Mary-Kate & Ashley Olsen for ELLE UK

Posted on March 07, 2012

Darlings, the Olsens got the gowns-and-airbrush treatment for Elle UK. We refuse to put any effort into identifying either of them. Thankfully, Elle UK considered lazy shits like us when composing the covers.

We are to assume then, that this is the Ashley, right? Killer dress and great picture, we have to say. She needs a manicure to deal with those babyhands she’s sporting.

Dolce & Gabanna Spring 2012 Collection

Prada Coat

And so this must be the Mary-Kate, yes? Sorry, honey. Elle UK must hate you for some reason. Why else would they use such an unflattering pic? Perhaps she’s the evil twin.

But we’re – as we so often are when faced with all things Olsen – confused. If the first one is Ashley and the second one is Mary-Kate…

Then who the HELL is this?!?


And why does it say “The Olsens” when we can only see one Olsen? Are the other Olsens hiding behind her? Is this the Alpha Olsen?

Prada Spring 2012 Collection

Mary-Kate & Ashley Olsen featured in the April 2012 issue of ELLE UK photographed by Alexi Hay and styled by Anne-Marie Curtis. Hair: Mark Townsend. Makeup: Genevieve.

Oh hush, we’re just kidding. We know that’s just an extra picture of Mary-Kate Ashley Mary-Kate Ashley.


Roberto Cavalli Spring 2012 Collection


Roberto Cavalli Spring 2012 Collection


Roberto Cavalli Spring 2012 Collection

They do their usual creepy, swamp-baby schtick, but it works particularly well in an editorial like this and the clothes are stunning.


[Photo Credit: Alexi Hay for,,]

Please review our Community Guidelines before posting a comment. Thank you!

  • SapphoPoet

    The clothe are gorgeous and they look good in them. But I turn into my mother when I see those girls. “Mary Kate and Ashley, you are not leaving this house with that much make up on. Go back upstairs and wash your face. And let’s pull your hair back so we can see your pretty face.” 

    • Deitra S.

      “And here, sweeties, mama packed you a lunch.  It’s your favorite – carrot sticks and lemon wedges.  Eat something, please, darlings.”

    • Wendi126

      And mama knows you love the haunted waif look but you look so pretty when you smile, try it once, just once, for me.

      • TheOriginalLulu

        Seriously. I get that it’s their thing, but Jeeze Louise already! Not even a grin??

        Could it be because they were once such smiley little cherubs that they figure they have done all the smiling they can handle for one lifetime?

    • Heather Hayes

      My mother would not have let me out of the house without brushing my hair, either.

      • TheOriginalLulu

        “You’re not going out looking like a wild animal!”

  • Sobaika Mirza

    ________ Olsen in the Cavalli looks spectacular!

    • Onymous


    • Pants_are_a_must

       I feel like this is how we should refer to them until this “look how identical we are! AGAIN!” experiment ends.

      • Wellworn

        Weird thing is, I read once that they are fraternal twins, not identical.  They do look slightly different.  Not that I spend hours examining pictures of them.

        • Gianni_Rubino

          I fear I need an “MK” sewn on one, and an “A” sewn on the other, like Laverne’s “L.”    Somehow I suspect the fashion would then suffer.

        • MilaXX

           Yep side by side  you can see they aren’t identical, but the work the mirror imagine look so hard why bother?

        • M N

          They have different colored eyes, at least in these pictures.

        • jaymeglynn

           I think Mary Kate (photographed on our left) actually looks more like their sister Lizzie, than she does Ashley.

    • Gayer Than Thou

      Didn’t we see that same Cavalli on Mila Kunis like yesterday?

      • Lori


      • kimmeister

        Wasn’t it similar, but one piece instead of the separates shown here?

  • Baditude

    I almost can’t believe how bad that Mary Kate cover is. Wow. Poor thing. 

    • Charlotte Horseman

      Yeah, that is like tanning bed with facial suction??

      • Sweetpea176

         Radiation burns?

