sometimes she is so beautiful and sometimes she is just so terribly blah. This is definitely one of those blah times.
I know that we, as normal people, don’t always look super fabulous, and the fact that Anne doesn’t always look fab sort of makes her seem sort of normal, which kind of makes me love her even more. But this is a Vogue cover that we are talking about. There are stylists and makeup people and professional photographers and editors whose job is to make people look beautiful and alluring. This is a failure on so many levels.
Melting Dali painting is spot on!
What do they mean by “secret marriage”? We all saw pics of her wedding, even right here.
And “groundbreaking” cast of Les Mis? Anne Hathaway, Hugh Jackman, Russell Crowe, Amanda Seyfried, Eddie Redmayne and Sacha Baron Cohen.
You just keep telling yourself, Vogue.
They meant the fact that she didn’t tell the press when it was happening — in this case, telling the interviewer they were doing it next year, and then getting hitched three days later.
There’s something very strange going n with her upper lip. She’s so pretty, I don’t know *why* this cover wound up being 50 shades of tragic.
I’ve never flat out hated her…most of the time I was indifferent, but then I saw TDKR, and my mind changed. She was phenomenal in that movie–I wasn’t expecting that at all. I know this has nothing to do with the cover (it’s bad), but all of this is to say, that I am squarely, Team Hathaway, now. Bring on, Les Mis!
She looks like she’s been caught mid-blink. I have pictures like that, and I either look drunk or sleepy-drunk. It’s not flattering on me, nor on Anne.
Ive always liked Anne (Hello, Princess Diaries!) but she looks like she smelled something stanky in this picture. And she looks crazy in the second. And almost dead in the 3rd. (Which is what they’re going for Im sure. TBH I don’t know a thing about Les Mis.)
Wow, I actually liked this cover because I am not a fan of the short hair (on her) yet here I like it. In red carpet pics, wedding pics, and paparazzi pics I can’t stand it. So the hair alone here was enough for me to give a thumbs up.
She was absolutely stunning in Ella Enchanted, then hit the big time, lost too much weight, and has never looked as good again.
Thank you for pointing out the melting-crazy-digitally-rotated-eyes! That was my first reaction upon seeing the cover and now feel vindicated.
I don’t have anything to say about the pictures because I hate them, but I don’t think she’s necessarily winning the Oscar. I know she wants it bad and fully expect her name to be called when the noms are read. I think Jennifer Lawrence and Marion Cotillard have more buzz behind them.
Agreed, Jennifer and Marion both have way more buzz right now. Anne could pull a Zeta-Jones though and go up for Supporting and I don’t think she’d be wrong to do it– Fantine dies pretty early on in the first act.
Yeah, I haven’t heard Anne mentioned as anything BUT a supporting actress.
She’s campaigning in the Supporting Actress category, which is smart. The only competition she really has there is Helen Hunt for “The Sessions” (who should be in the Lead Actress category) and Amy Adams for “The Master.” I can’t see a way where Anne doesn’t win Best Supporting Actress, unless the Academy decides to finally give one to Amy Adams.
If she went for Best Actress, she’d have some competition from Jennifer Lawrence and Marion Cotillard. The Actress races seem like they’ve already been determined at this point- the real race is Best Actor (DDL, Denzel, Joaquin) and of course Best Picture and Best Director.
Oh, I just can’t. I think she is a horrible, terrible, awful actress. Insincere, completely unoriginal and not at all creative. I genuinely don’t understand how she is so successful.
This is what you get for making a movie called the devil wears prada i guess.
best comment of all time
Horrible pictures, but I guess I’m in the minority who flove Anne.
In the older cover image you link to, I could swear that was Eva Mendes on the cover. I kept looking for AH. Then I had to squint and tilt my head in order to see that it was indeed a highly photoshopped image of Miss Anne.
Ditto, could have sworn the 2010 cover was Mendes. Not a doppelganger I ever would have guessed.
