What is will all the celebrity shilling? Are they not satisfied with being overpaid on screen? Does $10M a picture NOT cover the bills? It seems like no one cares about having a reputation anymore. Dignity? What the hell is that? They only care about having their face in as many places as possible.
Like InStyle.
The April 2006 issue (with Rebecca Romijn on the cover) (she's got a new TV show coming out, after all!) contains 31 celebrity endorsements.
Here's the rundown:
Sasha Cohen for Citizen watches: This is no way makes me want to buy a watch, especially the über-tacky charm bracelet one that's pictured in the ad. C-
Jennifer Love Hewitt for Hanes: I loathe these ads. They make Hewitt look like a tranvestite. (Oh, btw, she's called Jennifer Love in the ads.) F
Colin Mochrie for Nabisco: He's rather unattractive, which I believe breaks the cardinal rule of celebrity shilling. But I do like the snack packs and he's kind of funny. C+
Courteney Cox for Kinerase: I don't know what this product is or does and I do not care. C
Serena Williams for Spongebob Squarepants: You think I'm kidding, but she is seriously in an ad for a cartoon. C-
Charlize Theron for Christian Dior J'Adore: She looks like a frosty bitch. Not interested in smelling like one. C
Carrie Underwood for Skechers: As a B-lister, this ad is at the right level of sponsorship. She is sitting on the floor with a gaggle of lab puppies (coincidentally, labs are the B-listers of the puppy world; everyone knows golden retrievers are the cutest). C+
Halle Berry for Revlon: Revlon dumped some serious coin on this issue. There are beaucoup ads. This one is simple and attractive. B
Gwyneth Paltrow for Damiani: She has weird eye make-up on, but otherwise a clean, pretty ad. B
Hilary Duff for Candies Foundation PSA: Every celeb knows the way to goodwill is to do a PSA. A simple black and white picture does the trick. I WILL do everything I can to prevent teen pregnancy. Thanks for the tip, Hilary! B+
Samaire Armstrong, Ciara, Hilary Duff, and Michelle Trachtenberg for Candies at Kohl's: Yup, when one starlet isn't enough, you get four! Four girls who normally wear D&G and Prada are now dressed up in clothes from Kohl. Puh-leaze. D
Eva Mendes for Revlon: Not as pleasing as Berry's ad. B-
Kate Winslet for American Express: I like these ads. I'm tired of seeing the same ones everywhere, but I still like them. A
Ellen DeGeneres for American Express: see above. A-
Mischa Barton for Keds: I don't like these ads because I don't buy Barton as an "everygirl" who sits on a stack of watermelons in her Keds skimmers. C+
Kate Bosworth for Revlon: She's pretty enough to pull off a make-up advert, but not famous enough to really make it work. B-
Rachel Weisz for Burberry: Not a big fan of the photo montage tack, but Weisz looks lovely. A-
Gwyneth Paltrow for Estée Lauder Pleasures: That whore! Two ads! She looks rosier in this one. B+
Uma Thurman for Tag Heuer: Simple, unfussy. Nice. A
Julie Bowen for Neutrogena: Scraping the bottom of the barrel, aren't they? This ad is lifeless. C-
Queen Latifah for Cover Girl: She looks nice, but can't compete with the Revlon juggernaut. B
Halle Berry for Versace: Another trollop! She looks hot. A
Andie MacDowell for L'Oreal: Back to her modelling roots! Literally...it's an ad for hair color. B-
Mary Kate and Asley Olsen for Badgley Mischka: Not bad. I don't really buy them as refined society people, but I DO buy them as rich girls in fancy clothes who pass out in a druggy haze only to wake up the next morning with vomit on their $10K dresses. Oops. A-
Ashley Judd for American Beauty at Kohl's: Ashley wants us to think she's a simple country girl who shops at Kohl's and wears $20 perfume. I don't buy it. C
Charlize Theron for Aldo fights AIDS PSA: She looks good and there is a big piece of duct tape over her mouth which seems appealing. A
Naomi Watts for David Yurman: I think these ads would benefit by being in color instead of black and white. But still a decent ad. If I could afford it, I'd buy Yurman. A-
I'll post again if I come across a magazine with more than 31 celebrity advertisements. Could be any day now...
7 comments:
What would the world be if emotional whores didn't get the chance to manifest their fears and desires through material means?
Oh ... I guess it would be a 'perfect' world.
I've been thinking lately that the reason models have become actresses is because actresses have taken all their modeling jobs!
I have a Marie Claire in my bag - I'm going to count endorsements right the hell now...
Ellie, I suspect you're right. Those poor, poor models! Hollow cheekbones gone to waste! We should start a non-profit to bring models back to their rightful domain on the glossy pages of women's magazines!
It actually just shows the current trend toward "celebrity" vs. "talent." Actors become models, singers become actors, models become actors, actors become singers, actors write novels...
... and they ALL start clothing or perfume lines or write children's books. It's MADNESS, I tell you.
o i have to disagree on one of the grades. . . the olsen twins modeling for Badgley Mishka deserves a much lower grade. To me throwing two teenage millionaire label whores into an ad for a company like them says that the company is looking to move itself from solid, established company with a decent below the radar following into a big name dropping celebrity hounding People Magazine slut of a brand.
Why would any designer with self respect encourage such disgraceful activity?! They deserve a slap on the wrist and a D- on this ad!
What is next? Badgley Mishka children socks? or B-M baby strollers with bluetooth connections built in?!
That is always the sign of a sellout: the kids line. I understand where you're coming from, designer man.
Kind of reminds of the todo about Lindsay Lohan pushing Vuitton.
Post a Comment