    • Spicytomato1

      Other than the dress, Ashley’s really isn’t much better. The hair and makeup just ruins everything.

  • Scarlet39

    Oh wow.  Mary Kate’s cover… yeah, I don’t quite know what to say about it. 

    Love the clothes. 

  • BigWhiteGrannyPanties

    That picture is OLSEN SIX.  Didn’t you see BattleStar Galactica?  

    • Alli

      If the Olsens were Cylons after all everything would suddenly make so much sense…

    • twocee

      This comment wins!

  • Anathema_Device

    You guys killed me with this post. Still laughing sooooo hard. Having said that, did Mary Kate fall asleep in a tanning bed? Were the lights too hot in the studio for her delicate skin? Weird picture.

    I need that first Dolce & Gabbana dress and the life that goes with it. Please? Well, not the Olsens’ life, but you know…

  • Paigealicious

    The “anime eyes” on Ashley’s cover freak me out.

  • Kiltdntiltd

    The clothes are undoubtedly beautiful, stunning, even. But I cannot get past the incredible ICK factor of these two, when I see them, giving out with the Dickensian, starving waif routine, Every Single Time.   Ladies, are you faces just STUCK that way?

    • Ms_Flyover

      YES!  I’m reasonably sure if I could afford a $39,000 croc. backpack*, I might be able to smile occasionally.  Or at least not look suicidal. 


      • Kiltdntiltd

         It just plain baffles me why anyone finds this sort of thing, to the remotest degree, appealing;  especially in a pair of stinking rich, famous, adult women.  Digustibus non disputandem est, I suppose

      • Sara Munoz

        She “designed” that bag. Which means people are paying her for their $39,000 bags. She can afford to have a smile transplanted onto her face.

    • Judi Townsend

      PREACH! Agree with everything you said (and I love your tag line: loving life from where I stand) 

      • Kiltdntiltd

         Why, thanks a lot!

  • Laurie Bergman

    I would rob a bank for that D&G jeweled dress IF I was indeed the bank-robbing kind.  Covet.

    • Anathema_Device

       If I help with the heist, can we share it? then we’d also have the money to go some place fabulous enough to warrant wearing it.

      • Laurie Bergman

        I like your thinking.  Team Jeweled D&G!

  • newleaf1

    Sorry, that black Cavalli is just too Morticia looking.  On the other hand, it totally suits the Morticia twins.

  • Little_Olive

    OMG that second cover is AWFUL!! 
    Is she holding in a diarrhea burst? 

    • dress_up_doll

      I’ve never gotten into scatalogical humor, but that was my very first thought as well.

  • NC_Meg

    They do look good here (I LOVE Ashley’s cover) but Jesus, can someone do SOMETHING with their hair? I don’t even mean a new style (although that would be nice) but they both look like they need a deep conditioning treatment and/or a trim.

    • Rachel Sawyer

       Or they could try combing it.

      • NC_Meg

        Well, yep, that too.

  • Charlotte Horseman

    “Creepy Swamp Baby Schtick!” – LOL!!
    Forget them – the D&G dress is gorgeous…

  • Susan Collier

    Since you mention the babyhands on Ashley’s(?) first cover, I’m so disturbed by the airbrushed appendages on this Olsen. No veins or contours, just weird Barbie arms. The Mary Kate cover is hilariously bad. And the headline, “Olsens Taking the Fashion World by Storm”?  When will these two stop taking all creative outlets by storm? I needs a break.

    • Kayceed

      Yes, it’s been years they’ve been at it. The fashion world is actually under siege by the Olsen juggernaut, by now.

    • zmayhem

      I have no idea what is the what with airbrushed PASTEDE ON YEY celebrity babyhands on magazine covers, but it’s so pervasive and creepy. Especially painfully obvious when they do it to someone like Sarah Jessica Parker or Demi Moore or Madonna, all gorgeous women in their 40s and 50s with strong working mother hands, but still pretty blatant even here.

      I remember being a kid cuddled up on one couch or another with both my grandmothers, stroking the backs of their hands in utter delight and fascination at the softness and creases and the standing-up veins of blue that, when I put one finger lightly to them, let me feel the lifeblood fluttering back and forth between heart and fingertips. And the rubbed-smooth skin underneath their rings, and their pale palms, and their perfectly done older-woman-peachy manicures. Their hands matched their whole selves, and they were gorgeous and I loved them.

      And, damn, even the Olsen waifs must have actual non-generic hands; they both do a ton of hand-sewing and drawing and writing, and I’m positive that even their tiny millionaire hands have some small degree of character and calluses and reality, and, really, we wouldn’t all drop dead of horror if a magazine cover dared to show a glimpse of them some day.

      • Amelia Logan

        I have chubby hands right now. I can’t wait till I’m 40 and I have slender but wrinkly woman hands.

  • BeeBeauNYC

    That Dolce & Gabana dress is absolutely amazing. I’m blown away by it, but not by the Olsen gals. They only get a “whatevs” from me.

  • schadenfreudelicious

    Yikes, Mary Kate’s cover looks like she spent the day on the ski slopes with her goggles on, Roberto Cavalli blazer twin appears to have suffered a rather shocking shoulder dislocation….

  • quiltrx

    They should have show a lot more of that black Cavalli.  It’s gorgeous.

    And am I the only one who sees these two as living Bratz dolls, with the giant heads and anime eyes?  (well, they ARE less slutty than Bratz dolls, I suppose, in their usual dowager getups.)

  • formerlyAnon

    Why do they look so distressed? They were competent actresses at one point, in their limited range. Facial expressions must have been something they thought about.

    That blingy and bulky and beautifully blue coat/bathrobe in the third Olsen photo is a great example of why I can admire but rarely get enthused about Prada. Why would anyone want a garment that looks so awkwardly bulky unless it is worn on a stick frame and belted & photographed *just so*?

    Also: Return of the Bedazzler? Are jean jackets next?

  • charlotte

    These EYES! They are coming to get us! The younger sister is probably locked away in the attic.

  • PastryGoddess

    Funny that they weren’t photographed in any of their own clothing.  I know they do more sportswear and accessories, but there was no way to throw in a shirt or bag somewhere

    • Heather

      Right, like maybe their $35,000 backpack?

  • halleygee

    I really love the last three photos. Poor Mary Kate looks like she just got back from spring break with a bad sunburn in that cover shot.

  • shirab

    So are they identical or fraternal but very much alike? I swear I read somewhere that they said they are fraternal twins, but I can’t for the life of me spot any differences.
    In other news, are visible eyebrows coming back? Looks like the twins have embellished theirs. I have relatively heavy ones that I don’t pluck because a) it’s a literal and figurative pain and b) they cycle back in style every now and then. (Thankfully Brooke Shields was all the rage when I was in high school so I was spared having to do brow work at such a tender age.)

    • Heather

      I agree… everything written about them claims they are fraternal, but they look like absolute clones to me. For a long time, when they were always photographed together, I could even swear that they were CONJOINED.

      Their younger sister is both prettier and apparently about 8″ taller.

    • AnaRoW

       It happens that fraternal twins will look exactly alike. I had friends who lived across the street when I was kid who were fraternal but looked exactly like each other. The only way I could tell them apart was that one had an allergy to grass so his eyes were always yellow.

    • Rincey

      I can usually tell them apart, but it’s difficult in editorials like this when they are airbrushed so much any defining details are removed. 

    • Spicytomato1

      I just flipped through the latest Glamour at the salon (full disclosure: it’s a Hair Cuttery) and I was struck by how natural all the models’ eyebrows were. I made a comment about it to the gal who was about to wax mine and she sniffed that “messy brows are never fashionable.” But I’d say the latest ads — not to mention actresses like Lilly Collins — seem to indicate otherwise.

