Kate Upton covers Vogue Italia’s ‘seductive’ issue: gorgeous or trashy?

Kate Upton

Kate Upton covers the November issue of Vogue Italia, and to tell the truth, I’m not quite sure how this happened, people. It’s not that I’m upset about this development at all (because I really like Kate, who is much more fun than today’s stuffy models), but this has all happened so fast for her. It was just February when she was graced the cover of Sports Illustrated, and her career exploded as a result. Soon enough, she was appearing in GQ and doing the “cat daddy dance” for gross Terry Richardson. Then she tried high fashion in Jalouse, and Anna Wintour gave her the stamp of approval by featuring Kate in a very lovely Vogue spread. The fashion industry really, really wants Kate to happen in a huge way, and they’ve accepted her (and her boobs) with very open arms. The question remains, however, will the general public second the opinion?

Now back to this cover — doesn’t Kate look a lot like a much more stunning version of Anna Nicole Smith here? In a very 1990s supermodel sort of way. Like, this was how Anna was supposed to turn out if she didn’t marry a 90-year-old billionaire, star in a trashy reality show, and then end up on all sorts of drugs. Kate definitely looks “seductive” here as the cover caption claims, and I’m sort of giggling over how this busty “mall girl” has been able to strut her way into progressively more high-fashion gigs as her fellow, mean-girl SI models and downmarket” critics are probably shaking with rage. Kate was definitely the underdog just a few months ago, but she has proven herself to be a very likeable underdog, so I’m rooting for her career.

Whether you like it or not, I’m afraid that Kate Upton is here to stay. The fashion world is pushing her very hard right now, and that’s not really a bad thing at all. I mean, Kate’s a very healthy-looking girl, and she has a very refreshing, fun attitude. Has she fully arrived on the scene though? As in, will she soon fulfill her self-proclaimed desire to “bring back the supermodel“? Time will tell if Kate has longevity, but I think there’s a damn good chance that she’ll grow increasingly popular as a household name.

In addition to Kate scoring the cover of Vogue Italia, she’s also just posed for a 1960s-inspired photoshoot from V magazine, and Kate herself has tweeted a few previews from the shoot.

Kate Upton

Kate Upton

Photos courtesy of Vogue Italia and V Magazine/Twitter

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

85 Responses to “Kate Upton covers Vogue Italia’s ‘seductive’ issue: gorgeous or trashy?”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Shelley says:

    There is nothing spectacular about her in the swimsuit model way nor in the high fashion way -__-

  2. cmc says:

    Her boobs are freaking ridiculous. Good for her for cashing in on the amazing body she was born with. I’d rather see her in a magazine than pin-thin Candice Swanpoel or whatever her last name is.

  3. T.C. says:

    It looks very trashy, bland and try-hard. Like a little girl playing dress up. Anna Nicole Smith was a natural at looking sexy. Woman was sex personified without trying. Kate is not in her league.

    • RocketMerry says:

      Yep. I so do not care about what the fashion people are trying to do with her – namely, trying to gain do-good points for having a normal sized girl on cover. Yeah, she’s not staying after the first rounds of “look at us, we publish things you can rely to!” pictures – nor do I care about whatever physical attributes identify her. Pin-thin, big-breasts, blond, brown-haired, small, tall, big…it really does not matter, when a woman is budget, she just is. It’s some sort of aura aroud her.
      The point here is that she IS trashy and budget-y. End of story. If she’s the flavor of the month, good for her, she’s beautiful and God bless. But she is budget.

      • Amelia says:

        +1 RocketMerry, on everything.
        She seems a lovely, fun girl with a decent face and she doesn’t go around birth shaming women (*ahem* Miranda/Giselle). But she doesn’t have that ‘it’ factor.
        She’s like Boobs Lively who was wearing Gucci (?) a few weeks ago – She can make haute couture look like a prom dress.

      • T.C. says:

        I used to come to Kate’s defense because I thought the fashion people were being snobs but this photoshoot proves their point. She is very budget. She doesn’t have Anna Nicole’s charisma and “it” quality. You need more than just big boobs to be a good model. Who thought the dark eyebrows and dark roots with blonde ends were a good idea for this shoot? Hot mess.

      • The Original Genevieve says:

        I will agree that she is beautiful. However, it is entirely possible to be beautiful and trashy at the same time. As in, the aforementioned Anna Nicole Smith and also Christina Hendricks.

