Change is Good. Unless It's Bad.


This is the October issue of In Style UK.  I'm sure you'll recognise the talented Naomi Watts on the cover. Ms. Watts is fresh off of her role as Princess Diana, and has been out and about doing the press junket. Like most successful leading ladies, Naomi has a very ethereal beauty, delicate, but with a burning intensity beneath the surface. She has a wonderful look that enables her to look very editorial.


Or conversely, her look lends itself well to a modern version of old Hollywood glamour.


I get in theory what the people at In Style were going for putting her in this Flintstonesque outfit for their latest cover; an attempt to completely switch gears and try something different on an actress who is always flawlessly put-together, while channelling the punk trend. But this does not work for me. At. All.  I do not believe that it lends itself in any way to what the Daily Mail is calling a "punk princess makeover."


The platinum quiff, the awkward print-mixing, the shiny skirt (looks cheap, and I'm sure it's not), the pink-nude lip with the impotent smoky eye that is not quite up to the job of balancing said nude lip…gah! Everything just seems out of balance here. While I am used to seeing Naomi looking sophisticated and chic, here she just looks she is channeling a teenager who has yet to learn how to be sexy without looking skanky. Punk princess? Nooooot quite.

Is it me?

Discuss.

Comments

  1. I agree - she looks awkward with that floating hand and uncertain look on her face. I think part of it is those longish sleeves on the top - would be better sleeveless, I think and with some fierce spiky cuffs or something - ear cuffs?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Exactly. It's like they didn't fully commit to the punk thing. It's way too designer-y and clean to be punk, but too manufactured and skankified to be sleek.

      Delete
  2. This look reminds me of the outrageous Miley C.
    My daughter watched "Diana" last night and liked it but said that she was dressed in contemporary fashion rather than 90ies style.

    Annette | Lady of Style

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah, I have not seen it myself, but I don't think it got a good reception here in the UK…which is a shame, because Naomi Watts is a fantastic actress. Mullholland Drive (the David Lynch film that came out a few year back) was particularly spectacular.

      Delete
  3. agreed - I think her face shows how uncomfortable she is! She's still gorgeous, though - she can't help it.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Yeah, I don't think it's working at all. She looks like a teenage mall rat.

    ReplyDelete
  5. She really does look uncomfortable. I barely recognized her. That hair colour on her is awful. It really washes her out.

    Bisous
    Suzanne

    ReplyDelete
  6. I thinks she looks fine. Gorgeous people look good no matter what.

    S
    xo

    ReplyDelete
  7. Way too "Bo-Peep" gone wrong. She looks ill, like she's anemic - blech! Having said that, she still looks world's better than Miley!

    Alicia

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Alicia, I think she looks like Bam Bam from the Flintstones in this shot. Unfortunate styling to say the least.

      Delete
  8. The pictures inside are stunning through, her hair is a totally different colour. Love your blog!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That actually makes me feel a bit better. There was one I saw online where she was in a cream dress….THAT should have been the cover.

      Delete
  9. She looks amazing in the actual editorial inside, her hair is a totally different colour. Big fan of your blog!

    ReplyDelete
  10. That platinum mullet is really bad.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I think she looks horrid. Incredibly David Bowie-esque and not in a flattering way at all! Shocking.

    ReplyDelete
  12. She has cool coloring and she's dressed in warm. This is a good example of how dressing in the wrong (for her) palette can make a beautiful woman garish.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Deep Thoughts...

Popular Posts