    • amywinns

      interesting you have this take on their lookalikeness…. I see it as a rare attempt to show that they definitely are NOT identical. they have brilliantly mastered the art of posing to maximize their similarities, no doubt because the market prizes “twins” much more highly than “sisters”. however, these covers present one of the most marked displays of their genetic and style differences I’ve seen. In the inside shots, you see how they work the similarities, with a lot of help from lighting and poses. Their hair is pretty much identical, which is one of the keys to making themselves look alike: By wearing virtually the same hairstyle, as much down around their eyes and cheeks as posible, it hides the planes of their faces better. (mary-kate is more catlike, with broader cheekbones. ashley’s nose is rounder.) Ashley will occasionally wear an updo, especially if she’s trying to project “businesswoman” but MK seems to hate fussing with her hair at all.

  • Alli

    I know life is hard when you’re rich and skinny, but would it kill them to crack a smile?

  • sarahofalessergod

    Other than the Mary-Kate cover, these are some pretty great shots.  I feel weird now, because I never have any problems telling them apart, except maybe when they’re wearing Jackie Faux sunglasses.

  • poggi

    My guess is that the third cover is Mary Ashley, the hybrid.  That would actually be the best use of photo shop, just give use one composite Olson. 

  • nannypoo

    They’re both evil twins. I blame them for the pouty-face thing that so many other celebrities are now sporting. Here’s a tip for anyone considering this face: if we laugh at the Olsens we’ll laugh at you, too.

  • janetjb

    They’re wearing gorgeous gowns; shouldn’t that make at least one of them a little bit happy?

  • Lilithcat

    Those cover shots remind me of nothing so much as this.

    • Kiltdntiltd

       OMG, Lilithcat.  Right ON!!!!

    • Ms_Flyover

      LMAO.  And I needed that this am.  Perfect.

    • Stubenville

      Too cheerful.

    • Anathema_Device


    • Pants_are_a_must

      Those ladies actually ate, so no.

    • formerlyAnon


  • Thathoodwink

    The picture of the two of the together? They are looking at each other as if they were just summoned up to be beheaded.

    • formerlyAnon

      Isn’t there a folk song about two sisters, one tells her sister Ann about the murderous intent of the first’s husband, Bluebeard? And it does not end well. I am probably mixing up more than one song/tale. But that photo would fit perfectly.

  • AuntieAnonny

    Funniest thing I’ve read all day.

  • Pants_are_a_must

    It’s like they took the girls from The Shining, stuck giant blond wigs on their heads and made them swim in a sea of eyeliner. Then they swaddled them in gorgeous designer outfits they have no idea how to wear.

    Somewhere, Courtney Love is feeling left out.

  • miagain

    Why do they always looks like they have a stomach ache… sweet jesus, how ’bout a smile once in a while??  Do they possess teeth?

    • Sara__B

       I suspect they, like Victoria Beckham, have decided their smiles aren’t attractive. I hope they don’t cling to the constipated baby swamp waif expression for life.

  • DominoEstella

    I love these tiny girls.  I cannot tell them apart!  

  • Stan

    Why do I see this and think this:

    • Stubenville

      Yes! For the win!!!

    • formerlyAnon

      You think it because it is entirely appropos!

      (and sweet Jesus, that link spun me right into my godmother’s apartment in the late ’60s)

    • Nancy Abrams

      Some of the original Keane paintings were signed “Walter Keane” and others were signed “Margaret Keane.” The styles were almost identical and there were actually people who preferred one style over the other, but there were small differences that told them apart — just like the Olsens. As the web site points out, they were all painted by Margaret.

  • Ellen Mirro

    I’m a twin. Growing up I did have an uncle or two who would refuse to think it mattered that I was my own person. It’s not that difficult to tell Ashley and MK apart, and a little disrespectful to not even try.

    • Qitkat

      I respect your comment, but Tom and Lorenzo are far from the only people who find it quite difficult to tell them apart. I’ve always had the impression that many adult twins want us to distinguish one from the other by dressing differently and choosing different hairstyles. It appears that the Olsens deliberately mess with our minds by doing the opposite. To each his own I suppose, I don’t really care. This sort of teasing, not disrespect, is something that I imagine that they (a) both ignore, or (b) are secretly amused by. I suspect that it is much easier to tell them apart when seeing them in person.

