Tag Archives: Dakota Fanning

Dakota Fanning for Glamour March 2013

hiya beauties!


…Dakota Fanning is 18. I’ve mentioned it previous post, I feel like she has been around forever.  Dakota is absolutely beautiful! She’ll be 19 next month. She’s an adult…. Yes, that makes me feel old! ha ha


Well, it is weird to me because we’ve all seen this girl grow up, like we’ve watched Emma Watson grow up but Dakota we’ve watched grow up from being a baby, the little girl from I am Sam, or Up Town Girls.


We already know that the Fanning sisters, Dakota and Elle,  are stylistas in their own right, I thought I’d show you her latest shoot in Glamour March 2013.

x missfitz


Filed under Beauty, Celebrities, Fashion, Hotties, Magazines, Media, Models

Dakota Fanning Wears Chanel & Couture Cat Ears

In my mind, it is crazy that Dakota Fanning is only 18 years old; the girl has been around for what seems to be like forever. The Fannings obviously don’t waste any time getting into the family business, but what I like about Dakota and her sister Elle is that they both seem incredibly smart and well-adjusted for the amount of fame they have both experienced at such young ages. I don’t forsee any Lohan-ing either in their futures… oh and let’s not forget to mention that they are both FASHION WONDERKIDS who are lucky enough to be outfitted by some of the most revered designers out there.

It’s very rare that an average 18 year old can wear Chanel and look at once totally arresting and also completely age appropriate, but I suppose if anyone’s going to be able to pull it off, it’s Dakota.

Dakota has covered the December issue of InStyle UK to promote her role as creepy Jane in Breaking Dawn : Part 2, and the cover shot itself features a white jacquard Chanel dress. Dakota looks beautiful, youthful and extremely sweet here.

I happen to have mixed feelings about the other photo which pictures her in a Dolce & Gabanna corset, a Roberto Cavalli skirt (which OMG, is GORGEOUS!), and cat ears. I really think we could have done with the cat ears, but from what I understand about styling (not a whole lot) the stylists wanted her to look youthful as she is still only 18 years old even though she’s going semi-risque with the corset. The interview isn’t very interesting but does include a question about Kristen Stewart’s affair with Rupert Sanders and the resultant crimpled heart of Sparkles.


“Everyone thinks they have the right to, you know, publicise the struggles and sadness and heartbreak and all of that. It’s like, ‘Why do you think you are the authority to judge people’s experiences?’ “


“Why have I been able to stay sane in a sometimes insane world? The pure love of what I do. Making movies.”


“I’ve always been drawn to material that’s more kind of heavy, you know? Whether it be dark or dramatic or sometimes disturbing. And that can be hard to do when people think you’re still a kid.”


“You know, I’m not the kind of girl or person who really wants a boyfriend in my life. I’m also the kind of person… I’m very black and white in what I feel and I don’t wanna be with someone that I don’t foresee spending a long time with.”

I think I understand Dakota’s perspective on the situation because she and Kirsten are very good friends and have not only worked together on The Twilight Saga but also grew very close on the set of The Runaways. Dakota only sees the good in Kristin, and she want’s to defend her. However, I don’t really think the bulk of the criticism over the K-Stew affair with Rupert has anything to do with “judg[ing] people’s experiences” in general. Instead, Kristen’s caught a lot of heat (from the non-Twihards, anyway) for pretending to be above all of the Hollywood cliches, and then she got caught behaving like a Hollywood cliche. Or rather, she got banging her married director like a so-called “typical” starlet.

As for Dakota, I hope she carries on just as she’s been doing as a NYU studen who somehow manages to squeeze in a bit of time for films on occassion. I predict she will be just fine.



Filed under Beauty, Celebrities, Designers, Fashion, Gossip

Natalie Portman’s DIOR Mascara Advert Banned In The UK

Hiya Poutlings

Photoshop doesn’t really bother me that much. I am a photographer, I know what photoshop I like and what I don’t. In advertising of beauty products, it is annoying but undeniably rampant practice for sure, but at this point, I always think “nobody looks like that” and “the proof is the pudding, just buy it and test it out” – which can be an expensive practice as a makeup artist too. It’s got to the point where the general public without a knowledge of photoshop know what is real or not and I’m apathetic to that, apart from beauty advertisements! Are we seriously supposed to look at these pictures and say “wow, this foundation looks great” when the model has been subjected to hours of professional hair and makeup but has also been Photoshopped to the point of no recognizable human features?

For reference to my above statement, open any fashion magazine to any page selling a cosmetic brand or product, bonus points if its a well known celeb. Does she look like a woman wearing makeup or does she look like a woman-alien hybrid who is wearing makeup also eigh hours worth of post-production photo enhancement and might also slurp out your soul to steal your youth?

What is the purpose of photographic advertising if it has virtually nothing to do with the product being advertisted?

So, heres the deal, in the States (and generally the rest of the world follow them like sheep, BAA), they turn a blind eye to this type of consumer manipulation. In the UK, they answer it with Advertising standards Authority, which is exactly as it sounds. The Authority addresses everything from over-sexualization, such as Dakota Fanning’s underage advert for Marc Jacobs and extreme thinness to the very sort of dishonest, aspirational punting that occurs in said beauty adverts. They’ve cracked down on adverts featuring Julia Roberts and Christy Turlington in the past, and their next target is Dior Diorshow mascara starring Natalie Portman.

OH LOLA, Dakota Fanning for Marc Jacobs was deemed too sexual

Model, Christy Turlington & Julia Roberts – both women in their 40s. not the dewy, fresh-faced nymphs these ads for Maybelline and Lancome would have you believe.

The latest banned advert, Natalie Portman for DIOR.

The advert which is now banned is egregious in its use of capitalized emphasis, FALSE EYELASHES to advertise MASCARA. Taken at face value, it’s a beautiful image that I don’t mind looking at, but really, don’t you think it’s an insult to our collective intelligence as human beings that brands actually pull this kind of bullshit? Ever more disturbing… the general public fall for it.

Think about it.

That’s all I’m saying.



Filed under Advertising, Beauty, Celebrities, Designers, Eyebrows, Eyelashes, Fashion, Makeup, Media, Mistake, Models, Photography, Products, Retouching, Skin

It’s not high morals, its common sense. Far too Much, Far too Young.

Hiya Poutlings!

How many times have you flipped through the pages of a fashion magazine or watched a runway show and thought to yourself that a certain model was too skinny?  Too fat?  Too short?  Too pretty?  Too average?  Too tall?  Too curvy?  Too lanky?  Too old?  Too young?

If at least one of these thoughts has never crossed your mind, I think it’s safe to say that you are in the minority.  At some point, each of these characteristics has caused a stir in the fashion industry.  The continuing curvy/straight sized debate was perhaps one of the hottest topics in 2011 and was covered by numerous media outlets.

The modeling and fashion world is a harsh, over-sexualized environment that is not suited for children or teens. When child models are getting exposed to the same realities as the adult models it’s obvious that it is wrong. Somehow, we get to see younger and younger child models nowadays acting all grown up, and quite frankly, I find it very disturbing.

Thylane Lena-Rose – a 10 year old girl.

It’s an issue that everyone’s spoke about now and it’s just too much for me to understand. The photographs of a 10 year old child model, Thylane Lena-Rose Blondeau that appeared in Vogue Paris December/January 2010/11 issue has caused outrage amongst the parents and public.

A 10 year old girl is wearing lipstick, actually scrap that, a full face of makeup, a low cut dress and heels while lying in a pose that any grown model over her teens would… Is this really just marketing to paedophiles?

Now, do not get me wrong, Thylane boasts quite the modelling CV that most grown models would be proud to have. She walked the catwalk for Jean Paul Gaultier at the age of four and has had several magazine shoots.