        Kind of like Brooklyn Decker, trailer park beautiful. On the trashy side.

    • Jacq says:

      Agreed. She is beautiful and has a rockin’ bod. She is completely harmless & nice to look at, so I have no problem with her. BUT, when she aims for “high-fashion” is ends up looking cheap. The cover shot is like Lindsay Lohan trying to do Marilyn. Out of her league is right – she is beautiful & definitely has a future in modeling something else.
      I like the vintage looking photo with the lashes, that one works for some reason.

      • Eleonor says:

        Agreed, she’s got a great body and is a good bikini model, but she’s not a high fashion supermodel: Cindy Crawford (or Naomi, or Claudia Schiffer) never looked low budget, they all looked spectatular, amazing. Kate Upton in high fashion shoot looks meh.

  4. marie says:

    The cover looks like an ’80s Revlon ad to me. Not that there’s anything wrong with it..

    • Christian says:

      I like it! I don’t normally care one way or the other about this girl but I think this cover is lovely and eye-catching. But I’m a sucker for the late 80′s/early 90′s thing – this is an example of how to do it right. I don’t think she’s “here to stay” though. As soon as the fashion industry pats itself on the back for featuring a “normal girl”, they’ll be back to their anorexic ways.

  5. ViktoryGin says:

    I’ll try to start by saying something nicez: she strikes me as having a lot of charm (tits will do that)

    But let’s be real…she looks like two-bit hooker playing dress-up.

  6. megs283 says:

    I think she’s gorgeous…def some people hit the genetic lottery and I’d be lying if I said I wasn’t a bit jealous!…but I think one of her best features is her beautiful face, and the Vogue cover doesn’t do her justice. Nevermind that her boobs are so far out there in that outfit that it goes from sexy + alluring to…in yo’ face.

    • Fritzi Schnitzer says:

      I think she’s gorgeous, too.Her face takes well to different styles of makeup and her body is fantastic.She looks happy, not grouchy,gaunt-faced, and starving. I bet Courtney Stodden is frenzied with jealousy.

  7. Jenna says:

    Umm…no. I mean, good for the difference she brings (size wise) to the modeling world and all but…eh. I just can’t seems to go crazy over the girl like everyone else.

  8. virginia5 says:

    stop trying to make it happen! (and no I am not jealous)

    We know she has big boobs, stop making it the focal point in all her photoshoots

  9. Nessa says:

    She is such a cute girl, with a great body. That’s the extent of it, though. If she is a supermodel, I am convinced if I had another 4-5 inches or so, I could be a supermodel, too.

    • Fatkid says:

      I’m convinced that the difference between super model and the average tall (thin) girl is being “discovered”. The big models, for the most part, are lucky benefactors of right-place-right-time or pushy parents.
      Either way luck is the big difference, so you go on with your slightly less lucky super model self Nessa!

      • Sachi says:

        Actually, it’s more than just being discovered by an agent or winning a modeling competition. Big models who score the ad campaigns, magazine editorials, fashion runways, and become favourites of fashion designers/photographers are not just posing in front of the camera and the photos just magically turn out beautiful.

        People say modeling is so easy and it’s just posing and anyone can do it. But looking at Kate Upton’s photo shoot proves otherwise. You have to be more than photogenic to transform a photo from ordinary to special.

        Big models also have to have personality to endear themselves with designers and photographers. Get Prada, Versace, Dior, Chanel, and Valentino designers to like you and you’re guaranteed to be a big name. Get Steven Meisel to love you and you’re set.

        Look at haute couture nowadays. It’s brimming with models who walk the runways of many prestigious brands. But how many of them get to score the big ad campaigns? How many of them are championed by the fashion world? Not many. It takes more than just a pretty face to make it in the fashion world. If you don’t take off as a model, your agency will turn to someone else who can and will.

  10. Yup says:

    I can’t wait until the day women don’t tear down each other’s bodies.

    She’s gorgeous, plain and simple. Any other thoughts are just jealousy, really.

    • Crimestick says:

      Yup- thank you for saying exactly what I was thinking.

    • Carolyn says:

      Yup – agree!

    • Irishae says:

      I was hoping I’d come across a comment like yours. At this point I think women are far less threatened by the stick-thin, boyish looks of the unattainable Candice Swanpoel’s (sp) and Miranda Kerr’s (who had to get pregnant to acquire a set of boobs). Put a real, naturally gorgeous woman in front of us and we look for reasons to hate on her. I love CB commenters, but grow up please.