    • formerlyAnon

      It’s easier to tell them apart in candid photos than in editorial shots, I think, & probably because of the photo manipulation that takes place to remove the tiny ‘flaws’ that actually give each their individuality.

    • Sweetpea176

       Disrespectful?  Like I owe Mary Kate and Ashley Olsen anything as a barely-interested observer of photographs they either paid a publicist to have printed or got paid for?  It’s not like I’m having them over for dinner and can’t be bothered to figure out which is which.  Besides, they are a commodity and market themselves as such, and I’d be willing to bet that looking exactly alike is what defines the brand.

  • Terence Ng

    Wow, that Mary Kate cover looked a lot like Boobs Legsley. I mean, Blake Lively.

  • marilyn

    The Creep Sisters.  Too much makeup and messy hair.  They are too old for the straight hair parted in the middle, but otherwise looks like s***.  They really like looking creepy and it works for them.  They look like poster girls for famine relief. 

  • Danielle

    I can’t tell who’s who, but the 2nd and 3rd pics might be the worst professional photographs I’ve ever seen.

  • Call me Bee

    These two are quickly moving to the top of my “Celeb Dislike Immensely” List.  What have they done since Full House but stand around looking like starving homeless children?  Ugh.

  • Dejah_Thoris

    Whenever I see them, the only thing that comes to mind is an overwhelming desire to tie them to a chair and comb their hair.

  • Sara Munoz

    The clothes are absolutely stunning.

  • Stubenville

    What am I seeing as the Prada coat flaps open on the model; the “good china’?

    • formerlyAnon

      Pretty close. I thought it looked like a body suit or some fancy granny panties.

  • Stubenville

    And the Olsen twins have a huge future ahead as the “before” pictures in anti-depressant drug advertising.

  • Judy_J

    The Olsen Twins could be models for a Margaret Keane painting.

  • kcliff

    In this situation, the way to tell them apart is simple – Mary Kate’s hair is longer. I can usually tell them apart, their faces are different. Ashley’s is ever so slightly fuller, and her chin looks shorter to me. I have heard they are fraternal and mirror twins, but mirror twins would have to be identical, I think. I assume they are fraternal because they would know, and what a weird thing that would be to lie about. I’ve actually heard their fashion lines get quite a bit of credibility, so good for them. They seem honestly involved and passionate. 

    Also, there’s this, which is amazing:

  • Hillary Schuster

    I love the Olsens (and they are super easy to tell apart – they aren’t identical).

  • SewingSiren

    I love these girls. I usually really detest celebrity designers. But these two , I think, are quite talented and hard working. I’ve always thought they had a very interesting and somewhat unique way of dressing themselves too.
    I absolutely love the Dolce and Gabbana dress on the first cover. Those ridiculous bodysuits from the same collection have gotten in so many magazine shoots, but the jeweled dresses are the real stars.

    • formerlyAnon

      I do usually like the clothes they wear. Often, they are the clothes I might wear were I younger, thinner, and very rich.

  • serenitynow02

    I’ve missed the little imps lately. (I am only saying that because they scare me.)

  • Susan Crawford

    I’m an Olsen sisters fan from wa-a-ay back. Love those two little mini-moguls! (Telling them apart IS easy: Ashley’s eyes are larger.) Anyway, this was a lovely editorial, and the clothing looks spectacular. The D&G cover look on Ashley is to die for, and the Prada coat – also on Ashley – is star quality all the way.

    Mary Kate’s cover look – in another superb Prada coat – is just tragic. The lighting and that neon, Andy-Warhol-silkscreen-screaming-lip-color makes her look more than slightly demented. She got a raw deal. Another raw deal? the shot of the Cavalli dress and blazer. Poor dear child looks as though she needs a trip to the emergency room to have her dislocated shoulder yanked back into the socket.

