Vanity Fair labels Chloe Sevigny a 'legend'
Lili2
INSANITY FAIR
By MEGAN TURNER
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
------
IF Chloe Sevigny is a legend, then I'm a cheese-and-tomato sandwich. Vanity
Fair's decision to include one of the most over-exposed cynosures of our time
on the same page as an actress like Vanessa Redgrave as a Hollywood legend is
more than misguided - it's deranged.
The glossy's seventh annual Hollywood Issue, out tomorrow, has broken with its
annual tradition of identifying actors on the verge of super-stardom in favor
of rounding up 10 actresses who are supposed to personify the term "legend."
From prophecy to lunacy. How else to describe the inclusion of Penelope Cruz
alongside immortal screen sirens such as Catherine Deneuve, Sophia Loren and
Meryl Streep?
Gwyneth Paltrow, Nicole Kidman, Cate Blanchett and Kate Winslet are all fine
actresses, with noteworthy turns in "Shakespeare In Love," "To Die For,"
"Elizabeth" and "Titanic," respectively.
But legends?
Lauren Bacall, Katharine Hepburn, Anjelica Huston and Jane Fonda - even Julia
Roberts - must have been washing their hair on each of the three days
photographer Annie Leibovitz shot the cover.
Webster's dictionary defines a legend as "a notable person whose deeds or
exploits are much talked about in his or her own time."
Sevigny's, Cruz's, Paltrow's and Kidman's deeds and exploits are, indeed,
well-documented - but do bold-faced appearances in People really count?
Admittedly, deciding what constitutes a legend is as arbitrary as defining an
"It Girl." But surely assembling an impressive roster of quality films counts
for more than showing up at the right parties, wearing eye-catching outfits and
having high-profile relationships. (Ironically, the Hollywood issue features a
letter from a reader calling the magazine to task for overusing the word
"legendary.")
VF notes that, between them, these 10 actresses have notched up 399 films and
27 Oscar awards and nominations.
Those numbers are skewed rather heavily toward the bona fide legends: 85 films
are attributable to Vanessa Redgrave, 98 to Sophia Loren and 47 to Meryl
Streep.
Sevigny has worked on a total of 10 movies, including the legendarily bad
"Gummo" and "Julien Donkey-Boy," and has received one Oscar nomination, for
"Boys Don't Cry."
And what a difference a year has made for Penelope Cruz: last year the magazine
considered her a rising young talent; this year, she's a legend.
You may remember Cruz (or not) from Spanish-language films such as "Belle
Epoque" and Pedro Almodovar's "All About My Mother." Her first American star
vehicle "Women on Top" flew under most people's radar and the less said about
last year's "All the Pretty Horses" the better.
Vanity Fair's features editor Jane Sarkin, who has produced the Hollywood
issue's cover since its inception, yesterday defended her picks.
"There's certainly a huge list of people we could have included," she said.
"Obviously, we couldn't do them all, but these are the ones we wanted and the
ones we ended up getting."
But Chloe Sevigny a legend?
"I'm not calling Chloe a legend - I'm saying she has what it takes to become a
legend. Some of these women are legends, some are on their way to becoming
legends and some may or may not become legends, we'll have to see."
Glad that's cleared up, then.
Ann
Lili2 wrote:
> NY POST
>
> INSANITY FAIR
> By MEGAN TURNER
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ------
>
> IF Chloe Sevigny is a legend, then I'm a cheese-and-tomato sandwich. Vanity
> Fair's decision to include one of the most over-exposed cynosures of our time
> on the same page as an actress like Vanessa Redgrave as a Hollywood legend is
> more than misguided - it's deranged.
>
> The glossy's seventh annual Hollywood Issue, out tomorrow, has broken with its
> annual tradition of identifying actors on the verge of super-stardom in favor
> of rounding up 10 actresses who are supposed to personify the term "legend."
>
> From prophecy to lunacy. How else to describe the inclusion of Penelope Cruz
> alongside immortal screen sirens such as Catherine Deneuve, Sophia Loren and
> Meryl Streep?
>
> Gwyneth Paltrow, Nicole Kidman, Cate Blanchett and Kate Winslet are all fine
> actresses, with noteworthy turns in "Shakespeare In Love," "To Die For,"
> "Elizabeth" and "Titanic," respectively.
>
> But legends?
