Belated Thoughts on the Golden Globes
I actually wrote most of this Monday, but I had some tech issues (is there anything more boring?). So here are my thoughts today!
1) My favorites were; Anna Hathaway in her Dynasty-redux Armani; Tilda Swinton in her bananas white and cream Jil Sander; Tina Fey because I want to be her when I grow up and she can do no wrong no matter what; and Mila Kunis, looking every inch the movie star she will be.
2) Many people disliked Annette Bening's spiky hair and glasses, but I thought it was very her, which is the point, and that she looked pretty great. I didn't love the dress, but it fit her nicely.
3) One of my bete-noirs is the overuse of the word "flirty" to describe clothing, particularly ruffled things. However, the definition of flirty was Julianne Moore in her pink Lanvin. Every time they cut to her she was smiling and laughing girlishly, and I think that one shouldered pink satin had everything to do with it. How could you not giggle in that dress? She totally pulled it off.
4) This is an interesting case that's been on my mind since Sunday. Ponder Olivia Wilde for a moment if you will:
Besides- a dress like this probably covers a multiplicity of flaws- as could the Marchesa! But Olivia Wilde has no flaws. She could have been daring, and dare I say, gone a little younger, a little more modern. Heck, she just starred in Tron. What perfect inspiration! She could even have worn something like this, and blown everyone out of the water:
1) My favorites were; Anna Hathaway in her Dynasty-redux Armani; Tilda Swinton in her bananas white and cream Jil Sander; Tina Fey because I want to be her when I grow up and she can do no wrong no matter what; and Mila Kunis, looking every inch the movie star she will be.
2) Many people disliked Annette Bening's spiky hair and glasses, but I thought it was very her, which is the point, and that she looked pretty great. I didn't love the dress, but it fit her nicely.
3) One of my bete-noirs is the overuse of the word "flirty" to describe clothing, particularly ruffled things. However, the definition of flirty was Julianne Moore in her pink Lanvin. Every time they cut to her she was smiling and laughing girlishly, and I think that one shouldered pink satin had everything to do with it. How could you not giggle in that dress? She totally pulled it off.
4) This is an interesting case that's been on my mind since Sunday. Ponder Olivia Wilde for a moment if you will:
That is a gorgeous Marchesa dress. And it is being worn by a very beautiful woman. Yet, it doesn't add up. Let me simplify: right girl+right dress = wrong outfit. I love Ms. Wilde on "House"- she's spiky and smart, and you can't deny she has great bones. And the gown is really outstandingly beautiful. But, this is a dress for an Oscar Nominee, not a TV actress presenting at the Golden Globes (the most corrupt of award shows). The dress completely eats her up, and her tiny head is further swallowed by that sad, lank hair. I love hair worn down but, just...no. If I could, I would photoshop Anne Hathaway's head onto this picture and you would see what I mean.THAT would work. Because in order to pull something like this off, at a not-quite-the-Oscars sort of event, you have to be a FULL MOVIE STAR.
For example:
Here is Catherine Zeta Jones channeling Scarlett O'Hara, from the green textured fabric, which boldly recalls Scarlett's curtains-upholstery dress, to the Civil War era hair. It's actually an absurd look, and most people who tried to rock this would wake up to find themselves the butt of many a fashion joke. But not Catherine Zeta Jones. On her, this totally works. I mean, this woman doesn't just look like a movie star- she is one! And what a rare species they are. She's gorgeous and all you do is look at her face, because, well, what a face! And she's totally comfortable in this stunningly beautiful monstrosity that's surely not comfortable at all. I mean, I can totally imagine her strolling down her back garden to the pool in this, and flopping onto a plush lounge chair with a book or something. This is a lot of dress, and yet, it's not wearing her- she's most definitely wearing IT. The same can not be said for the lovely Olivia Wilde. That dress is wearing HER.
For example:
Here is Catherine Zeta Jones channeling Scarlett O'Hara, from the green textured fabric, which boldly recalls Scarlett's curtains-upholstery dress, to the Civil War era hair. It's actually an absurd look, and most people who tried to rock this would wake up to find themselves the butt of many a fashion joke. But not Catherine Zeta Jones. On her, this totally works. I mean, this woman doesn't just look like a movie star- she is one! And what a rare species they are. She's gorgeous and all you do is look at her face, because, well, what a face! And she's totally comfortable in this stunningly beautiful monstrosity that's surely not comfortable at all. I mean, I can totally imagine her strolling down her back garden to the pool in this, and flopping onto a plush lounge chair with a book or something. This is a lot of dress, and yet, it's not wearing her- she's most definitely wearing IT. The same can not be said for the lovely Olivia Wilde. That dress is wearing HER.Besides- a dress like this probably covers a multiplicity of flaws- as could the Marchesa! But Olivia Wilde has no flaws. She could have been daring, and dare I say, gone a little younger, a little more modern. Heck, she just starred in Tron. What perfect inspiration! She could even have worn something like this, and blown everyone out of the water:
As it is, Emma Stone got to do that instead, and she looks exactly right- elegant, lovely, every inch a young star, emphasis on the word YOUNG. You can't see it here, but there is a huge cut out in the back of this dress- and it's sexy as hell. Note to Olivia Wilde: You've got the figure! USE IT! YOU ARE STILL YOUNG! Edge it up a little!
5) Ok, now the "didn't likes": Scarlett Johansson- I actually didn't mind her crazy hair, but I can't stand nude color dresses. They are so bridal and boring, on TV anyway. And the shoulder flap things are not cool. The whole look is grandma-ish, and not in a good bonkers way, but in a bad, dull, way. Also, that tattoo is "blergh"; Nicole Kidman! Why did she have to touch up her botox? She looked actually rather nice on "The View" a few weeks ago- her face moved! Now she looks like polished marble, which is weird on someone who actually has blood in her veins and skin made of cells; the less we say about J.Lo in her cheesy and matronly sheer caplet with bling, the better; and last but not least, January Jones, who looked like a cross between a lampshade and a burlesque act. She's always trying so hard to prove that she's not Betty Draper, and somehow, she fails. This is totally what Betty would wear in 2011. For advice she should see: Stone, Emma.
5) Ok, now the "didn't likes": Scarlett Johansson- I actually didn't mind her crazy hair, but I can't stand nude color dresses. They are so bridal and boring, on TV anyway. And the shoulder flap things are not cool. The whole look is grandma-ish, and not in a good bonkers way, but in a bad, dull, way. Also, that tattoo is "blergh"; Nicole Kidman! Why did she have to touch up her botox? She looked actually rather nice on "The View" a few weeks ago- her face moved! Now she looks like polished marble, which is weird on someone who actually has blood in her veins and skin made of cells; the less we say about J.Lo in her cheesy and matronly sheer caplet with bling, the better; and last but not least, January Jones, who looked like a cross between a lampshade and a burlesque act. She's always trying so hard to prove that she's not Betty Draper, and somehow, she fails. This is totally what Betty would wear in 2011. For advice she should see: Stone, Emma.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Belated Thoughts on the Golden Globes.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://ltdstylo.com/MT4/mt-tb.cgi/124
Leave a comment