    Overall, though, this is a great editorial feature.

  • CatherineRhodes

    Why do they always look so terrified?

    • Sweetpea176

       I was wondering the same thing.

  • judybrowni

    But why are they apparently so frightened of fashion?

    Scared silly Children of the Damned: they’re wealthy beyond reason, what the hell spooked them in this photo shoot?

  • WhiteMage

    they look like madonna. not young madonna, but like young version of current madonna, and her washed out blond hair, raccoon eyes, and vacant stare. the first cover was great. the rest… not so much. 

  • Alex McGeagh

    I want every single one of the Cavallis shown here. WOW. Incredible…stunning, breezy, delicate but wearable. Love. 

  • Nariya

    My GOSH is that covershot of Mary Kate hideous!! That’s like, the worst cover I’ve ever seen. 

    • sleah_in_norcal

      she looks like an aging drug addict here.  channeling courtney love.

  • Megan K.

    Ahhhhh gorge.

  • yulaffin

    Two more celebs that never seem to smile.

  • Chloe Stabler

    They look absolutely terrified in every shot.  I don’t know if that’s their “photo face” or they really are terrified. 

  • Chloe Stabler

    They look absolutely terrified in every shot.  I don’t know if that’s their “photo face” or they really are terrified. 

  • jw_ny

    I love the creepy waif style of these 2 in these pics…purty dresses too (especially like the D&G and the Cavalli.)   I’m generally not a fan of MK & A’s styles on the street & RC though…but they do have a consistent style and it does work for them.

  • granddelusion

    I don’t get the Olsens. Never have, never will.

    • Jessica TallGirl Freeman

      I know right?

    • Pennymac

      Don’t know why, but they skeeve me out. In my minds eye I can see them crouched in the corner of a dark Victorian haunted house, speaking to each other in the special twin language and plotting how to kill the children in their beds while they sleep…..

  • alyce1213

    The clothes are to die for.  
    They’re cyphers – one thing added to another yielding the same number. The closer shot of *Thing Two* in the black Cavalli is truly a tragedy.Ashley’s eyebrows are darker and heavier (in these shots, anyway). One of them has a bigger face, but again, that can be discerned only by side-by-side comparison.  I need to see their ears — which will probably never happen.

  • Helen

    is the makeup great for Halloween party?

  • Laura O’Gorman

    I think “creepy, swamp-baby” just about covers ever picture of them I’ve seen…

  • Jessica TallGirl Freeman

    Dear God, that second cover is a hot mess.  Her eyes are actually different shapes and sizes.  As is the skin on her face.  Its very “the shades of Lindsey Lohan” is it not?

  • Katie Glick

    Wow that Cavalli looks so different on an Olson vs. a Kunis. The gown sucks a lot of the fun right out of the jacket. I have to admit these girls have grown on me with all their weirdness.

  • ballerinawithagun

    What is going on with the extreme case of camel toe on the Prada model???

    • Sweetpea176

       Yikes!  Now I can’t un-see it!

  •!/Space_Kitty Space Kitty

    AaAaaAAaGhh!!!!  How can they look so despondent in such stunningly beautiful clothes?!

    You’re young and pretty and utterly obscenely wealthy!  STAND UP STRAIGHT AND SMILE FOR FUCK’S SAKE!

    My god they’re turning me into my grandmother.

    • PantherontheRunway

      If you sound like a grandma, I’m right there with you! Because an older woman/person would have thrown in a wink and a smile! because even as old as Meryl Streep or Madonna are, they aren’t scared to smile and feel.

      These two look constantly look like euro-trash robots.

  • MilaXX

    Sadly even with great clothes like are still Children of the Corn. If ever there was a time not to do a smokey eye, this would have been it. Fresh faced would have been more eye catching.

  • giiiirrrr

    Keane eyes all around.

  • Amelia Logan

    I miss when they had different hair colors.

