Because what I find appealing about her is, yes, she is cute. But not in an Anne Hathaway kind of way; (which is less aw! and more yawn!) she has more edge than that without taking it to the Rachel Evan Wood extreme, or even posessing a Girl Next Door aura.
She just is what she is, and not much more than that can be said.
Those last two covers she appeared on (The cringey GQ, which, yes, frankly, did leave her looking a little Rachel Evan Wood-ish) and then the sickly Lucky cover, looking all Hollywood and innocent, as if it was naively trying to counter balance the mens magazine cover and shield the eyes of readers who may have spied the (actually, not exactly damaging) images.
The reason I bitch about these covers (blame the art director, please, not Rachel), is because Nylon has conquered the perfect middle ground (but pfft, what do I know, I'm just the target audience!)
One of the things that I always love about Nylon is that, even if they pick a cover star who, gasp, isn't an anti star or some hipster but who in fact also graces covers of candy coated magazines, they still manage to perfectly pin down and yet exaggerate the recreate the side of the star that we wish to see. It's certainly true that many of the faces gracing the glossy front page these days are about as mainstream as those on ELLE.
Richie, Lohan, Christina, Olsens, Sienna have all popped up over the last year, but with bashed in anglo doc martins, checkered jeans, string vests and ethereal-grunge hybrid dresses, they all looked suitable un-themselves.
This is why the picture (from the website) showing Bilson in a lycra vest and spangly skirt with bedhair and boa works so perfectly for me.
I sense the sychronised pricking of ears as you lot wait to hear the March issue crash land into your mail/letter box? Yay or Ney.
Having said all that, actually much prefer the snaps inside the magazine..
now playing: handjobs for the holidays by broken social scene.