Rihanna vs Emma Watson: Battle of the cover girls
One’s a self professed ‘Good Girl Gone Bad’ the other’s a Harry Potter child star but this month two of the world’s hottest 20-somethings go head-to-head on arguably the globe’s most prestigious fashion magazines. The question is – which do you prefer?
Obviously both girls look incredible and the photography is top notch so we reckon the choice comes down to whether you’re Team Kooky or Team Sexy.
Rihanna is clearly on Team Sexy sporting a Monroe-esque blonde wig and tres chic but super tight skirt but (please don’t hate us!) it somehow leaves us cold. I mean, she looks beautiful, the pose is strong but is it just a little predictable? We’re bombarded with sexual imagery on a daily basis and this cover isn’t shocking so maybe we’re just bored of sexiness; this pose just looks, well, a little contrived; Cookie cutter seductive, if you like. (But Rihanna does look pretty!)
Having said that, some fashion peeps (and possibly Northern Irish farmers) have commented that it’s refreshing to see Rihanna with some clothes on! … Sorry to disappoint folks…
As someone who has ranted about the amount of gratuitous nakedness in the media (possible leotard jealousy admittedly) I’m surprised that I actually like the more provocative of the Vogue images, as perhaps despite the obvious ‘sex appeal’ boxes that are ticked, Rihanna looks so strong and possibly the background (and beret) makes it seem more arty and less men’s mag. I LOVE the beret.
Opinions are divided about the cover- too ‘obvious’? Not daring enough? Some have branded it ‘boring’. What do you think?
As you’ve probably guessed, I’m on Team Kooky (and do admittedly have a bit of a style crush on Emma Watson). Perhaps it’s a British thing (more subtle, arguably a little prudish and that specific kind of self-depreciating sense of humour) but I put it down to a sense of fun. Not taking sexy too seriously.
I LOVE this cover- the enigmatic expression, off-centre composition, candy-coloured feathers; everything! It’s innocent in a show-girl way and is the kind of slightly silly shot you might attempt at a fancy dress party (but in a more seductive high fashion way!) It’s sexy, but in a less obvious way.
To borrow a men’s mag phrase, Emma also ‘gets her legs out’ for the shoot but again, it’s in a playful way. She’s wearing bunny ears (clichéd sexual reference) but with a 60s crocheted super short dress and details like the peter pan collar and bows on the shoes (similar to Leighton Meester’s) says flirty and cool…not ‘come hither!’
Maybe the outfit looks like it suits someone more her age, maybe it appeals more to girls than it is for men (have you read The Man Repeller blog?) Despite being an actress, Emma doesn’t seem to be trying to be anyone else…which as all good advice columns say, is seriously attractive.
As for the wooly hat picture – cute! The question is, Team Kooky might please the girls but does it attract the boys as much…and do we actually care? I’d rather be a kooky fun girl.