Thylane is just 10 years old…. Here she is pictured looking more like her age.

Thylane is a beautiful, but what 10 year old child is not? She has piercing eyes, waist length hair and pouting lips which have brought comparasions of her with a youthful Brigitte Bardot (who started her modelling career with Elle at 15 years old).

Brigitte Bardot

Brigitte Bardot

There was plenty rage about this particular 14 page fashion spread but many more that are in fashion world today.

French Vogue has also featured a truly disturbing photo shoot feauring girls of around 6 years old in heavy makeup, high heels and designer clothes.

These instances are most definately not the first of their kind. The fashion industry is badly publicized for hiring underage models to walk the runway or pose for a photo in adult clothing, assuming adult attire. Somehow, it never caused enough stir to stop the whole thing.

There are boundaries. They are just children.

With child beauty pageants still much on the rise, it’s really no wonder a fashion industry would use little children to sell stuff even if the campaign was received highly negatively. It does always draw a lot of attention, does it not? But is Vogue alone to blame? Someone allowed it. If you see a 10 year old working somewhere other than the entertainment and fashion industry the employer would be seen as a law breaker.

Elle Fanning (younger sister to Dakota Fanning) was chosen to be the face of Marc Jacobs when she was 13 years old, and Hailee Steinfeld chosen to be the face of Miu Miu at 14 years old.

Somehow children are all over fashion and entertainment now. I think of it as the Disney era, they are stars made for kids to look up to but do the parents push them too far?

Child pop stars, fashion icons, beauty pageant contestants, and models are popular. The topic of over sexualization of children has been debated and talked over and over but what has it lead to?

“CHILDREN MUST STAY CHILDREN”, a phrase that has been said so many times and guess what no one gives a toss attantion anymore. Still modelling and singing or dancing is child labour so the only option there is to ban it all together with those beauty pageants (to avoid crazy parents giving their children botox!).

If you have notied the tendency in the fashion world, young models and usually girls in their teen years, full of naivety, facing the harsh realities that they are not prepared for.

The fashion industry is harsh even for 20 something year old models. How can parents let their own children be exposed to such an industry? It’s clear as day to me that child models simply do not belong in fashion.

Controversial advertising?

When I see  these Vogue images, the scenario I have playing in my head is just  little girls playing dress up – wanting to be just like their mother. Although I am a big fan of controversial advertising this is something we should not want, nor tolerate as the public. For the record, I strongly do not believe that these children are being sexually abused while shooting, I must say at 6 years old, or 10 years old, I would of loved the oppurtunity to get all dolled up, hair, makeup and get to play dress up in front of a camera, it would of been fun, and I’m sure the parents of these children love attending the shoots to see their little super stars shine, however, not in this capacity! In the grand scheme of things, is it not something you should leave to them doing themselves as oposed to doing it for fun. Actually making money of it and exposing them to the cruel natures of the world that could look at these posed photographs in a bad way?

Enter 12 year old Australian super model Maddison Gabriel.

At the age of 12 years old, Maddison was named the official ambassador of the Australian Gold Coast Fashion Week , which, as you can imagine caused quite an uproar within the community. The Australian prime minister at the time came forward to say that catapulting girls as young as 12 into the fashion industry is crazy, and that he was completely oposed to it. There were various statements made in the media about it, to which Maddison’s mother simply couldn’t understand why there was such a problem with it as apparently, Maddison had known since she was 6 (a whole 6 years prior) that all she had wanted to do was model… She was also quoted saying:

“We’re trying to get our teenage daughters to act  older. I  am so happy that I’ve got a daughter who has got a good head  on her  shoulders.”

Can someone tell me why in the world we need a 12 or 13 year old girl to act older?

Janice Dickinson, the world’s first supermodel, said it best when she spoke about the personal problems many young children in fashion develop as a result of their fame, and don’t forget the fortune.