  11. Harpreet says:

    I hate the fact that women with big boobs, size 4, and little waists are considered curvy. These fashion peeps should really try to push a more realistic figure, like size 10!

    • Fatkid says:

      Doesn’t curvy mean that you have curves? If you have a hourglass figure, regardless of the size of your clothing, you are curvy. Period. I’m sick of folks trying to lay claim to that word and change its meaning. Curvy comes in many sizes, it’s not a contest (or shouldn’t be).

  12. Talie says:

    She actually looks similar to another high fashion model called Lara Stone…it took her longer to gain attention, but she exploded fast and people obsessed over her tits. The only difference is that Lara didn’t begin doing cheesecake shoots like Kate, so she didn’t get the same shade. But she was called fat and other cruel names due to her body shape.

  13. Suzie says:

    The girl’s look is a cross between old Hollywood glamour (as in Rita Hayworth) except for the thick eyebrows, and something more trashy and recent. Those flabby boobs in the foreground aren’t a very attractive fashion statement. Looks like they tried to cram them into the photograph at all costs. The second photo looks like she was caught unawares in her bedroom, while intoxicated.

  14. I.want.shoes says:

    Her face is very plain. She is basically cashing in on the fact that she has big breasts.

    But whatever. I’m all for having models that actually don’t look like they are concentration camp escapees. I just wish she would model clothes, and not just bras.

  15. Ari says:

    I think she looks great and there is a niche for her particular look as evidenced in these photos.

    She ALMOST reminds me of Brigitte Bardot slightly…almost. I like the 60′s inspired looks.

    • Micki says:

      I’ve just wanted to write “old-fashioned glam” when I saw your comment.
      I think se can pull the look and with time she even become a household name.

  16. OhDear says:

    She looks good. Gotta respect her hustle, too. Wonder how long this is going to last, though. Good luck to her.

  17. bns says:

    I wish I had her body.

  18. bea says:

    She should not do “high fashion” – her look is just wrong for it.

    Honestly, she looks best when she’s doing ‘her’ thing, which is being a girl-next-door-buxom-blonde.

    The minute they put dark lipstick on her, it all falls apart. Accentuates her kinda small face………….

  19. Jay says:

    I kind of like her just because so many people trash her. She’s not my type, but she seems like a fun girl and I hope she really goes places, just because I’ll enjoy hearing people whine about how she’s nothing but a budget mall girl and she doesn’t “deserve” to be on the cover of Vogue.

  20. Lamont says:

    I Called it!!!!! *pats self on the back*
    I said in an earlier post that I would not be surprised to see Kate U on the cover of Vogue Italia. VI is like the naughty younger sister of the Vogue Big 4 (US, UK, Paris) who does things the others would probably like to do and gets away with it with a tut-tut
    Firstly Kate is with IMG. And IMG is a behemoth. It’s the biggest modelling agency on the planet, consuming all in its wake. In the FI, if you leave IMG the only way is down (which is why HF fave Karlie Kloss’ exit from Next to IMG, though fractious was practically inevitable). With IMG in her corner the advertisers, brands and fashion houses would be prepared to change the game and accept an outlier. I sincerely doubt Kate would have done this well if she were with another agency.
    Kate’s a point of debate/curiosity/vituperation/fascination, (like Blake whom I LOVE) this is always good for copy.
    Secondly VS is gearing more towards HF. It says something that Karlie Kloss is on their books (and is desperate to stay on it) while Kate who looks/ed more their type is not.
    The new VS angles are following the Gisele prototype rather than Heidi Klum (who was famously dissed badly by Kaiser Karl) route.
    Incredible as it may appear now but when Gis first came out she was considered curvy – ‘The Boobs from Brazil’ because of her implants. Check out her earlier runway walks 2000-2004, and would have seemed a natural for their pages
    I believe Gisele side stepped the route of Heidi S to establish herself more with the High Fashion crowd.
    Fashion like most things is increasingly segregated and hierarchical and there is an underlying presumption that once you go down the bikini/lingerie route you can kiss the exclusive runways and front covers of Vogue/Harpers Bazaar goodbye.
    Cindy/Naomi/Stephanie/Linda/Kate could get away with that until the Eastern European continent made for excessive supply and choice. The model no longer called the shots. It was the designers, editors, photographers, e.t.c (Kate has also benefited from this patronage)
    I can tell you 100% sure that SI has called both Candice Swanopel and Miranda Kerr but instead we’ve seen both doing the Prada, Balenciaga runways and sign contracts with De Renta and Versace.