>
> Lauren Bacall, Katharine Hepburn, Anjelica Huston and Jane Fonda - even Julia
> Roberts - must have been washing their hair on each of the three days
> photographer Annie Leibovitz shot the cover.
>
<snip the rest>
All these silly lists are about making headlines and creating buzz. Now New York
Post is talking about it, mission accomplished as far as Vanity Fair is concerned.
Fiona McQuarrie
: NY POST
: INSANITY FAIR
: By MEGAN TURNER
: --------------------------------------------------------------------------
: ------
:
: IF Chloe Sevigny is a legend, then I'm a cheese-and-tomato sandwich. Vanity
: Fair's decision to include one of the most over-exposed cynosures of our time
: on the same page as an actress like Vanessa Redgrave as a Hollywood legend is
: more than misguided - it's deranged.
I was kind of wondering about this after reading the last few issues of
Vogue. They keep presenting her as some sort of "fashion icon". She's a
nice enough looking woman, but she always looks kind of sulky and her
clothes are rumply. And some of her outfits are just plain weird, and not
style-setting at all.
Does she just have a really good PR agent?
Cheers, Fiona
Elayne Riggs
> NY POST
> INSANITY FAIR
> By MEGAN TURNER
> IF Chloe Sevigny is a legend, then I'm a cheese-and-tomato sandwich.
And even if Sevigny ISN'T, Turner's a cheese-and-tomato sandwich.
- Elayne
HelloPossum
They keep presenting her as some sort of "fashion icon".
My thoughts exactly. She's been called the new It girl by Vogue, and that
fashion icon label escapes me, too. She mixes a lot of styles, uses a lot of
retro, so maybe that's it. But if one of us non-showbiz types showed up at a
public event n a '70s short furry jacket, I doubt we'd be dubbed fashion
legends.
3d...@qlink.queensu.canada.invalid
RGINA
>Chloe Sevigny, Mena Suvari, Mira Sorvino... who can tell them apart?
>Well, I guess Mira Sorvino, since she's a brunette at least part-time.
>
>Mena Suvari strikes me as *extremely* weird. She always has big, dark
>circles under her eyes, dresses like someone 20 years older, and
>somehow conveys that she's being secretly abused.
Speaking of the "legendary" Mena Suvari--I saw her at UCLA a few weeks ago
filming American Pie 2 and NO ONE knew who she was among the large group of
bystanders surrounding me as we watched them set up for a scene. LOL
alt showbiz gossip
Kiara
20. She can look ok but I admit she tries to dress really too old.
"Patricia Martin Steward" <puff...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:3aaa288e...@news.earthlink.net...
> On 6 Mar 2001 05:49:55 GMT, Fiona McQuarrie <mcqu...@sfu.ca> wrote:
> >
> >I was kind of wondering about this after reading the last few issues of
> >Vogue. They keep presenting her as some sort of "fashion icon". She's a
> >nice enough looking woman, but she always looks kind of sulky and her
> >clothes are rumply. And some of her outfits are just plain weird, and not
> >style-setting at all.
>
> Chloe Sevigny, Mena Suvari, Mira Sorvino... who can tell them apart?
> Well, I guess Mira Sorvino, since she's a brunette at least part-time.
>
> Mena Suvari strikes me as *extremely* weird. She always has big, dark
> circles under her eyes, dresses like someone 20 years older, and
> somehow conveys that she's being secretly abused.
>
> --
> This email address won't work. I've tried. Earthlink has tried. It just
doesn't work.
>
> Face your fears.
> Live your dreams.
Kewl Kat
I don't believe that for a second - you couldn't pick out the two-story
forehead gleaming from the set?
Lol
Kiara
icon". Her clothes to me look baggy, ill fitting, not too clean and does
nothing to enhance her figure.
"Fiona McQuarrie" <mcqu...@sfu.ca> wrote in message
news:981tq3$cgr$4...@morgoth.sfu.ca...
Brandy Alexandre®
<20010306124426...@ng-mh1.news.cs.com>:
I think she is one of the homeliest "stars" I've ever seen. And
frankly, I don't think I've "seen" her in anything.
--
Brandy Alexandre
http://kamikaze.org
I'm retired, but work part-time as a pain in the butt.
Brandy Alexandre®
in <3aaa288e...@news.earthlink.net>:
>Chloe Sevigny, Mena Suvari, Mira Sorvino... who can tell them apart?
