At least GOOP admitted she wasn’t even trying to go punk. You might ask, “Why even go then?” But you probably don’t turn down a Met Ball invitation. Especially if you’re Gwyneth Paltrow, you’ve got a movie out and a new cookbook, and you REALLY REALLY need to make up for last year’s hideous Prada apron with pockets that were constellations of horror.
In fact, even thematically, this feels like what she SHOULD have worn last year, given the Schiaparelli theme and the fact that pink was one of Elsa’s signature colors. It’s like her Step One of Fug’s Non-Anonymous was to make a visual apology for not paying any attention to the Prada until it was too late. But I’m not entirely sure this works on any other level — the cut is almost aggressively plain except for the strip of illusion netting, as if she used up all her wackadoo mojo on the Iron Man 3 events and this was all she could handle. I might have liked it better if it went bare instead of with sternum hose. And I ALSO think that, even though Gwyneth’s People Magazine Most Beautiful face is indeed great, maybe she needed something more up there than to look like she’s ditching out on the gala in ten minutes to go to the gym. Or punking out on it, I guess, which… how many times will we use THAT pun today?
Loading ...[Photo: Getty]
5 photos in gallery
5 photos in gallery
Fugron Man
I’m assuming this week’s GOOP will be all about cool ways to spend less than $450,000 on your First Communion.
But, psst, I’m not sure Christ is down with his newcomers bringing both nip and navel with them to the altar (WHY can I see them here?). I’m also pretty sure there’s a verse somewhere in which J.C. complains to John about mock turtlenecks — something about “be not tempted to mimic the nape-draperies of college football coaches.” Trust.
[Photo: Getty]
react: