By now we’ve come to accept the fact that the wheezing corpse of print media is on its last legs and seeking new target audiences wherever it can, and that the 12-year-old girl market seems ripe for exploitation. And so Entertainment Weekly once again has its cover graced with, what, the 700th Twilight story?
But apparently this market focus is not sufficiently narrow, as indicated by the following instruction to unfathomably stupid 12-year-old girls incapable, it seems, of figuring out on their own to rotate the magazine ninety degrees (and, for the superretarded unfathomably stupid 12-year-old girl, the additional clockwise graphic, just in case they made the wrong rotational choice):
From Entertainment Weekly #1035 (pages 28-29)
You’ll also want to check out the casting requirements for Twilight‘s Edward in the image above, presented in a language utterly suited for the aforementioned, unfathomably stupid 12-year-old girl. They left off “must be totally dreamy!” ROTATE MONITOR CLOCKWISE.
12 comments
so does this mean you don’t want your subscription renewed?
I can channel my inner unfathomably stupid, 12-year-old girl if you can, timber.
OMG. I didn’t notice the rotation instructions! No wonder I was having a hard time reading my issue.
EW used to be the only mag I’d read cover to cover (so saaaaad, that, I know).
Now, it’s Seed. Tastes change.
I prefer the phrase “ever-so-dreamy” myself.
This post made my brain incontinent.
I didn’t renew my subscription with EW about 5 months ago, after seeing how pathetic the magazine had become. The writing was starting to read like poorly written blog entries, except for the movie reviewers (LS and OG,) who you could tell were poring over their thesauruses just to appear intelligent.
I actually got a rather hostile renew notice when my subscription ran out. When I talked to a customer service rep over the phone about said hostility, she had the gall to tell me “it was a joke that you obviously didn’t get.” I then informed her that my humor, as well as my money, were something EW would never get.
And when did Diablo Cody become some sycophantic Hollywood suck-up who suddenly wasn’t interesting anymore? Her last few articles I read actually convinced me Juno was an overrated piece of shit, and that I’d stay well clear of her future endeavors.
I actually am acquainted with Diablo Cody — as much as anyone who’s traded barbs for years with her on an interweb forum can be “acquainted” — and am thrilled for her success. (Full disclosure: I haven’t chatted with her on that forum since shortly after her Oscar win.)
That said, yeah, her column is seriously… uninspired. And has been from the get-go. It doesn’t taint (heh) the freshness of Juno for me, but I simply stopped reading it which, I would imagine, is a real kiss o’ death. I would imagine that she’ll bail once her contract’s up, something “Uncle Stevie” King should’ve done, oh, forty years ago. Cripes, his column’s an embarrassment.
I have to admit that I laughed pretty hard at her first two articles, and was thrilled to see her writing for EW. Her comment about having sperm for eyebrows (in regards to the cheesy illustration they started using) had me laughing for days.
Then, on the third article, it was like she turned into Sybil, and one of her less-interesting personalities took over. I didn’t want to hear her lame recollections about NKOTB, because it sounded like a lame email my sister would send me. I was fully expecting to read “LOL” and “OMG” every other word in her articles. Then again, as you’ve aptly pointed out, the magazine is becoming targeted towards the Hannah Montana crowd, so it would make perfect sense.
I’ll offer a hearty amen to the “Uncle Stevie” comment. I loved that he was on the Pop Watch, but it was painfully obvious he didn’t know pop culture from a Pop-Tart. I had to stop reading his articles because they were causing me emotional harm from the outrageous empathy I created from his embarrassment.
I’ve been a subscriber to EW for about 15 years, and every now and then they have a serious misstep. The “Twilight” diary is definitely one of them. Yeesh.
The only way I’d see “Twilight” is if someone I knew rented it, we had plenty of alcohol, and I’d made sure to have my snark guns fully loaded and ready to go.
Oh, and Robert Patterson? Not hot. At all. Period.
Everything you just said, yes.
My issue isn’t with EW, but the Twilight series in general. I shudder to think of the consequences of *that many* teenage girls getting THAT into a series of books written by the only woman in North America over 20 who apparently has never heard of Kitty Genovese or Rebecca Schaffer. Edward breaks into her bedroom in the dead of night to watch her sleep, and Bella is charmed by this?
*sigh*
[...] the mag that I wouldn’t have otherwise (usually it’s about movies). Just lay off the “Twilight”/Gossip Girl double issues and we’ll be cool, [...]