>Well, I guess Mira Sorvino, since she's a brunette at least
>part-time.
>
>Mena Suvari strikes me as *extremely* weird. She always has big,
>dark circles under her eyes, dresses like someone 20 years older,
>and somehow conveys that she's being secretly abused.
And her forehead's way too big
Brandy Alexandre®
<3AA5B01B...@yahoo.com>:
>> Speaking of the "legendary" Mena Suvari--I saw her at UCLA a few
>> weeks ago filming American Pie 2 and NO ONE knew who she was among
>> the large group of bystanders surrounding me as we watched them
>> set up for a scene. LOL
>
>I don't believe that for a second - you couldn't pick out the
>two-story forehead gleaming from the set?
>
>Lol
>
ROFL!
Tod Friendly
Patricia Martin Steward <puff...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:3aaa288e...@news.earthlink.net...
> On 6 Mar 2001 05:49:55 GMT, Fiona McQuarrie <mcqu...@sfu.ca> wrote:
> >
> >Vogue. They keep presenting her as some sort of "fashion icon". She's a
> >nice enough looking woman, but she always looks kind of sulky and her
> >clothes are rumply. And some of her outfits are just plain weird, and not
> >style-setting at all.
>
Is there a prize for this?
--
Tod
"If you had returned my calls, I could have warned you. I just want
you to know, I was the one who got Gus to turn it into a blind item."
- Tama Janowitz, "A Certain Age"
g_ba...@ether.com
<babie...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Patricia Martin Steward <puff...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:3aaa288e...@news.earthlink.net...
> > Chloe Sevigny, Mena Suvari, Mira Sorvino... who can tell them apart?
Tell them apart? Aside from Mira Sorvino, I don't even know who the other
two are! Has Chloe Sevigny done anything?
MLYoung
>two are! Has Chloe Sevigny done anything?
>
Boys Don't Cry--Hillary Swank's
love interest. One of those actresses,
like Debra Winger, who's not much
to look at, but has a great voice.
--margaret
Tod Friendly
<g_ba...@ether.com> wrote in message
news:g_bannis-060...@192.168.1.101...
Sevigny was in Kids and The Last Days of Disco - 2 fine low-key films.
And Mena Suvari was one of the stars of American Beauty and American Pie.
Peep...@webtv.net
>>Tell them apart? Aside from Mira Sorvino,
>>I don't even know who the other two are!
>>Has Chloe Sevigny done anything?
>Boys Don't Cry--Hillary Swank's
It's *Hilary* Swank, ditz.
Hugs,
Janice
--
GO Green!! GO, Ralph!!
http://www.votenader.com/
(-)> *peep* (-)> *peep* (-)> *muckmouth*
MLYoung
>Marge
--margaret
EatWelBWel
Julia turned it down?
Chloe is a nobody who has starred in nothing. Can anyone explain her
prominance?
Sandra
Flkofcguls
Jesus, what is with the Sevigny bashing? It's not like she's calling herself a
legend or going around believing her publicity. She happens to actually have
talent, or maybe you missed Kids, Boys Don't Cry (for which she should have won
the Oscar) or If These Walls Could Talk 2, where she played a more convincing
boy as a butch dyke than Hilarity Swank ever could.
She seems very low-key and I'd hardly say she's a publicity whore. C'mon, we
can't have let the Gwynnie-Cameron-JLo well run dry already! Quit pickin' on
the poor girl.
MLYoung
Saturation: 47 percent
Volume: +6
On-topic: 7 percent (and it had such
a good day yesterday)
--margaret
Fiona McQuarrie
: She seems very low-key and I'd hardly say she's a publicity whore. C'mon, we
: can't have let the Gwynnie-Cameron-JLo well run dry already! Quit pickin' on
: the poor girl.
If she isn't a publicity ho, why is she in every single issue of VOGUE in
the last few months? She may be very low-key, but her publicist sure
isn't.
Cheers, Fiona
Flkofcguls
>If she isn't a publicity ho, why is she in every single issue of VOGUE in
>the last few months? She may be very low-key, but her publicist sure
>isn't.
>
>Cheers, Fiona
Maybe someone at Vogue has a crush on her.
Kiara
"Flkofcguls" <flkof...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20010308204821...@ng-mf1.aol.com...
MLYoung
Well, she usually shows up in Andre
Leon Talley's column and I find it hard
to believe he has a crush on her. Not
at all his cup of tea.
