Wednesday, 6 March 2013

Look magazine

I don't know how many of you reading this have ever read Look, or how many of you read it religiously every week. Well I read it religiously every week, because my mam buys it, but I HATE IT!!! It is an absolutely appalling read and is not so fashionable for a magazine that is supposedly a 'fashion' magazine and every issue grates on me but this one really got me twitchy. The 11th March issue has Cara Delevigne on the front so I immediately thought "YAY!" but that was very short lived.
So. A few points:

1) They are frequently talking about "new trends" but they seem to catch on to them long after I have and long after I have seen them on other bloggers and around London which makes me think they are so behind with trends!! And this may just be me but I prefer cool unknown brands and in this issue they've only gone and cottoned onto them!! Firstly, that makes them far less cool to me now. Secondly, no Look, we'd heard about them ages ago because you are not street. And apparently collars + jumper + statement necklace is a brand new thing?! As far as I was aware it's been around long enough so Look were very slow to catch on there!

2) They suck up to celebs in their mag so bad!! Stop being so licky!!

3) They fill up their pages with some really boring useless crap.

4) They didn't used to but they feature such stupid stories that are more common in cheapy mags.

5) In their "High Street Hottest" section the clothes are anything but "hot" it should actually be called "Worst of the High Street" because that is what it is. They seem to pick out the most shitty, frumpy clothes to show!

6) Again, they always think they're the first to know about these little secret shops or underground trends. Um no. All you have to do is look to the streets of London to see these!! Another example from this issue was "Bones are the new skulls" and I quote: 'Alexander McQueen catapulted skulls into the fashion stratosphere and now bones, vertebrae and x-ray prints have been splashed over leggings, jersey sweaters and shoes' and one of the images used to show this is of Kat Graham (who is she?!) wearing the leg bones Black Milk leggings which I know for a fact have been around for an extremely long time. Bloggers such as Lua P have been seen wearing these for a year maybe more! And I have been lusting after them for about a year too but tbh anything Look prints immediately becomes uncool to me. So no sorry Look, A McQueen didn't inspire those leggings and it is certainly NOT a new trend.


If I had to describe Look magazine as a person I would say it was like that really uncool mother who tries to get down with the kids but is actually really annoying and is slightly too 'mutton-dressed-as-lamb' and has nothing of value to say.

The only good part of Look is the beauty section. Oh and the horoscopes.

I would really love peoples thoughts on this? Any of you read Look and do you like it or not?
X

2 comments :

  1. Ughh, I agree with the 'Hottest on the Highstreet' part, it's always really hideous clothes, and I just don't understand why they pick the crap ones, when there's so many nicer ones in those stores.

    The only reason I get Look every now and then is cause of the Photography bit, with the pictures of the models, if you know which bit I mean? Most of the photos are pretty good.

    Xxx

    ReplyDelete
  2. I don't read Look, purely because I just don't read magazine any more. Like you, I find that they're quite often behind the trends (what with the time scales necessary to print media, so it's not really their fault, I guess), so the very few that I do buy tend to be more art-driven (i-D) or about the styling (Lula). Look's main benefit is being pretty cheap, but it's not my favourite. I prefer Grazia!

    ReplyDelete

Comments are my most favourite thing ever so please stop and say hi :)