    SI covers are increasingly a transient thing. The hype lasts 3 months max. It’s up to the models to build their brands. The past SI cover models have been unable to the next level in the modelling world IMO. The big names in fashion/runway don’t exactly come calling and the VS models are very aware of that The closest they would come to lads mags’ are those considered high-end, for the ‘thinking man’ GQ and Esquire

    It’s also not entirely fair to bash VS because Kate’s catwalk is the pits. It’s not a good thing to witness. She’s better in editorials.
    But this girl has really taken it to another level this year. Will she get a big campaign?

    • stellalovejoydiver says:

      I didn´t know Kate was with IMG, that´s great for her. Honestly I am rooting for her, yeah she might be plain or budget or not the best model, but her success is an important sign to other young girls who want to be a model. Especially when you think about Karlie Kloss who is so skinny, that she had to have her ribs photoshopped and the camera adds a couple of pounds. VS is so full of shit, unfortunately there are many young girls looking up to the VS Angels and that they not only hire someone like Karlie but dissing Kate for her figure is just disgusting.

  21. Shitler says:

    Eff all the haters! She looks gorgoeus

  22. Lisa says:

    So… What, it could be called trashy because you can see her boobs?

  23. Erinn says:

    Yes, she’s a gorgeous girl, but I don’t think she’s that great of a model. Would I love to have her body? Heck yes.

    But there’s something just so cheap about her. I don’t know if it’s the styling, or the way she carries herself or what. In the last photo, I don’t see anything amazing going on with her face outside of ‘pretty’. In the other photos she looks like she’s trying to be a porn star.

    I just can’t take her seriously. She seems like a nice, fun girl, but she doesn’t strike me as a serious model.

  24. Tania says:

    Her body is soft and beautiful, but I can’t help wishing she had a bit more muscle tone. I feel like she looks “skinnyfat” (she’s not large AT ALL) only because of the lack of muscle tone:

  25. Tania says:

    Her body is soft and beautiful, but I can’t help wishing she had a bit more muscle tone. I feel like she looks “skinny fat” she’s not large AT ALL) only because of the lack of muscle tone:

  26. Tania says:

    Her body is soft and beautiful, but I can’t help wishing she had a bit more muscle tone. I feel like she looks skinny fat, she’s not large AT ALL) only because of the lack of muscle tone:

  27. Tania says:

    Her body is soft and beautiful, but I can’t help wishing she had a bit more muscle tone. I feel like she looks larger (she’s not large AT ALL) only because of the lack of muscle tone:

  28. Tania says:

    Her body is soft and beautiful, but I can’t help wishing she had a bit more muscle tone. I feel like she looks larger–she’s not large at all–only because of the lack of muscle tone:

  29. Tania says:

    Her body is soft and beautiful, but I can’t help wishing she had a bit more muscle tone. I feel like she looks larger–she’s not large at all–only because of the lack of muscle tone.

  30. shewolf says:

    Whaaaat? A bit like Lindsay Lohan trying to do Marilyn? That’s hitting below the belt. I think shes gorgeous but I think what everyone is picking up on is her age. She’s a very young girl and people are dressing her up like she is older. Youth seems to hang around these days but the classic beauties in their days didnt have that “wheeeeeeeee!” look that Kate often has in her eyes or the “daaaarn I am hanging today” look that Lindsay often has.

  31. Audrey says:

    I think she looks great. It’s very Italian a la Sofia Loren.

  32. Victoria says:

    She has a beautiful face, natural pretty. So what she has big natural looking boobs?Models should represent all shapes and sizes of women, because its a sample of the population. I want to see the supermodels of the 90s comeback, they were gorgeous

  33. platynum says:

    I lover her.she’s down to earth and doesn’t hide her face. Good luck!

