The overall rating of a review is different from a simple average of all individual ratings.
Share this review on
You have to wonder why this magazine is called Heat. Heat can be considered to inflame passion and this it certainly did with me. I have not felt so inflamed with dislike about anything as much for a long time. Heat is also a source of warmth but there is so little warmth from Heat magazine to its subject matter it is appalling. Heat magazine is a deeply cynical exploitation of celebrity and of the celebrities themselves.
After some recent TV advertising I thought I would give it a go. The edition featured Victoria Beckham and her now famous lipring and the whole article left me floundering. The first thing I noticed about Heat magazine was the dreadful standard of writing in it. The lipring article meandered about in a disjointed ramble. It was if the paragraphs had been jumbled up. The overall impression in the end was that this was a 100 word article at best, being spun to 1000 words.
The second thing you notice is that most of the articles in Heat are at a level of trivia that is depressingly trifling. The information has a value so low you despair for anyone finding it of interest. We get to hear that Amma and Helen from Big Brother have moved in together and the magazine breathlessly speculates as to whether they share a bed. I really have to say that is not interesting and frankly none of our business. We learn that Calista Flockhart has a new hair-do. Stunning news only topped by the fact that the publicity shy chanteuse Christine Aguilera has a container of Nesquik backstage among her many items. The lass is obviously not supporting the Nestle ban then.
There is photo coverage of a party held by Jamiroquai at the launch of the new album. As a side item here, are we sure it’s a new album, it sounds awfully like all the others. There is also a review of this album and a few others and some reviews of films on release as well as those coming up on TV. As a TV listings magazine Heat it is adequate but even the free supplements of the weekend papers do it better.
To celebrate, and I kid you not the tone is definitely celebratory, the divorce of Nicole Kidman and Tom Cruise the magazine highlights some of the relationships which it considers matches made in hell. I find little to celebrate here as I am sure Anais Gallagher, Phoenix Chi Gulzar and the other victims of these doomed celebrity marriages will do in later life.
Whereas the celebrity magazines like Hello and OK are more predominantly approved photo spreads to which the celebrity has agreed, Heat seems filled with photos taken in unguarded moments. I find this intrusive and unnecessary. Is a photo of Gail Porter and her new husband walking down the streets of London really of any interest to anyone particularly as it was so poor they were hardly recognisable. It seems all an excuse for a cheap shot. Heat metaphorically photographs the hand that feeds it before taking a huge bite.
And as for Victoria and her lipring it seems that the celebrity press and Victoria deserve each other, feed off each other, dislike each other. It hard to know who is sillier.
I agree with many of your sentiments and indeed said so in my review (plug) but Heat doesn't hide the fact that it is not the deepest of publications. I think it has more to offer than the likes of Hello etc. which just seem to want to show pretty people in their pretty homes