  • PantherontheRunway

    I hate that they are so pretty, but always wind up looking frail and ghostly, they’re like current day Morticia Addams 

  • Fifi LaRoux

    Will someone please give them a Xanax already?

  • suz72350

    The dresses are gorgeous, but the Olsens remind me of Keane’s big-eyed waif paintings from the 60s.

    Check it out.


    • BrooklynBomber

      You said it.

  • BrooklynBomber

    Some of these clothes are just gorgeous. The D&G! The b&w Cavalli!  Swoon!

  • malvernite

    still my fave pic of les Oulsens, from VF a few years ago, they looked like they still were having a bit of fun:

    no matter what they wear these days they look too old.

  • ccm800

    crap. No thought pix. Seriously – they dialed this one in. 

  • Pamela

    Past tired of the raccoon look they’ve been sporting since they were thirteen.  And the limp yoga hair.  And the blank looks on their faces.  You can put gorgeous clothes on them but you might as well use a mannequin as these lifeless celebs.

  • NasserShaheen

    What a way to ruin some awesome clothes. Those dresses are so beautiful!

  • prettybigkitty

    Holy crap!  How did MKAshley’s head fall off on the Valentino shot?!  Totally weird.  

    • Paula Berman

       I thought the exact same thing. Her head looks all wrenched and out of place in that picture.

  • j_anson

    This editorial makes them look so sad, which is odd because I have the vague idea somehow that they were getting past the troubled child star phase of their lives.

    Anyway. I think the Mary Kate cover is less attractive but more interesting. Although maybe that’s just a way of saying that ugly is more interesting than conventionally pretty?

  • Kim

    They’re definitely upping the eyebrows to a Billie Piper look~

  • poketom

    ok Alpha Olsen looks FIERCE and that coat is stunning. 

  • Miss Paradox

    It is my new goal in life to own and wear that first D&G dress.

  • Lisa

    Ashley’s cover is GORGEOUS.  But that extreme, harshly lit Mary Kate cover has got to go!

  • blondie65

    love the clothes.  that’s all.

  • PeaceBang

    The cover D&G dress is rapturous, and the clothes in general are gorgeous but these girls. They bore me unto the death. They have squillions of dollars and they have to look like they’re tragic dolls all the time? And the cliched squatting-and-peeing pose? Enough.

  • umeboshi

    would it kill them to EVER:
    1) smile
    2) lay off the eyeliner
    3) try something besides a bleached-out middle part
    4) wax the brows a bit
    5) SMILE

  • Jose Bejarano

    Why is it so universally accepted to trash on these girls so hard? They’re gorgeous young girls who have done quite well for themselves while doing a pretty great job at keeping relatively private lives. So they have one look when they model. Big deal. Give them some credit. Statistically speaking, they should have Lohaned it years ago.

  • bellafigura1

    I always want to yell “What??!!  What’s wrong?!!” when I see them. Although I too think they’re pretty cool and hard-working and indie and relatively private.  They do have the Look of Concern down to a science.  Or one of them does.

  • kentiesgirl

    TLo, your choice of thumbnail pics gave me nightmares. Got the courage to click and laughed my ass off. If only I had sooner. Love the gowns..wish they hadn’t covered them up so much. In the 5th pic, the left galago is totally overwhelmed. Better with the white jacket or none at all.
    Are you certain that’s an Olsen in the 3rd? Looks nothing like any of them. I’m kinda convinced it’s Blake Lively with a sunburn and a hangover.

  • Beth G

    I realize these are fashion photos so they can’t smile.  But I think a more interesting way to style and photograph them would be in youthful clothes with smiles… because that would be so NOT what you usually get from them.

  • butter nut

    park avenue bag ladies.

  • PrunellaV

    Can always tell them apart because Ashley has the eyes of a lemur.

  • alyce1213

    Flotsam and Jetsam.

    • Coralie Legister


  • jaymeglynn

    The clothes are incredible but what’s with the crazy bright lighting? It hurts my eyes to look at. (And i’m a teenager!)