Nicole Kidman’s new Jimmy Choo print ads: cartoonish, sad and/or disastrous?

kidman1

So far, I’ve hated every campaign from Nicole Kidman’s collaboration with Jimmy Choo. This is her third print ad campaign thus far, and each campaign just gets worse and worse. At this point, I don’t even know why they hired Nicole Kidman. Why even hire a famous face to represent your shoe and purse line if you’re just going to make her look like a friggin’ cartoon? I mean, Nicole already made herself look somewhat cartoonish with her marble-like face and overfilled lips, but it’s sad/weird that the Jimmy Choo Photoshop people were like, “Hey, you know what Nicole needs? To be utterly unrecognizable in these photos!”

The idea, according to the fashion professionals, was for photographer Sølve Sundsbø to create a campaign “inspired by the cubist movement.” Sure. Granted, I’m not an art history major, but this looks less like “Cubism” and more like “Photoshop disaster.”

Things I learned from these Choo ads:

*Even a famous beauty like Nicole looks completely creepy with Photoshopped doll legs.

*Nicole should never agree to wear pale orange lipstick. EVER.

*No woman looks appealing when you make her mons look like a Ken Doll’s sad, blank crotch.

*Nicole’s bolt-ons look sketchy from certain angles.

*Apparently, the height of fashion is “looking dead-eyed and corpsey.” Noted.

*If you do this to the “face” of your campaign, people aren’t going to be paying attention to the shoes and bags. I’ve seriously been staring at these images for 30 minutes and I couldn’t tell you what the bags and shoes looked like at all.

kidman2

kidman3

Ads courtesy of Jimmy Choo/Fashion Gone Rogue.

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

38 Responses to “Nicole Kidman’s new Jimmy Choo print ads: cartoonish, sad and/or disastrous?”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. bowers says:

    I can’t tell who it is.

    • Ice Maiden says:

      Me neither. Why bother hiring someone like Nicole, at huge expense, when you’re going to photoshop her into unrecognisability? Might as well just get an anonymous model for a fraction of the price.

      I really liked her first campaign for Jimmy Choo, but these photos are just tacky.

    • Me neither–and I’m someone who can always tell.

      These look terrible–that first shot is the worst.

    • Stef Leppard says:

      +1 Doesn’t even look like her. They could’ve saved a lot of money and used a random no-name model.

      Edit: I basically just repeated everything ice maiden said. Whoops.

  2. Suze says:

    Gah, these are creepy, and you’re right, Kidman is unrecognizable.

    And they are selling what, again? Oh, that’s right. Shoes.

  3. FreeBunny says:

    It’s sad, she was so lovely.

  4. blue marie says:

    Wow, those are bad but I do like the shoes in the first photo.

  5. Esmom says:

    I didn’t mind the first ad, only because that red bob wig looked so good on her. These shots are just so try hard. At this point edgy is not in her wheelhouse, imo.

  6. Anna says:

    She doesn’t even look like a real person. Too much photoshop

  7. LadySlippers says:

    She looks like Elizabeth Hurley.

    And someone needs to tell the ad agency that this in NOT cubism. They made her look scared, vulnerable, and exploited — like she’s waiting to be killed or tortured, neither of those actions scream ‘please buy my uber expensive shoes’.

    Poor Nicole. Is her contract with them almost done? I’d be hopping mad if I were her.

  8. Corrie says:

    It’s a meh campaign but not sad. Just not great. Mediocre. She needs to stop the Botox, she’s a wonderful actress and is beautiful. I don’t get her need for the work on her face-same with the work on her hair. She’s not even old or aging bad, she’s pretty damn hot. Mind boggling.

  9. CaribbeanLaura says:

    I actually made an effort to look at the shoes, which was difficult let me tell you. But I like the shoes, I’m not a ‘fashion girl’ by any stretch of the imagination, but the shoes kinda make me wanna get them. Not that I could afford them AT ALL. That being said the amount of effort I had to make to look past Nicole’s weird barbie face to actually see the shoes makes the ad usless really.

    • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

      I agree you have to remind yourself to look at the shoes, which isn’t the hallmark of a good ad campaign and her dead Barbie face is creepy. Having said that, I love the last two pairs of shoes. I’m sort of obsessing over them, which is stupid because I can’t walk in heels that high. Jimmy Choo’s bags are always blah, imo.

  10. klue says:

    Ew. Dead Barbie Chic

  11. phaksi says:

    All of the above! She looks like the doll Anjelica from Rugrats has. And I didnt know she has bolt ons

  12. Brittney says:

    If you’d showed me these and asked who it was, I would’ve guessed Kylie Minogue.

  13. Cleveland Girl says:

    I don’t know – i feel like running out and buying those shoes if my legs could look like that in them.

  14. Frida_K says:

    She looks like Brigitte Nielson back in her heyday in the first photograph.

    Did she HAVE TO go along with this? Couldn’t she have said no to any of it?

    Who on earth would think this is attractive or worthy?

    Bleh!!

  15. Tig says:

    The first doesn’t even look like her/is the idea to make her so repulsive that the shoes are the only attractive thing in the photo?

    And to above poster- Kylie M looks way better than this, and who would ever photoshop her amazing legs??

    Run Nicole run! With or w/o Jimmy choos on your feet!!

  16. judyjudy says:

    Those turquoise shoes! Want!

  17. Neffie says:

    She looks like the 60 foot woman.

  18. GlimmerBunny says:

    The last picture is okay, the other ones are unrecognizeable. And Nicole is SO beautiful, I relly don’t understand why they did this to her 🙁

  19. Eleonor says:

    Mess.

  20. lucia says:

    This is very bad bad !

  21. Nicolette says:

    And where is Nicole exactly? Why do they bother using people for any photo shoot anymore? They wind up looking like someone else completely anyway, and it’s ridiculous that they get these enormous paychecks for their image being used when it’s not their image at all in the end. Just create someone with all their photo shopping and technology and call it a day.

    • Santolina says:

      Did they get what they paid for? Sweet deal for Nicole and her insatiable vanity. You’ll never see her taking a stand for women’s healthy body image, etc. What messages will her daughters get from mommy’s endless Photoshopping and product endorsement mania, I wonder?

  22. Hootysgram says:

    Doesn’t even look like her…She’s pretty enough without photo shop!

  23. GIRLFACE says:

    She doesn’t look good at all. I can’t tell if it’s photoshop or botox and fillers making her look awful here probably a combo. I’m in my 20s and I know girls with botox and fillers. I swear it makes you look worse. When I see people with fillers it is always obvious. Her forehead eye area looks ridiculous. I hope it wears off. Yuck.

  24. Grant says:

    Oh goodness, these really are terrible.

  25. someone says:

    I don’ t get the last picture. The first two she is apparently laying on her back on the floor and they are showing her from the top looking down. But the third one doesn’t make sense – she is bent at some weird angle.

  26. Gia says:

    Ummm, yeah. Who the hell is that?? Beyond recognition.

  27. lady mary. says:

    it looks like that ANTM episode ,where they stuffed the models in a coffin and were askd to emote 7 deady sins ,can;t even spot the bag with those loud graphics in the background

  28. Jayna says:

    They honestly showcase the shoes quite well and uniquely. I just hate how her face is photoshopped to oblivion. They took away the essence of her beauty and made her look generic facewise.

  29. kaligula says:

    Am I the only one who likes them? I love the light, and the energy in them. Also I have had a girl crush on Nicole for a while now so I guess that makes me inclined to see the positive here. But really I think they are interesting. It’s hard to do something different and truly original looking in ad images nowadays and I think they’ve accomplished it.