Please don't take this the wrong way (as I love sparkle just as much as the next girl) but how many sequined dresses does Taylor Swift own? I'm all for glitz and decadence but there are so many ways to glamorize oneself during the holiday season (more on that later) that it's time for Taylor to put the sequins away.
Last night, she surprised no one with a silver-embellished mini from Collette Dinnigan that highlights her legs and arms. I'm yawning. What did pique my interest was Taylor's hair. She finally abandoned those curls for a sleek, straight look with a bang. Whoa.
While the hair is sexier than usual (and is that cleavage I see?), the look was a bit wiggy and maybe a tad too mature.
What do you think of her new beauty look and those same old sequins? Glam or a Sham?
And here's her performance from last night which I loved:
Confession: I am the biggest Willow Smith fan. After dressing up like her for Halloween, my adoration has only flourished from her W Magazine article (where she says, and I quote, "I can't do whatever I want. Mommy has to say it's okay." Squeal!) to her introduction of Justin Bieber's performance last night at the American Music Awards.
Speaking of which, while some of her outfits (like head-to-toe leopard print and biker boots) can overwhelm, last night she impressed me in a tasteful yet adventurous look. She wore a romper which was fun and age-appropriate with a statement-making yellow sleeve complete with poufy shoulders and buckles.
Love the bright yellow pop of color against the gray and the rocker-chic detail of the sleeve. And she kept the hair sleek with a pompadour and ponytail. Bravo, Willow! My only gripe? Lose the slouchy boots.
What did you guys think? Was she GLAM or a burning SHAM?
Her body is amazing (looks like she gained a bit more weight...applause) and the dress is sultry and romantic thanks to the gorgeous material. Rih's head full of crimson curls is where, in my opinion, the looks goes wrong. The red-on-red isn't necessarily chic and the curls so remind me of Whitney Houston in the '90s.
What do you think of Rihanna's look? GLAM OR SHAM?
Also, check out her opening performance below. Werk, Rih Rih!
The fashion fete on everyone's mind this week (well, besides the Christian Louboutin sample sale that I'll fill you in on later) was the Lanvin for H&M fashion show and editor shopping event. While I was chained to my desk at the office (insert sigh), my fellow bloggers, editors and tastemakers hit the Pierre Hotel in New York to see the fashion show---and get their hands on---Lanvin.
And as you can imagine, it was a glorious occasion. The Lanvin for H&M pieces look even better when styled with pearls, leopard print tights, gloves, piled-on bracelets and turquoise lips. Yes, I said turquoise.
With frilly hats, floral decor and brilliant styling, the production had all the bells and whistles of a Haute Couture show, which is pure marketing genius (what more do fashion lovers want than elite and made-to-order haute couture made accessible to the masses?).
Check out pics from the show below - what do you think?
SN: isn't Alber Elbaz adorable?
Watch the video here:
For the rest of us who are eagerly anticipating the North American launch date, THIS Saturday, November 20th (it hits stores everywhere November 23rd), I've included a list of H&M stores that will carry the collection in the states:
United States
New York
New York City -
1328 Broadway
150 East 86th Street
435 7th Avenue
515 Broadway
640 5th Avenue
731 Lexington Avenue
California
Los Angeles -
Beverly Center
Westfield Century City
Um, who even knew that anything involved with Beyonce would ever be banned anywhere in the world?! OK, maybe that's a bit dramatic to say that it's "banned" (because you can watch it...just not during the daytime hours).
What in the heck am I talking about?! Why, Beyonce's fragrance ad for her first scent Heat. (Click here to watch it.)
The Advertising Standards Authority, an independent body in the U.K. that aims to maintain standards in advertising, ruled that this steamy ad can only be viewed after 7:30 p.m. An ASA spokeswoman told WWD the ad was "racy" but not explicit. Well, at least they didn't delegate her ad to be shown only after midnight with the rest of those corny sex hotline ads, right!?
As you know, I'm not really a fan of this scent (still holding out hope that her next one Heat Rush, which launches February 2011, will be better!) but I can't say that the TV ad is any worse than what she's put out before in music videos; or even what other pop stars put out in music videos and ads (hello Lindsay Lohan!). I think the ad is pretty fierce (love that walk at the end...POW! Get it, Bey!)
What do you think, Glamazons? Is the ASA being too hard with this ruling? Or do you agree with the ruling?
There was an explosion of purple Tuesday at Nordstrom's pop-up trailer here in NYC for the official U.S. launch of Katy Perry's new signature fragrance Purr. Clad in a long, fitted Zac Posen dress, the new bride looked very grown-up, wouldn't you say? And kudos to that lovely statement necklace that she's wearing as well. LOVE!
But, back to the fragrance: so, as we've told you before Glamazons, Katy wanted her fragrance to be "completely unlike anything she's smelled before."
My fave WWD quote in regards to this new kitty fragrance amazingness?:
"You can put all the bells and whistles on things and it can still smell like sh*t. I was very particular about this...I couldn't put out something that I didn't 100 percent believe in."
While I haven't quite yet managed to get my hands on it yet to tell you whether it really does smell like sh*t or not, I can say that the packaging is genius. I mean, who wouldn't want to have a purple glass kitty chilling on their boudoir?! I also think that the ads are hilarious! (Click here to check out one of the shots.)
In other fragrance news, the pop star spilled the beans to JustJared about plans for her BFF Rihanna's new fragrance. It's going to be called 'Rebel Flower.'
"I'm excited to see hers because she does things with a twist, too and we're always trying to push the envelope and raise the bar," she told JustJared Tuesday.
Oooo exciting, right Glamazons?! I mean, I agree that Rihanna is definitely pushing the bar with this red hair business (which I happen to think looks better shorter) so I can't wait to see what she's brewing up in the fragrance labs.
Purr by Katy Perry costs $36 for 1 0z and is now available at Nordstrom and Nordstrom.com. We hear that there should be a matching body lotion and shower gel launching soon as well, but no real confirmation as to when it will hit stores or pricing. (Just note that it's coming!)
What do you think of the bottle for Purr, Glamazons? AND do you plan on purchasing Rihanna's fragrance once it hits stands?!
Remember when Tom Ford hosted a super private showing of his first-ever Women's Collection with barely any editors, no celebrities in the front row and ONE photographer (Terri Richardson)? Well, he finally unveiled images of his collection in next month's Vogue shot by Steven Meisel and presumably to his dismay, those images have hit the internets.
Like Marc Jacobsand Tracy Reese's Spring 2011 collection, Ford presented a seventies-inspired line of fitted dresses in vibrant colors and playful prints like leopard and tye-dye with traces of menswear. For some reason, perhaps given the mere obscurity of all, I thought I'd be laying eyes on something more fascinating, like feathers and hair used as fabric for example.
Ford's desire for exclusivity and elusiveness I can understand (afterall, he's a fashion designer), but his aversion to the internet...to celebs? I mean, it's all a little perplexing. You don't want celebs in your front row, but Beyonce, one of the biggest pop stars of our generation, can walk in your show. If that's not vying for media attention, what is?
Here are Tom Ford's (who now goes by Mr. Ford) quotes on the internet, celebrity and fashion journalism via Vogue:
“I do not understand everyone’s need to see everything online the day after a show. I don’t think it ultimately serves the customer, which is the whole point of my business — not to serve journalists or the fashion system. To put something out that’s going to be in a store in six months, and to see it on a starlet, ranked in US magazine next week? My customer doesn’t want to wear the same thing she saw on a starlet!"
Do you agree that seeing fashion the day after a show (or the day of on The Glamazons, haha) doesn't serve YOU as the customer? Does the fashion industry benefit from celebs wearing their garments?
I'd argue that it does, but immediacy does represent the democratization of fashion, and some people prefer the traditional hierarchy (designers -> editors/buyers -> (and six months later) the public). Even though I'm an editor, I'm not one of those people. Are you? Do you think the new and improved, digitally-enhanced "fashion system" undermines the retail business?
And finally, on to the most important question, which dress do you think Beyonce wore? LOL.
But I find her latest hairstyle deeply disturbing. She has taken her bright red hair to unprecedented lengths with a long, straight weave and it looks more costume-y than ever. My vote is for the red to atleast be toned down; a deeper, more burgundy color could look gorgeous.
And though Rihanna's a beautiful girl no matter how you style her hair, I prefer her with shorter locks to show off her facial features, don't you?
