Fashion is in the eye of the beholder

Monday March 06, 2006 @ 10:55 PM (UTC)

So, I have many, many opinions on Oscar fashions, but I couldn’t think of an excuse to unleash them on my poor, unsuspecting readers until this moment. So here it is. Take cover if you were expecting fiction.

They really aren’t kidding about beauty and the eye of the beholder. I am a woman of strong opinions, and, okay, I’ll admit it, I tend to think they’re right. Especially my aesthetic opinions (for instance, Whisker of Evil, by Rita Mae Brown ‘and Sneakie Pie Brown’ her cat, is a terrible, twee, badly-constructed and facile book; I can support this with quotes from the text, or could if I hadn’t already sold it back.) But the hazy hivemind of the fashion-conscious Internet often seems to tiptoe its way to hypotheses that I find completely mystifying. I’m not sure whether it’s just that they’re all so frightened of appearing wrong that the first time someone shows a shimmer of opinion, they all jump on and magnify that into the accepted fact; or whether they have all made their decisions about people long ago and continue to say, “Ah yes, she’s a brilliant fashionista” no matter WHAT she turns up wearing.

So, for instance, everyone agrees that Naomi Watts should have worn something with more color and less ripping (tho’ no one used my brilliant line that apparently she has very energetic cats and lets them nest in her wardrobe), but her lopsided hair, which seemed to underline the chaos of her gown, was apparently ‘best hair’. So much for my opinion.

Still on hair, apparently we are all impressed by Jennifer Aniston’s Rachel hair (with straggly frizzies. Dude, new wax would fix that.) Umm, when Diane Keaton wore a tux to the Oscars a few years ago, everyone said, “Umm, you already DID Annie Hall,” but we’re supposed to admire Aniston’s reruns? Hmm. Also, I thought she looked like she’d been up all night and caked makeup and a fake smile over the top, but apparently she was ‘radiant’ and ‘glamorous’. Hmm. Man, I keep striking out! (I’m probably just an anti-tanning fuddy-duddy.)

I’ve been told Salma Hayek’s outfit was ‘risky’ and ‘bold’. Umm. It was structurally sound, and if you MEAN the color, of COURSE you mere mortals cannot wear that color, but that’s an advantage as far as Salma, goddess of beauty, is concerned. There is no risk for HER! I thought Keira Knightley was the best-dressed mortal there, and I have been told her necklace didn’t match her dress, and she was ‘vampy’, and ‘overdone’. I thought Sandra Bullock looked a bit like the Corpse Bride from the bust up, and apparently she’s ‘fetching’. At least we all agree on the real Corpse Bride, Helena Bonham Carter.

The struggle continues. I think Nicole Kidman is STILL campaigning to steal the part of the White Witch from Tilda Swinton, or at least Magical White Witch Barbie, and apparently she’s ‘classic’ and ‘gorgeous’. I think Michelle Williams MIGHT have pulled that color off if she hadn’t worn bright red lipstick…and apparently she looked great. I think Uma Thurman has finally made up for years of wacky red carpet antics with a superb gown, and no one even comments.

So, in short, world, we do not agree. Therefore, I must conclude that I am right.

I apologize to my readers for this descent into fluff and falderal. Your normally scheduled strange fiction, musings and anecdotes will soon recommence.


1. Salma was best-dressed. Ever. In the history of people wearing clothes. End of story. Yowza. I’ll be in my bunk.

B. Holy crap, you found a picture of Keanu SMILING? That’s…incredible.

1. I don’t really let Salma compete in that portion of the competition. It would be unfair to the mortals. I must admit, I’ve probably spent more time looking at her picture than at any other picture from the whole event. I could go on and on about that dress.

‘B’. I hear the reason they went together is some upcoming movie they’re promoting…so he’s probably getting paid a million for every tooth he shows.

There, I have clarified within the text of the article :P

So far, three of us agree on Salma Hayek. She was best-dressed at the Oscars by a long-shot.

I’ve read press that George Clooney was best-dressed there. This confuses me. I think men should be in a separate category. Men wear pants, usually suits, to the Oscars. So there are good suits and bad suits, but suits are suits. They are fundamentally boring and can’t compete with dresses, which have 1800 more options, colors, etc. Nevertheless, George Clooney is sexy, and he looked fabulous. And men look good in suits.

Uma’s hair was fabulous, but that color washed her out. fugged Aniston (it was a gentle fugging, but a fugging nonetheless.)

There is no way that Keira Knightley is a mortal. As an Oscar “campaign ad” pointed out—the cheekbones! The cheekbones! And I would add: the hipbones!

Yes. I thought the barely-suppressed glee Clooney sported with his custom Armani was the best accessory a man can wear to the Oscars, but, all the same, he was wearing a tux to a tux event. YAY HIM.

I would rather see Uma washed out than wearing a gigantic silk tea towel or something. It was a muuuuch beter choice than we’ve seen in a while.

Yes, I saw the fugging (after I posted, you’ll note) and was quite pleased. The fug girls are occasionally over-harsh, but they aren’t obsequious yes-girls.

Fine, Keira Knightly is a hamadryad. :P She beat all the non-Salma competition, and that is the point.

Is it just me or is Jennifer Aniston starting to look like The Joker?

Hmm. That would be a new direction for Hollywood women. Usually they become puppets.

New comment

required, won't be displayed (but may be used for Gravatar)


Don't type anything here unless you're an evil robot:

And especially don't type anything here:

Basic HTML (including links) is allowed, just don't try anything fishy. Your comment will be auto-formatted unless you use your own <p> tags for formatting. You're also welcome to use Textile.

Copyright © 2017 Felicity Shoulders. All rights reserved.
Powered by Thoth.