“There’s lots of drugs, there’s lots of alcohol, there’s lots of photographers preying on these girls. Thirteen is way too young…”

As if to support Janice’s comments, Martin Robertson, a convicted American sexual predator contacted the Sunday Telegraph the following year from his Texas jail cell and requested photographs and articles about Maddison. When this new broke, Mommy Gabriel criticized the media for reporting controversy in 2007 and thereby alerting Martin Robertson of her daughters existence. She didn’t seem to grasp that Maddison’s modeling career was trulu the underlying cause of Martin Robertson’s interest – it had sexulized Maddison in the predator’s eyes.

In early 2008, one of the worlds most popular photographers, Annie Lebovitz caused a massive stir when she shot 15 year old Miley Cyrus for Vanity Fair. The most controversial image was the provocative photo where Miley appears to be naked and wrapped in a satin sheet. In the accompanying article, written by Bruce Handy, Miley was quoted as saying :

“I think it’s really artsy. It wasn’t in a skanky way, Annie took, like, a beautiful shot, and I thought it was really cool. That’s what she wanted me to do, and you can’t say no to Annie”

However once the media erupted into a frenzy, Miley had changed her mind about the shoot and issued the following statement:

“I took part in a photo shoot that was supposed to be ‘artistic’ and now, seeing the photographs and reading the story, I feel so embarrassed. I never intended for any of this to happen, and I apologize to my fans who I care so deeply about.”

Vanity Fair later realeased a videa and behind the scenes images supporting their assertion that Miley’s parents and/or minders were on set all day. Since the photo was taken digitally, they saw it on the shoot and everyone thought it was a beautiful and natural portrait of Miley.




Personally, I didn’t have a problem with Annie Lebovitz’s shots of Miley, for the most part. Do I think think they were provocative? Yes. Do I think they were sexual? Yes. But I am in the opinion that her parents were aware of what was going on and they had given their approval of the images. If anything, the image of Miley and her father makes me more uneasy because they seem a bit too close for comfort.

What is interesting to me is how Miley’s opinion of the shoot changed once the controversy began swirling. Do you know what is even more interesting? That her parents let it happen and later tried to absolve themselves of the responsibility behind it. There is no doubt that Annie Lebovitz’s provocative images sexualized Miley, so why should they pretend to be appalled when they clearly knew what was going on?

If anything, today Miley could thank Annie Lebovitz for opening up a whole new market for the name Miley Cyrus to be involved in. Think Maxim, FHM, Playboy, all big money makers and exposure for a pop star once they reach legal age, or is it just me who see’s this?

So, what do you think? Should there be an age restriction when it comes to fashion editorials and modeling? Or do you think a parent’s permission (which clearly can be questionable) is all that is required?



Filed under Beauty, Clothing, Daily Banter, Designers, Emotions, Fashion, Magazines, Makeup, Media, Models, Photography, Trends, WTF

Dakota for Marc Jacobs

Dakota Fanning, on the right in her 2007 Marc Jacobs Campaign and more recent 2011 campaign on the left. They grow up so quickly!!

Marc Jacobs has chosen Dakota Fanning as his muse for the second time in four years. In 2007 the then 13 year old actress had starred in loads of movies but she hadnt quite made any noise or been noticed on the fashion scene until Jacobs had approached her for his campaign.

Marc Jacobs said “I’ve been a big fan of Dakota since the first time I saw her in a  movie, and we made her a wardrobe in her size when she was 12, which was  pretty incredible. When we were speaking about who to use in the Oh,  Lola fragrance ads—I had recently seen The Runaways. Dakota was in  it, and I knew she could be this contemporary Lolita, seductive yet  sweet.”

Dakota poses with the light pink bottle for the shoot for Oh Lola a play on “Oh La La”. The fragrance which will be launched next winter for us southern hemispherions is the little sister to Lola which launched in 2009. Its a much ligher, flirtatious scent which includes raspberry, frais des bois and pear.

Dakota Fanning expressed that she was “humbled” to be asked.



Filed under Designers, Gossip