Cast your vote on Rihanna's new straight long weave. Is it GLAM or a SHAM?
And check out a gallery of all her red hair moments.
If you're like me, Glamazons, as soon as the temperature drops, your skin starts to dry up. Maybe not as dried up as a prune (ew) but it gets pretty darn dry. I usually have to resort to creams and lotions that I would never normally wear during the spring and summer seasons (simply because they're just too heavy). Because I'm a lover of all things drug-store, I usually just grab some Nivea (the original formula works wonders for my dry winter skin!) but I've got a new fave this season.
It's the Kiehl's Creme de Corps Soy Milk & Honey Whipped Body Butter. Yeah, it's a bit more on the pricier side ($35) but there are plenty of reasons as to why there's no shame in dropping your guap on this jar of moisturizing goodness. Luckily, I've outlined all of the reasons for doing so right here for you:
#1. It literally smells like Milk & Honey, but in a good way.
My experiences with these type of fragrances haven't always been the best simply because the scent can tend to border on the sweet/sickening side. So sweet/sickening that when you apply in the a.m. you'll start to feel slightly nauseous once you catch a whiff of it by noon. Ugh. However, is delicate and not overwhelming so that after you apply, you forget about it; that is until you go out on a date with a cute boy later who sniffs you and reminds you that you smell quite delicious. Side note: This is all based off of real world experience, of course.
#2. Whipped body creams make for the most delicious textures ever.
After first opening the jar of this stuff, the first thing I thought of is frosting. Delicious, sweet, yummy buttercream frosting. Mmmm. It kind of made me want to bake a cake, but being that my oven is currently serving as a storage area for my summer sandals, I quickly nixed that idea. However, it's whipped texture makes for easy application and seeps right into your skin. It's not too greasy or too light but rather just right.
#3. It's part of the Creme de Corps family, which means it contains some of the same nourishing properties as the original moisturizer. The Whipped Body Butter contains shea butter, squalane, jojoba butter and beta carotene to protect and soften your skin. Also, in case you've never tried the Creme de Corps Body Moisturizer, then I highly advise you to do so. Before this Whipped Body Butter, it was one of my fall/winter faves because of its ability to give my skin the perfect amount of hydration without being too oily or greasy. (And it's been my experience that once you've found one product to be your fave, then anything else in the same family can only be better!)
#4.The limited-edition holiday version currently on shelves contains this cheerful packaging of tulips designed by artist Jeff Koons and your purchase will help donate money to charity.
Always a do-good beauty brand, Kiehl's tapped Koons to create this limited-edition design on the entire Creme de Corps Holiday Collection and all of the proceeds (up to $200,000) will benefit the Koons Family Institute, an initiative of the International Centre for Missing and Exploited Children. (Turns out that Koon's son Ludwig was once abducted and he's had to battle two continents just to get him back! Crazy pants, right?! Since then, he's become an advocate for protecting children.)
The entire Limited Edition Creme de Corps Holiday Collection (isn't it pretty?!) contains an 8.4 oz size ($27); 16.9 oz with Pump ($45) and 1 liter ($70). The Milk & Honey Whipped Body Butter is 8 oz. All products can be purchased at your local Kiehl's store or Kiehls.com. Happy Buttering!
Ok, wait: before you continue reading, let me warn you that these Diesel ads that you are about to view are pretty raunchy:
But, are you really surprised?!
According to the NYPost, Brooklyn Law School plans to sue Diesel over these ads. Why? Well, you just looked at 'em, right!? The school rented out their library for the fashion brand to do this shoot expecting it to be a "tastefully done" denim ad. Ha! They clearly didn't do their research. I mean, practically everyone in the city knows that the fashion brand is known for pushing the button when it comes to their ads. Students and faculty have voiced their embarrassment, but if you ask me, they should have known better. And this is clearly an underwear shoot because where's the denim!?
What do you think of the ads, Glamazons? Do you give it a GLAM or a SHAM? Also, do you think the school is right to sue the fashion brand? Let's discuss below in the comments section!
All images on www.glamazonsblog.com are readily available on the Internet and believed to be in public domain. Images posted are believed to be published according to the U.S. Copyright Fair Use Act (title 17, U.S. Code.)
