Fugger: Anne Hathaway

Fug or Fab the Cover: Anne Hathaway on Glamour


We’ve gotten a lot of requests from Fug Nation that we address this cover, and we hate to disappoint.

Let’s start with the good: Anne’s face looks gorgeous and fabulous, especially compared to the droopy dullard Vogue made her out to be. This is actually, energy-wise, the exact opposite. This person has been drinking carrot juice spiked with Red Bull; that other lady hasn’t stood up in three days because her servants are really good at peeling her grapes and giving sponge-baths. Second, her tank top is in support of Eve Ensler’s One Billion Rising campaign to educate people about — and call them to arms to fight — violence against women, and no one can argue the nobility of that message. So good for Glamour and Anne for getting the word out.

However, the rest of this seems like she’s about to pop on those giant headphones, put on some candy-pink legwarmers, and go for a jog that ends with impromptu jazzercise in the park, before maybe getting pulled on-stage with Bruce Springsteen during his “Dancing In The Dark” video. So essentially, she’s 1980s Courteney Cox right now. And that’s not necessarily bad. It might even be Fun. But full of Sex and Style it isn’t. Particularly when I can see her bra — it’s like a dark shadow undercutting her cause’s logo — and those granny panties are bunching all over her stomach. I don’t know. If she’d put on some pants, though, I’d kind of like to hang out with this genuinely smiley Anne. I could even deal with it if she didn’t put on pants, I suppose, as long as she bopped around all day with a Sports Walkman connected to the end of those headphones, because that would be hella entertaining. But I can’t help but wonder why they went to those weird styling extremes when that head, the tank top, and better decorations around it would’ve been appealing without the feeling of being a) in a time warp, or b) being too exhausted by her incomparable oozing energy even to heave the magazine off the newsstand.

What do you think?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...
react:

Well WTF’d: Anne Hathaway


Today the role of Rooney Mara will be played by Anne Hathaway. HILARIOUSLY.

[Photos: Getty]

react:

Well Played, Anne Hathaway


I have big respect for her for: (a) realizing she could not go to the afterparty in a giant, white. mini-caped curtain, and (b) for wearing a formal cape instead of an overcoat. All hail the evening cape.

[Photos: WENN}

react:

Les Fuggerables


I was going to put this to a vote, but the longer I looked at it, the more strongly I felt that I had a heart full not of love but meh.

[Photos: Getty]

react:

Les Fugerables


Whoever is counseling Anne Hathaway on her pixie cut is doing a bang-up job. I went from being unsure about it to thinking she absolutely should keep it for a while. I mean, among other things, enjoy having the shoulders for it, you know? Mine need to be hidden.

But this dress is as sad as this movie promises to be, except with the movie, it’s on purpose (and devastatingly satisfying, because you don’t go to Les Miserables for unicorns and rainbows; you go because when you were 12 you thought Eponine was the bomb, and you used to imagine how it would feel to perform “A Little Fall of Rain” and make a dumb beautiful boy REGRET YOU FOREVER). I often wonder if Anne has struggled with her post-Fantine frame, because she lost so much weight for the movie and wasn’t sure how to clothe it; yet again this seems to be the wrong fit, and unflattering. It starts with the harness, and sags from there — in fact, the very cut of the bodice almost creates a droop. And then we have the uninspired shoes, which lend a dowdiness to the affair that directly contrasts what the back reveals:

Read More

react:

Fug the Cover: Anne Hathaway on Vogue


Frankly, I’d rather read “Katie Holmes: Her Second Act.” Except isn’t it her third act? Or is Vogue discounting the Dawson’s-to-Cruise years as mere prologue? For shame, A-Dubs.

[Photos: Vogue]

react: