Macpherson recreates iconic Playboy pose

SARAH MACKENZIE
Last updated 15:43 03/07/2013
Elle Macpherson

THE BODY: From men's mags to fashion glossies, Elle shares her body of work.

Related Links

Kate Moss to cover Playboy Elle Macpherson happy with older body Elle Macpherson refrains from treadmill

Relevant offers

Life

Model turns herself into 'sexy bimbo doll' Meet two Hamilton bloggers What does 'Australia's biggest w**ker' even mean? Martha Stewart disses Blake and Gwyneth The e-stalking stage of motherhood How female friendships really work Preparing my daughters to be single Thinking about a kinder world Top 10 kids' crazes of all time His sincere tears have struck a chord

There's not many women who could pull off a near nude shot at the tender age of 50, but Elle Macpherson has done it with ease.

In a throwback to her iconic Playboy cover in 1994, the Aussie model strikes an almost identical topless pose on the cover of Harper's Bazaar.

Coming out in August, the fashion mag features Elle in nothing but a pair of black thigh-high stockings and an armful of bracelets, while her arms and legs are strategically placed to protect her modesty.

All I can say is, she wasn't given her much repeated alias, 'the body,' for nothing.

The amount of retouching on the new image is questionable, but that aside, Elle's figure shows none of the middle-aged sag most mere mortals experience as they head into their 50s, and her skin looks ridiculously radiant and youthful.

"She is in incredible shape for a woman about to turn 50," said Bazaar editor Kellie Hush.

Macpherson was shot by Canadian music icon, Bryan Adams, for the magazine's 'Fabulous at any Age' issue, which features two alternate covers - the other of which sees her twirling in a tasselled Tom Ford jacket.

Two guesses at which cover will be more popular.

This is the sixth time Elle has featured on the cover of the monthly glossy since it was launched in 1998.

Ad Feedback

- Stuff

Recipe search

Special offers
Opinion poll

Is it ever OK to complain about other people's kids?

Yes, children should be seen and not heard.

No, let kids be kids and let off steam.

It depends on the situation.

Vote Result

Related story: (See story)

Featured Promotions

Sponsored Content