That is one nasty cover photo.
I like Anne too. I think she’s talented and endearing and I honestly love her version of I dreamed a dream, def one of the reasons that movie is a must see for me. That being said I didn’t like this cover. She’s so striking but here she mostly looks tired, which is a shame because her pics can be truly mesmerizing. I don’t see the smugness or the depraved french courtesan or the snobbiness or all the other negative stuff but I guess I wouldn’t because I don’t dislike her.
I like her too, and thought she was wonderful in Rachel Getting Married. But that cover is all FUG.
That’s the ugliest damn photo of Hathaway I ever saw.
That second photo looks like a cross between Prince and The Joker
I am not a fan of her, but I have seen pictures of her looking very nice. These are not those pictures. These are terrible. It’s like someone hates her they make her look so unattractive and unappealing. The cover especially, because a cover is supposed to make you want to buy the magazine. Your description of her facial expression is perfect.
I doubt they digitally rotated her eyes. Why on earth would they do such a thing? She has naturally downturned eyes. It’s not unattractive…that’s her normal eye-shape and placement. A whole host of factors can affect how someone looks in photos…here, it’s likely makeup, the angle of her head, the lighting, and her expression, which is one of her eyes being at partial mast.
That said, this photo sucks and indeed the entire spread seems lame. She’s annoying for her earnestness that seems married with a touch of boastfulness or conceit, but you cannot deny that she is super talented. In the end, she nets out slightly positive or neutral for me–her talent makes up for a lot and I love that she seems game for just about anything (she’s great on SNL).
I cannot understand how they made her look this bad.
I mean, this is the same woman!: http://blog.zap2it.com/pop2it/anne-hathaway-valentino-gi.jpg
So, I’m one of those bitches who doesn’t think Anne is beautiful, BUT you have a point. Her makeup is just so badly applied on this cover, for one thing. The eyeshadow applied above the hooded crease of her eye just emphasises the hood all the more – and gives her that drooping-candle effect. It just all looks amateur!
Hathaway’s looks are definitely not to everyone’s taste, but whether you like them or not, Vogue has committed a crime against faces in general here. It’s like a really bad license or passport photo.
Even though it’s such a desirable cover to be on, I wouldn’t be surprised if they get some passes on it after this.
I am firmly on Team Anne, but this is not cool. She, and her hair, were so cute on SNL this week, and kind of loving that she’s sharing Vogue cover space with Katie Holmes, of whom she did a pretty funny impression on the show.
Vogue has made her look ill/exhausted/depressed/hungover/grief-stricken. Nothing about this cover says “newlywed who just got the role of a lifetime”.
@Mary, I’m glad it wasn’t just me that thought of the Joker with that second pic.
I’m fairly neutral on Anne. I haven’t seen much that she’s been in, but I guess I do lean more toward “like her” than not. But this cover, it is not cool. Her eyes look droopy, and I HATE HATE HATE that shade of lipstick, especially with all the green in the background. It reminds me of those super-cheap and probably toxic lipsticks from those little “dress-up” makeup kits they used to make for kids.
I’m glad I’m not the only one who hated the lipstick! It reminds me of those cheap one-dollar tubes we’d get from the drug store in the late 80s–Wet & Wild, I think it was. Something with more of a red undertone than a pink one would have suited her colouring much better.
She looks like she’s trying to hold back a sneeze.
Ugh. Vogue is just awful.
Somebody at Vogue does NOT like Ms. Hathaway.
I love the 2nd pic. I love the vest, the eyeshadow, the hair… I don’t hate the Barry Manilow sleeves, but now all I can think of is “Does Barry Manilow know you raid his wardrobe?”
I like her expression, complete with what appears to be 3-day old eye make-up…
She’s got this edgy-androgynous look here, that works so well as an art portrait…
But for a Vogue holiday cover?
Have I mentioned how much I hate pink lipstick?