  34. TheOneAndOnlyOnly says:

    At least they put models on the cover and not Miley or Demi, etc like bottom feeding US mags.
    I agree Victoria, Vogue Cosmo Elle,etc. covers from the 80s/90s were the best with all the supers some known others not so well known, Pics and montages of that era are all over youtube/internet; who today could compare with Yasmeen Ghauri.
    No One has explained why all the mags feature every random d-list celeb nowadays, even a lesser known 80s model like Mitzi Martin blows these posers away. Good points Lamont,Kate lacks the personalities of the Supers from a generation ago and that works against her.

  35. Nicole says:

    If you change the color of her hair to a more natural blonde and tone her up a bit, I don’t think she would look so “budget”. I really want to see her go far in high fashion and change the look. I’ve been really sick of the teenage/androgenous look for a while now.

  36. Happy21 says:

    I don’t mind her and I find her bod ridiculous! I’d love to have it but she doesn’t come across as fashion model to me. VS yes, lingerie, yes. She just seems to cheapen everything a little. If it is at all possible I mean that in the nicest way. :)

  37. teehee says:

    Hollywood is a terribly sad place for women.

  38. I'm going to Guam! says:

    Her face is very average, her nose a bit miss piggy-ish. I can see why Americans would love her, you can put a blond wig on a horse and Americans would go gaga.
    I see past hair color and eye color. Her bone structure is so average, nothing model like about it and I must agree with VS when they said anyone with money can go and buy her features. Very bland.
    Her body however….Very nice body and she should stick to bathing suit bikini modeling and I say that in the most sincere way. She has a great body and she should definitely show it.

    • TheOriginalKitten says:

      “you can put a blond wig on a horse and Americans would go gaga.”

      Yeah, we only worship blondes out here. You know, like Kim Kardashian, Beyonce, Salma Hayek, Angelina Jolie, Mila Kunis, Freida Pinto..and these are just a few.

      For someone who doesn’t live in this country and as evidenced by your persistent stereotyping, really knows nothing about American culture/society/politics, you sure do have a lot of opinions about us.

      I can’t wait to travel down the magical rainbow to your country where everything is perfect, war doesn’t exist, politicians hold hands, and everyone pays for things with hugs and kisses.

      • I'm going to Guam! says:

        Hmm, someone didn’t want to post my reply to you for some reason (it wasn’t offensive).
        it explained what I meant with my above comment.
        Oh well.

    • Minty says:

      “…you can put a blond wig on a horse and Americans would go gaga.”

      What a stupid generalization about Americans, on a gossip website based in America, no less. We’re over 300 million strong, with disparate tastes, so there’s something for everyone. We all don’t like the same things. Has that simple fact ever visited your thoughts?

      On topic: Kate has a great body for bikinis and lingerie, but she doesn’t have a unique enough face for high fashion or a cosmetics campaign, not even CoverGirl. Bedhead is right in calling her a mall girl. Go to any mall and you’ll likely see someone else with her level of facial prettiness. Cute, but not jaw-dropping.

      However, what I think a lot of people are responding to, besides her traditionally feminine body, is Kate’s easygoing personality. She doesn’t come across as conceited or pretentious. She’s approachable. She looks as if she enjoys a good meal. It seems like she feels thankful and lucky to be where she’s at right now, so more power to her.

      The fashion industry is full of bullsh-t anyway, with their use of fur, their overpriced crap, their encouragement of eating disorders, their constant promoting of skeletal models as some kind of ideal, their cattiness and superficiality. If they are upset over the attention Kate is getting, then I’m enjoying their discomposure.

    • Sachi says:

      You’re right about the bone structure.

      Kate is beautiful, but her bone structure is very ordinary.

      Christy Turlington isn’t conventionally gorgeous, IMO, but her bone structure is amazing. The symmetry in her face…wow. Same for Karlie Kloss. Both have personalities that charm a lot of people, and Karlie already has a signature walk a la Naomi and Gisele.

      But there are those whose “imperfections” add to their appeal and makes them stand out in a crowd. Right now, one of the favorites in high fashion is Lindsey Wixson. Her gap-tooth, too-thick lips aesthetic might be ugly to a lot of people, but the fashion world is going crazy over her. She just looks so different, but also has high fashion written all over her. Around 2007-2008, it was the “elfin” models like Gemma Ward who made big splashes because of their big eyes, round faces, and small noses. They were described as ethereal, out of this world.

      Kate Upton looks very next-door compared to the models in high fashion nowadays. She is conventionally pretty which will work well with commercial brands.