--margaret
HelloPossum
>Leon Talley's column and I find it hard
>to believe he has a crush on her. Not
>at all his cup of tea.
>
>--margaret
Talley can be funny, but I don't think he's found his style for that column.
It fluctuates, and often is just a forum for him to vent his own anger at
someone in the fashion world. I've only read one of Kevyn Aucoin's columns ( in
Jane?) but he has more interesting and informative things to to say than does
Talley.
MLYoung
>>Leon Talley's column and I find it hard
>>to believe he has a crush on her. Not
>>at all his cup of tea.
>>
>>--margaret
>
>Talley can be funny, but I don't think he's found his style for that column.
>It fluctuates, and often is just a forum for him to vent his own anger at
>someone in the fashion world. I've only read one of Kevyn Aucoin's columns (
>in
>Jane?)
He has a page--lots of photos and stuff,
not just writing--in Allure. Does he
write in Jane, too?
I made the mistake of lending one of
Aucoin's books to my adolescent neice.
Didn't get it back for a year. She did
stop overplucking her eyebrows, however.
Talley's column is okay, but it's really
not a big favorite of mine. I love Jeffrey
Steingarten's food column, though I wasn't
all that thrilled with the one recipe I made
(hot chocolate), and "She's gotta have it." when Marina Rust wrote it. Alas,
Rust
is too busy being a social doyenne these
days to attend to important things like
frivolous fashion columns.
--margaret (Then there's E.Jean at Elle--
now, that's an advice column.)
but he has more interesting and informative things to to say than
>does
>Talley.
>
>
.
Peep...@webtv.net
>He has a page--lots of photos and stuff,
>not just writing--in Allure. Does he
>write in Jane, too?
>
>I made the mistake of lending one of
>Aucoin's books to my adolescent neice.
Ah, yes, another word Mags consistently misspells.
*LOL*
Hugs, ditz,
Janice, wondering *how* preternaturally stOOpid you have to be to
misspell "niece" *ad nauseam* if you've *had* one for ____-teen years.
Geezus.
MLYoung
>Mags
SOI for March 11, 2001
Saturation: 20 percent
Volume: +5
On-topic: 20 percent
Longest streak since inception of
SOI: 9 days.
Current streak: 1 day.
--margaret (amused that Shrieks fusses
about her spelling in one post and
then claims she's "anally-retentive"
about spelling in another. Consistency,
little Shrieks, consistency. Also, please quit misusing hyphens--if you're
going
to bore people with spelling flames, it's
the very least you can do.)
Peep...@webtv.net
<manifestation of her on-line OCD ("SOI", which makes MOI l-o-n-g for
"JFO") mercy-SNIPped.>
>--margaret (amused that Shrieks fusses
>about her spelling in one post and
>then claims she's "anally-retentive"
>about spelling in another.
Yep, you're anally-retentive re: your spellings -- be they correct or
incorrect, cupcake. Heck, you'd *have* to be to never get "Jacqueline"
or "backpedal" or "inaugurate" right -- even by accident.
*LOL....*
Now, *tomorrow*....take a handful of your anti-agoraphobia meds, hop on
a bus, haul your ditzy-ass to a Hallmark store, pick up a card for your
alleged "neice" & figure out how the hell to spell that ~$64,000~ word
-- *niece* -- correctly.
*LOLOL*
Hugs, "auntie",
Janice
MLYoung
>Yep, you're anally-retentive re: your spelling
Oh, and while I'm at it--"anally-retentive"
is incorrect. "Anal-retentive" is
the correct form of that compound
modifier. "Anal-retentively" would be
the correct form for the adverb--though
that strikes me as an awkward and ugly
construction. I'd avoid using it.
><manifestation of her on-line OCD ("SOI", which makes MOI l-o-n-g for
>"JFO") mercy-SNIPped.>
Ah, yes, time for an update. As for
OCD--well, ShriekShriek, I don't post
an SOI unless you post about me.
You do show an astonishing lack of
self-awareness. You're tacitly admitting
that you consider yourself obsessed.
Perhaps you would like a further
breakdown of your posts--i.e. number
of times you write "*LOL*" or "ClintOOn".
Or how about a ShriekShriek cliche compendium? Ah, better yet, a Shriek
Shriek cliche filter.
But, anyway, back to business.
