Fluffy as it is, this is one of my favorite Oscar-season traditions. While they’ve played around with the formula in past years, this is a straight-up glamor spread, and all the better for it. I’m particularly pleased to see a smooth-looking Anthony Mackie in the mix with the bigger names. On another note, I wonder if the magazine’s editors assumed Robert Duvall was a shoo-in for an Oscar nod when they cast him as the lord of this ensemble.
You can check out an embiggened version at the VF site. Nathaniel Rogers, meanwhile, has more detailed musings on the matter.
Comments
34 responses to “Vanity Fair’s Hollywood Issue cover”
Nice to see they added Mackie for no reason other than to avoid last season’s cover issue controversy.
“Embiggened” is a perfectly cromulent word.
Jjennifer Lawrence is my future wife.:) lol..great cover
Haha Anthony Mackie got Saldana’d. But yeah, my gayness is loving this cover.
How about Michelle Williams or Ryan Gosling?
Remember, not every actor in the business is necessarily available for this.
What was last year’s controversy?
Mm so many non-nominees in there. Still sad about Kunis.
Emma Stone should’ve been included. But maybe she wasn’t available. Though her Spider-Man co-star made the time. Just hope they asked her.
Hans, last year’s cover featured Abbie Cornish, Kristen Stewart, Carey Mulligan, Amanda Seyfried, Rebecca Hall, Mia Wasikowska, Emma Stone, Evan Rachel Wood, and Anna Kendrick.
Watch as young Hollywood relegates Robert Duvall to a bartender.
Also, I know it wasn’t this year, but total missed opportunity not having Jeff Bridges bellying up to the bar.
Hmmm.. finally, Vanity Fair discovers that there are black people in Hollywood
No black person has ever made the actual front fold cover for these issues — they’re always in the in-lay.
Some people need to get over seeing race everywhere!!! Last year they complained about the lack of black actors . Now they complain that black actor is in the in-lay!
But the same people do not complain about that there is no Hispanic or Asian actor in that picture! For them, race is only back or white!
Jessie Eisenberg between Olivia Wilde and Mila Kunis is great. They need to make a movie where Jessie Eisenberg is a secret agent.
Seconded. He has the Bond look down pat.
Embiggened? LOL.
I do not think it is whining to note that since VF started their yearly Hollywood Edition in the 1990s, no person of colour has ever appeared on the cover even in years such as 2001 (Halle Berry and Denzel Washington, 2004(Jamie Foxx) and 2007(Jennifer Hudson) where there were black contenders/winners in the running.
FYI Sertan, my use of black here was generic…it was meant to cover every none white variation
I don’t understand why they include non-nominees in this. What purpose does it serve? For example, Joseph Gordon Levitt didn’t even have a prayer of a nomination.
It’s the Hollywood Issue, not the Oscar Issue.
@JFK: I’m sure they took this picture before the nomination announcement, but I agree that I’m puzzled at some of the choices(Garrett Hedlund? Really?).
@Guy: Right, but wouldn’t it make more sense to just do an Oscar issue? It’s a bit suggestive…
No, I think it makes more sense to use the awards season as an occasion to take a snapshot of the industry — both of its current high-flyers and future hopefuls. It broadens both the scope of the issue and its potential audience.
Plus, just from a practical standpoint, the issue takes months to plan and execute, so trying to anticipate the Oscar nominees that far in advance would inevitably, in some instances, blow up in their faces.
Rex,
I dont think people from other races would appreciate to be called “black”, no matter how generic you meant it!
I am sure black people would have a big fit if you called them “hispanic” and said you meant all non-white people!
Also, some people need to understand that some products, including magazines, retailers etc have well defined target markets! If non-whites are not included in their target market why would they have them on their cover?? It is a simple business decision.
Would you blame Versace or Armani for showing homeless people on their advertisements?
Sertan…aargh, aargh!!! And I’m not saying that in pirate-speak.
People see racism because there *is* racism in society. And I – Asian American – accept Rex’ shorthand (although he could have said people of color) just as I accept Asian -American as short hand for Filipino-/Chinese-/Japanese-/Indian-/Korean-/etc. American. Otherwise, it’s just too long to include everyone in our racial grouping.
And yes, business/economic decisions are way ahead of moral imperatives. I’m not the only one who noticed that tv ads were integrated long before tv programs, movies and magazines were. If you look at magazine ads , they are now more integrated, but not the covers nor the articles.
