Uggh. Why again?

I know I bitched about this before but Kate Hudson has appeared on the cover of another top fashion magazine, namely Vogue. Why this is is beyond me. She's a pretty girl but past that there's not much there. She's out promoting another rom-com of sorts with Matthew McConaughey so at least she has a reason to be on a cover unlike her earlier turn on Bazaar.

In great editorial news, Dazed and Confused has a Gem inspired shoot starring Bridget Hall. (via Fashionista.

uggh. part two.

I feel that I was completely unfair to Harper's Bazaar in my critique the other day, because I didn't attack Vogue, too. Now, Vogue, "the fashion bible", has an awful September cover featuring Sienna Miller. First, why the hell is she famous? She slept with Jude Law but that's been over for some time. She should be a good pointless blond and go away. Anna Wintour most have a girl crush on Sienna because I have no other idea of why Anna continues to try and shove Sienna down our collective throats as a fashion icon. She's 25, fashion ICONS are not 25. Sienna is a poorly dressed hipster that has over stayed her welcome, let her go Anna.

uggh. Kate Hudson.

I, belatedly, received my Harper's Bazaar from my old address and, disappointingly, Kate Hudson is on the September cover. Why is she on the cover? She's pretty, true, but not a striking beauty for the ages. She lacks any discernible personality and has little to offer. Kate hasn't done any recent work of note, either. She was acclaimed in Almost Famous, but that was seven years ago. You, Me, and Dupree really isn't quality... anything. She does not require 16 pages of pictures and story plus a cover to display her blandness. For his or her part, her publicist should be paid big dollars to promote her so shamelessly. This issue, being the top fashion issue of the year, should have had someone relevant on the cover or possibly, god forbid, an actual model. I'm sure a model would appreciate the novelty.