Vogue used to like her, her last cover is stunning. She must have made La Wintour mad between now and then…
Hate her short hair, hate the weight loss, the wan look. I don’t know why she gets praised for any of that. She looked hella better before all this nonsense. I like her but … just stop already.
This is Picasso level terrible. Regarding her eyes, I’m pretty sure they mirror-flipped the original image, creating a disorienting effect because her face, like any other human’s, is not perfectly symmetrical. If you look at the waif portrait you can see the smaller/ more tilted eye is actually on the other side of her head. Next, they probably went in and “fixed” a microscopic line or two by the lid, somehow not noticing that they stuck her tear duct into the bridge of her nose in the process. Finally, the line of her lip has been “softened” resulting in that smeary “former Miss Ultimate Supreme on Colt 45 and laughing gas” look.
How drunk are the people who sign off on this crap? I mean seriously, at least half a dozen people had to look at that and think “yup, perfectly normal human worm baby!” before sending it to print.
I’m glad I am not the only one getting the Joker vibe from the puffy sleeves photo
Cover photo looks like a young Leona Helmsley. Not good.
What great comments, y’all, and spot on. Me, I look at the cover and think, ‘Let this be a lesson to all on the dangers to your face of crash dieting.’ I wonder if her skin will ever snap back. I guess it could be bad Photoshop as some suggest, but she looks so unwell.
I like Anne. Anyone besides me seen ‘One Day’. Oh honey, you will *cry-y-y-y-y*.
I too am not a Hathaway fan. I realized how much of a not fan I am when I found out she was cast as Fantine and I wanted to punch a brick wall. Although objectively she can be quite beautiful (just not in these pictures) and she can sing, she bugs me, a lot.
This cover though, it makes me feel a little better about all that.
Anne Hathaway said in an interview that she felt her features were too big for her face and I agree. The photographer for this cover just enhanced that and made her look hard and unpleasant.
And yes, Hollywood, expecting women to be rail-thin will distort their features. Most actresses today looked better when they started and their faces had a little more roundness.
I’m not reading that much into this cover… I think it’s a nice cover, which happened to be shot while she had a cold and felt pretty crappy! What it needed was her smiling big, so it would be festive; it is the december issue after all! On the 2nd pic, she reminds me of the singer of Fun., whom I love, so it’s not a bad thing, just a little odd! And, the 3rd pic makes me want to cry! At least now I know how to loose 15 lbs for a friend’s wedding!
And, the “second act” thing about Katie Holmes must be about her 2nd time on Broadway!
She’s a dead ringer for a young Ron Reagan Jr. in that third picture.
a) Her neck craaaaaazy loooooooong in the Fantine photo.
b) That cover is the worst. She looks so tired that it caused me to yawn. Repeatedly! Empathy yawning should not occur when the other person/picture/video is not even occurring. Annie, I hope you got to eat ice cream, watch some soap operas and take a nap after that shoot.
With that puffy shirt, she looks like a singer from a terrible production of Carmen, about to start the “Toreador Song”.
Geesh is Anna Wintour still PO’d about The Devil Wears Prada? This picture is just awful. Anne looks like she’s hungover.
Also, does anyone even read Vogue anymore? For some reason I’ve been receiving free copies of it, and I broke down and went thru the September issue, and all I can say is there’s 15 minutes I’ll never get back. The size of the Manhattan phone book, and 90% of it is ads.
All I can see is LIPS
When did Picasso do Vogue covers? Surely that picture is a composite of several pictures. Each feature points in a different direction – you can almost see the lines where they all fit together. Awful.
Posed and photographed to look like a Very Serious Actress and Renowned Tragedienne. Bernhardt might have taken this pose were she alive today. I like it. Vogue should have presented Streep in this manner.
Agreed; VERY serious, gazing into her future as a mature thespian.
And it’s not soooo bad. Except for the lips; either she herself, or the retoucher has given her the lips of the fish.