WHY? Because people of color buy products too, who knew!?! People of color – like women of all colors – love movies just like white men, and would like to see ourselves represented onscreen and behind the camera, on magazine covers, and as subjects of articles.
The days when the only people onscreen were white. and the only time you saw black actors or Chinese actors were in “race” films are over and in the past. It’s a small world and getting smaller all the time.
Can`t wait for Rapace ship to sail.
Why`s Tron guy on the cover? Does he have anything important coming out or he earned the honor by being the blandest thing in that movie?
P.S. Vanity Fair is consistent: “The cool thing about this retrospective look at Annie Leibovitz Vanity Fair covers? You can see how many times the people of color get pushed to the right side of the frame, putting them safely off of the main cover of the magazine and only seen when the flap is unfolded. Victims include ZoĆ« Saldana, America Ferrera, Kerry Washington, Lucy Liu , Don Cheadle, Samuel L. Jackson, Rosario Dawson, Omar Epps, Jennifer Lopez, Will Smith and Angela Bassett.”
http://jezebel.com/385859/photo-finish#ixzz1ClFYMODq
FYI, for those asking. Garrett Hedlund is Dean Moriarty in the upcoming On the Road film adaptation. Depending on when this was shot, perhaps they expected him to be a bigger name after TRON opened.
Why are people questioning Garrett Hedlund’s being included in this photograph? I saw “Country Strong” a few weeks ago, and though the movie is a mess, he (and the rest of the cast) are exceptionally good. He embodies the I-can’t-grow-a-full-beard-and-never-sh0wer affectations of young country singers with astonishing accuracy. And his voice! My God.
Ligaya,
first of all, I did not say “racism” I said “race”.
Second, because of my expertise in my field(unlike many other people yes i can use that word, since i earned it!) i know about different races buy stuff, so ads have changed etc. I am the one who uses “co-culture” instead of “sub-culture” when refer to different racial groups in this society. However, some businesses/companies make careful decisions regarding their target markets. If they choose not to target non-white people, that does not make them automatically racist! I will not even go into details of magazine ads, etc. I save them for my classes for my students.
Also, when some magazines targeting only black people have only black people on their covers, noone accuse them of being racist! But if VF doesnt have a black actor on its cover, then it is called racist!
Tyler Perry mostly uses Black actors in his movies. Does that make him racist too? These are all choices. You can agree or disagree with them.
Sertan, this is a film blog – not a blog about racism and I don’t want to hijack the discussion, so this my last word on this (unless someone posts something *really* egregious :D)…
OK, I concede one point, you did say “race.” I should have said, “people see *race* because there’s racism in society.”
I won’t go into the point about the power dynamic between majority culture/economics and minority culture/economics being unequal, and therefore Essence isn’t racist because it features blacks on its covers – it certainly has nowhere the circulation nor the amplified media coverage that Vanity Fair has.
The main reason there are ethnocentric magazines, Tyler Perry-type movies that masses of blacks attend and rom-com-chick flicks for women, is because we are relegated there. We are shut out or put on the sidelines. It’s not that we don’t enjoy all movies – we would just like to *see* ourselves in them, to be acknowledged that we exist, visible – not ghosts, and not as stereotypes or secondary/tertiary/background roles.
Once the playing field is equal/even – when everyone is represented (including the disabled, lesbians/gays/bisexuals/transgendered) – then we’ll see fewer ethnocentric magazines or movies that target only one demographic, because movies should and will appeal to ALL people.
There’s historical proof. Some of the greatest baseball players were in and greatest baseball was played in the Negro Baseball Leagues (not sure that’s the right name). But once the Major Leagues were integrated, that withered away.
In honor of america’s february black history month, vanity fair has been generous enough to put a black man on their cover. How thoughtful of them.
lol at Afrika. By the way, I am one of those black people that dont like to beg for anything. So whenever I see the complaining about the lack of Oscar nominess or Vanity Fair Covers, i cringe. I am like damn, lets have some self respect. no better way to make people feel superior than to constantly seek approval and legitimacy from them on irrelevant sh!t like the oscars and magazine covers. Civil rights sure, but magazine covers, whatever.
Really cool. Though Robert Duvall seems out of place. It looks like they photoshopped his head in.