      • I'm going to Guam! says:

        Yes, she’s a great commercial model but she has a great body and should show it off. SI was great for her and she even got the cover once.

  39. mk yarwood says:

    haha, am I the ONLY WOMAN HERE who thinks it’s a very good thing she isn’t ‘high fashion’? High fashion creates million dollar bras studded with blood diamonds. High fashion creates eating disorders, body dysmorphia, general cattiness betwixt chicks and gays. High fashion steals the culture of others and turns it into ‘style’. Where do we think the topknot came from? Anywhere else but Sikhs? No. I am pleased to see this living, breathing bombshell. I just wish she were as smart as Norma Jean.

    • Minty says:

      No, you’re not. THANK YOU for posting that insightful comment. I hadn’t read it yet before I posted a similar comment.

      Some other thoughts: the fashion industry is ruled by an oligarchy. The ones with power dictate what’s in and all their fashion sheeple fall in line, even if what’s in is downright ridiculous. The industry is elitist. It is not democratic and not representative of the population it’s selling to, yet many buy into their crap. Style over substance again and again.

      The last time I liked high fashion was during the reign of the early ’90s supermodels, when the images they sold were aspirational to me. That’s when models were healthy, assertive WOMEN who were in charge of their careers. They actually eclipsed the clothes. They were so different from the malnourished, passive, blank-faced GIRLS we see today.

      Designers won’t allow the supermodels to return. They don’t want models to have that kind of power again. Isn’t it funny how they use teens to advertise their products which are primarily bought by affluent grown women? SMDH.

      • TheOneAndOnlyOnly says:

        Great comments minty as a fan of the 90s glamazons; correct me if i’m wrong but hasn’t the fashion bizz, in a fit of smug pique, shot themselves in the foot by featuring anorexic waifs and now every random celeb in the ad campaigns instead of actual models; what was great about the 90s girls was that someone like Cindy Crawford could do pepsi and versace and was relatable and believable in both – high fashion,eds, commercial, covers – the 90s beauties could do it all.

      • Minty says:

        @TheOneAndOnlyOnly:

        I agree. I think they have shot themselves in the foot. The ’90s supermodels were as famous as movie stars and singers. Cindy, Christy, Naomi, Linda, etc, could write their own ticket and afford to be selective. They could also sell almost any product, even things that were not associated with fashion. The supermodels achieved enough independence that they couldn’t be told what to do, and you know the designers, editors, and photographers resented that. So, instead of promoting more models of that caliber, the industry prevented it from happening again with the next generation. They were going to control their girls. They wanted them pretty and passive and even younger.

        Ever since, actresses and singers hog the spotlight and get all the prestige modeling jobs instead of today’s models, because most models now are bland in personality and alienate the public with their unhealthy skeletal bodies.

        If fashion people had any foresight, they would have continued to promote supermodels who had the beauty and charisma to compete with Hollywood. Instead, they need Rihanna, KStew, Mila, Natalie, Sarah Jessica, Brad Pitt(!) to sell their stuff, and I’m sure they have to pay them a lot more for the “privilege”. The supermodels brought a lot of selling power to the fashion industry, but the people in charge were stupid enough to end that.

      • TheOneAndOnlyOnly says:

        Excellent minty You should run a major NY agency;
        Several points – spot on that companies have to pay the rihanna and kstews a lot more for a lot less Rihanna for covergirl and Kstew for Balenciaga Please;
        Second, doesn’t anyone in the fashion bizz realize what has happened or don’t they care.
        Everyone on this site knows that young hollywood isn’t much these days, and I’m sure there are some models out there that could compete with such a drab twit as KSTew.
        Even from a business point of view, it makes no sense because companies are paying more and getting a lot less than the supermodels brought back in the day.

  40. Relli says:

    She is stunning!

  41. Ellecee says:

    I have a girl crush on her. Why can’t we all just accept her and stop calling her “fat” or “dumb” or “trashy”?? I’m so sick of women hating on other women. We need to stick together ladies. We’re all different and thats what makes each of us great! Yea, Kate is busty and starry-eyed, but thats her “je ne sais quoi.” Let her have her moment in the sun. JEEEEEZ

  42. BX says:

    I think Kate is a beautiful girl, but not high fashion. All she has to offer is face and boobs. She can’t pose to save her life. She should be a commercial model. She can sell me Vicky’s, but she can’t sell me Valentino.

