« Next entry

Explain Oct 29, 2008 @ 4:31pm

Married to the Model

natalia and her creepy babies.jpg Dear Natalia,

You’re basically the prettiest person we’ve ever seen, ever, and we smile every time we see you in the David Yurman ads or posing for DVF, or as the lone model on the cover of Vogue.

Having said that, we were all kind of freaked out by the faux-pastoral scene shot by Mario Testino with your family because, isn’t it sort of creepy to have beautiful you holding your terrified children on a horse? And it’s also rather disconcerting to see all of you looking in different directions, dazed.

Plus, this isn’t the first time you’ve done the whole ‘look at my gorgeous family’ thing in Vogue, but at a time when ostentation couldn’t be more inappropriate, this seems out of place.

We do have fond memories of the shots of Stella Tennant with her family, but that had an interview to accompany it, and was all about personal style, which made sense. But just seeing the Portman clan hanging out and playing dress up looking like Peter and Wendy grown up is just awkward.

I’m sure if you asked him nicely Mario would have done this shoot just for you.

Just saying.

—BRETT KANE

natalia and co.jpg

« Next entry

Fashionista Main

And the Print Media Die On »

posted by guest

Oct 29, 2008 4:45PM

I really didn't find the shoot creepy or ostentatious at all. She's just with her kids in the country side; look past the fashion and the junk that vogue is trying to pawn on middle America and you see a family hanging out.

posted by adristar

Oct 29, 2008 4:46PM

the children are terrified?

posted by guest

Oct 29, 2008 4:46PM

"Portman clan" ??

posted by guest

Oct 29, 2008 5:05PM

I loved the shoot. Not creepy at all to me. She's too cute!

posted by laney

Oct 29, 2008 5:31PM

Hey, I really like this spread!

posted by FashionIntelligentsia

Oct 29, 2008 5:36PM

I loved it too.

Don't most parents love taking photos with their kids? How would models be any different in that regards?

posted by crackers

Oct 29, 2008 5:39PM

i think the kids look quite amused. i do not get your post. at least, i do not understand what point you are trying to make. are we talking about other pictures?

posted by guest

Oct 29, 2008 6:18PM

yeah i dont know where this article is coming from. i thought the shots were all beautiful and charming. its nice to see a model sharing some camera time with her family dont you think?

posted by guest

Oct 29, 2008 6:18PM

yeah i dont know where this article is coming from. i thought the shots were all beautiful and charming. its nice to see a model sharing some camera time with her family dont you think?

posted by guest

Oct 29, 2008 6:25PM

sounds like you are a tad jealous. I yet have to see one shoot Natalia V. made that was not exceptional.

posted by guest

Oct 29, 2008 6:46PM

The kids don't look terrified to me....
Was this a slow fashion day for you?

posted by guest

Oct 29, 2008 7:03PM

I didn't like it. No, the kids didn't look terrified, but it looked awkward and somehow off.

posted by guest

Oct 29, 2008 7:29PM

#3 - her husband's last name is portman.

#12 - because most young kids know how to model. have you ever tried to get a kid to look happy after more than 2 pictures? near impossible for most kids.

i loved it. its nice to see a happy family together and the shots were gorgeous.

posted by purplecroissant

Oct 29, 2008 8:08PM

She needs to have a daughter, no? Natalia would have the BEST closet for playing dress-up.

posted by guest

Oct 29, 2008 8:11PM

I loved that shoot. Its not ostentatious to be with one's family! WTF?

posted by guest

Oct 29, 2008 8:25PM

If it's ostentatious to wear gorgeous clothes in the countryside with your cute little kids, what would you call a studio shoot with couture gowns and models dripping in diamonds? There are a whole lot more ostentatious editorials out right now, so this doesn't seem to make much sense.

I feel like fashionista has been lagging behind lately, and it used to be my favorite fashion site. I don't want to stop visiting, but I think it seems like you guys have developed big heads over at the office...the writing has become pretentious (like when you talk about how fabulous your fashion week goodies are, the beautiful people you see and don't bat an eyelash at, and the franglais that's seriously getting old...). It seems like you think you know everything, can get in anywhere, talk to anybody, yada yada yada. I hate to say that but I just thought that might be what's irking a lot of your readers who are bothered by the site's content as of late. And I don't mean that as an attack on your staff, it's just the way things are coming across to me and probably a lot of other people right now.

posted by guest

Oct 29, 2008 8:28PM

#16 - amen.

posted by guest

Oct 29, 2008 8:39PM

yeah tell them comment 16!
people who work at fashionista are snobby for no good reason! Fashionista staff aren't in the real circle of fashion, so they pretend to be, by judging everyone. i bet when they walk down the street they check out every girl and say how hideous their outfit is!

oh and did i mention
you guys are boring

posted by guest

Oct 29, 2008 9:02PM

#16 I couldn't have said it better myself.