Revised SOI:
Saturation: 33 percent
Volume: +9
On-topic: 22 percent
--margaret
HelloPossum
with the one recipe I made (hot chocolate)
Was the article in which he trashed Laura Bush's hot chocolate recipe? Or was
it another politician's wife? It was way past the time of Hillary's chocolate
chip cookies, as I recall. Well, thanks for saving me the trouble. I'd clipped
that recipe for hot chocolate and was intending to try it. But I think that his
columns are the best thing about Vogue. Plum Skye's column is a tepid Bridget
Jones's Diary, but I'm sure that similarity has already been noticed.
MLYoung
>thrilled
>with the one recipe I made (hot chocolate)
>
>Was the article in which he trashed Laura Bush's hot chocolate recipe? Or was
>it another politician's wife?
Nope, it was Laura Bush's and that
was the article.
It was way past the time of Hillary's chocolate
>chip cookies, as I recall. Well, thanks for
I actually made both Hillary's and Liddy
Dole's cookies with my niece four years
ago. Hillary's were okay in a wholesome
oatmealy kind of way. Liddy's really
needed to be made with butter instead
of margarine.
saving me the trouble. I'd
>clipped
>that recipe for hot chocolate and was intending to try it.
Well, you may want to try it, anyway.
I don't like a real intense hot chocolate.
If you do, then the Steingarten recipe
is for you. I'm of the Ghiradelli powder
school, myself.
But I think that
>his
>columns are the best thing about Vogue. Plum Skye's column is a tepid Bridget
>Jones's Diary, but I'm sure that similarity has already been noticed.
Actually, I think you're the first. I prefer
'em to the Sweetie columns in Elle, but
that's not saying much. Well, at least
they're short.
--margaret (off to read about caviar)
>
>
>
>
.
Peep...@webtv.net
>Shrieks obsessed:
>
>>Yep, you're anally-retentive re: your spelling
>
>Oh, and while I'm at it--"anally-retentive"
>is incorrect.
*LOL*
*You* were the one who first used the 'spression, you anile dipstick.
I was just throwing it back at you.
*I* said your misspellings were "anally-consistent" -- you misquoted
that as "anally-retentive".
Duh.
*Not* too swift for a reporter-wannabe.
>"Anal-retentive" is
>the correct form of that compound
>modifier. "Anal-retentively" would be
>the correct form for the adverb--though
>that strikes me as an awkward and ugly
>construction. I'd avoid using it.
It's a perfectly fine construction, ditz.
"Mags posted anal-retentively."
Quick, concise. Shorter than "Mags posted in an anal-retentive
fashion."
Double duh.
>><manifestation of her on-line OCD ("SOI", which makes MOI l-o-n-g for
>>"JFO") mercy-SNIPped.>
>
>Ah, yes, time for an update.
Time for Luvox.
& you might not let m-o-I keep you up so late at night, pumkin.
~Remember~, you really need to rack up some posts from the early-to-mid
morning period (IOW, you need to change your l-o-o-ng established
posting habits (*rut*)) for that suspension-of-disbelief re: being a
"new-mamacita".
*LOL*
>As for
>OCD--well,
>ShriekShriek
>SOI
>ShriekShriek
>ShriekShriek
>
>But, anyway, back to business.
>
>Revised SOI:
>
>Saturation: 33 percent
>Volume: +9
>On-topic: 22 percent
>
>--margaret
Get help ASAP.
We know you're trying to substitute a ritual in lieu of your not having
a new-baby to diaper, burp, feed, nurse, etc., but THIS ain't working
for you, buttercup.
Believe it!!
Hugs of mind-healing,
MLYoung
>>Shrieks obsessed:
>
>
>*You* were the one who first used the 'spression, you anile dipstick.
>
Nope. I was quoting you.
You really are quite the crybaby.
--margaret
RJRSJ1
throwing a hissy fit while you walk by shaking your head.........knowing that
hindsight's 20/20 but they don't. Sad part is that in high school, it was
*expected*.
Peep...@webtv.net
>>as I recall. Well, thanks for
>I actually made both Hillary's and Liddy
>Dole's cookies with my niece four years
>ago.
*ROFLOL*
Congrats, cupcake. That's the first time we've seen you spell "niece"
correctly in four yrs.!!
YAY!!
Hugs,
Janice, who, apparently, has ZIP on Doc Pavlov..........*LOL*