    …Then again, no one can because I’m broke!

  43. Zoid says:

    I don’t honestly see how this woman is single handedly revolutionizing the high fashion industry. Everyone here rags on the ‘pin/stick’ thin models, but did it ever occur to you that she’s just playing into ANOTHER insecurity some women have? Like NOT having ginormous tits? Come on. She’s not any better. I think she looks pretty enough but let’s not pretend like she’s making some huge statement here.

    • Jae says:

      +1000

      Yeah, moving from unreachable (by most) standarts of women-and-gay-men-oriented high fashion to just as unreachable straight-men-oriented ‘huge boobs sell stuff’ standarts – BIG progress here!

  44. Zoid says:

    Oops double post

  45. Zoid says:

    Oops double post.

  46. Sachi says:

    Pretty on the cover of VI. But nothing special. I like this makeup and styling on her though.

    That last photo of her…very pretty, too.

    But I think what she lacks in her photos is “fierceness”. You see a lot of people using this all the time, but in models it applies even more.

    I used to watch Tyra’s ANTM :D and can’t count the number of times she and the judges have said, “Fierce!” and whenever a model doesn’t have that quality, they all say, “Hmm, her photo is very commercial, not high fashion.”

    IMO it’s the same with Kate. She takes very photogenic photos, but that’s about it. She has no other emotion in her eyes but wide-eyed happiness. Even when the photos don’t necessarily demand it, she just looks so upbeat and happy all the time. Nothing wrong with that, but it sometimes ruins the effect the photos might have had if she had a different expression and body language than just, “Oh, look at me! So sexy with my boobs and my pout!” most of the time. And because her bone structure lacks sharpness, it doesn’t work photographing her from odd angles because the effect is still the same: pretty but very ordinary.

    People say modeling can be done by anyone. But looking at Kate, I think it’s the opposite. The big models all have a different look, a different appeal. But the biggest aspect of their career aside from their physical features is their ability to morph into whatever theme is required. Sexy? Sure. Androgynous? Got it. Dark and sinister? No problem. Soft and romantic? Absolutely. Lots of high fashion models are not conventionally pretty, but their looks are malleable to any aesthetic and their poses can transform photos from so-so to beautiful.

    Gisele gets slagged on this website all the time for being ugly and manly and people are incredulous as to how she is so popular and she keeps getting work.

    Well, here’s your answer: Gisele is NEVER budget and her face is very striking. She stands out in a crowd. She can turn on the fierce when needed. She can be sexy one moment, then upbeat and animated the next. She’s the only supermodel who successfully crosses between couture and commercial. She can campaign for Givenchy and Versace while promoting Pantene at the same time. She takes great photos depending on the atmosphere and theme.

    http://i.huffpost.com/gen/442346/GISELE-GIVENCHY-AD.jpg – Gisele’s face and body language matches the gloomy atmosphere of the photo.

    http://haydeeserpa.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/giselepantene.png – Gisele’s face looks as “soft” as her hair.

    Fierce in Versace:
    http://images.teamsugar.com/files/upl0/0/3987/11_2008/versace.jpg

    http://www.millionlooks.com/images/gisele-bundchen-versace-spring-2012-ad-campaign.jpg

  47. nordicgoddess says:

    how about this: unless you’re smaller, thinner, prettier or more successful than this girl, no hating on her figure…or her success…
    jeez women..we should applaud a relatively normal looking girl (still smaller than average) on the covers of magazines..

    • Jacquelantern says:

      since when is being slim and 5 foot 10 with massive boobs normal? people say the stick thin model figure is unrealistic… well upton is just a different flavor of unattainable. most women do NOT have huge boobs and are NOT 5 foot 10. in my opinion, she does not represent normal any more than the super skinny models do.

  48. babythastarsshinebrite says:

    I luv the blonde hair and dark eyebrows look.

  49. blabla says:

    LOL. She’s posing for vogue, laughing all the way to the bank, while yall who criticize her are at home, calling her “Ordinary” and “not special” ohhhhhhh poetic justice !

  50. Dani says:

    She’s gorgeous, albeit a little budget, but give her 6 months she’ll be half the size and will do anything to stay in high fashion.

  51. muppet_barbershop says:

    Actually I’m a fan of these shots. Very not-Photoshopped, except for the graininess, which was probably ‘shopped but I’ll forgive it. I wanna find out what happens with the maid.