Fashionista, follow CosmoGirl's suit and fold, you guys simply suck.

posted by guest

Oct 29, 2008 9:04PM

Actually, I'd have to agree with everyone else on this page (except the post, of course). I was just flipping through November again and thinking how lovely this particular spread was -- how is it more ostentatious to have a fun shoot with your family than those dull shoots of super-tanned models looking at the pool in couture dresses/jewelry? And the dress where Natalia/her daughter Neva/her daughter Neva's rabbit were all wearing the same dress? Absolutely darling.

posted by guest

Oct 29, 2008 10:52PM

more importantly, they're not on a HORSE. they're on a ROCKING HORSE. in the middle of a hay-ish, dry-looking field. sort of evokes the great depression more than opulence...

posted by guest

Oct 29, 2008 11:48PM

I'm glad I'm not the only one who's been thinking that lately (I'm the commenter from post #16)

http://pytmedia.com

posted by guest

Oct 29, 2008 11:53PM

I read this post and I feel like the writer is in a bad mood and wants to find anything to complain about, it comes off as jealous rant. The spread was honestly the first one in a long time that made me smile. I looked at it over and over again and I thought it was amazing! Whimsical, adorable and so much more inspiring than the boring fashion stories with the same models in the same outfits doing the same old poses i.e. the "Look surprised and jump" pose. Im over it.

posted by guest

Oct 30, 2008 1:35AM

The baby does look scared in that picture....but I didn't find the shoot terribly pretentious. It's much better than the jumping models. But really, Vogue is a snotty, ostentatious publication. They don't know how to be any other way. And when they try to it's a joke. So you just accept it and admire the pretty clothes and photos, and don't take it too seriously.

posted by guest

Oct 30, 2008 2:26AM

As an avid reader for two years, I also feel like something has seriously changed in the past few months. What happened to the wide-eyed excitement that you guys used to exude in every post? It seems to have been replaced by jaded cynicism and unecessarily snarky commentary.

For most of your readers, fashion is *still* fun--and that is why we read this blog. Bring back the magic.

posted by guest

Oct 30, 2008 2:31AM

On a different (but not unrelated) note about the quality of this blog: please stop taking photos on a tilted angle. It is distracting and unprofessional. I could hardly look at your fashion week photos.

posted by guest

Oct 30, 2008 9:10AM

Thanks #26--I found them hard to look at too.

posted by guest

Oct 30, 2008 10:59AM

I totally agree with #16... I'm almost done with this blog.

posted by guest

Oct 30, 2008 11:15AM

hmmm i didn't love this spread. it didn't seem like natalia was really all that into it and more importantly, its really hard to focus on the fashion when there is cute kids in the way!

posted by guest

Oct 30, 2008 1:37PM

Pyjamas, pastels, and worn-out Chucks are NOT ostentatious. There's nothing that's ridiculously glitzy in this spread. Sure, there's Hermes and other luxury brands (this is Vogue, after all) but none of these are the in-your-face kind of accessories.

posted by guest

Oct 30, 2008 2:44PM

oh i thought this was creepy, after all usually all the famous people try to hide their kids and not show them off, at least not like this. to me it just seems like the kids are just cute accessories to emphasize the cuteness of all the clothes featured in the photos.

posted by guest

Oct 30, 2008 6:21PM

To #14/Purple Croissant: uh...Natalia does have a daughter. Neva is her second child and is in this editorial too.

I agree with #16. I don't visit fashionista as often as I used to; it's changed.

posted by guest

Oct 30, 2008 9:22PM

i am just so sick of wellies and dresses i could puke!!

posted by mmr421

Oct 31, 2008 6:20PM

lmao no. 33. I liked this spread and I still like Fashionista.

posted by 2mewmew

Nov 02, 2008 3:06PM

I was only able to flip through that issue of Vogue while I was home last weekend. And Natalia and her family looked lovely! I actually agree that this photo does look a BIT weird probably because of Natalia gazing into the distance while her cute children are looking elsewhere but if that wasn't mentioned at all, I wouldn't have noticed much. Oh well, I still love Fashionista as well.