This was a Fug-or-Fab post originally, but I typed myself out of it. Because once I listed the pros -- it's not black, it's not a caftan -- I ran out of juice compared with all the things that bugged me about this:
[Photo: WENN.com]I wish Angelina had gone with the original runway version of this Versace gown, which was a really pretty gray-blue color. It's not like the woman can't wear pigment -- she just chooses not to, for reasons neither I
nor probably Lucy Liu will ever understand (and I wish it hadn't taken me 47 minutes to realize I left out that hotlink, without which the sentence made no sense; awesome).
Plus, the flesh tone is creating a few problems here:
1) We might be able to see her nipples.
I don't think we ACTUALLY can -- I checked other photos and nothing
mammarial appeared to be making itself known -- but even if it's an
optical illusion, I FEEL like I am getting an
up-close and highly personal glimpse of some
Private Boob. Were this not in such an eerily accurate flesh tone, I
probably wouldn't be giving this a second look.
2) Factoring in the slit and the fact that I believe I can
also see her belly-button contours, Angie just looks naked, full-stop. Which is probably not an issue for HER, since I bet she wouldn't care that much if she accidentally did live out that old nightmare where it turns out you've shown up at the most important event of your life without a stitch on, because she is Angelina Jolie, and I suspect nothing fazes her. Seriously, I bet I could walk up to her and say, "Aliens tell me they'd like to juice your calves and serve them with squash blossoms," and she'd be all, "Nice," and then we'd go our separate ways and it wouldn't even make her rundown of Funny Things That Happened Today To Tell Brad About While We're Recuperating From Wild Animal Sex.
3) Somehow, in spite of all that, it STILL comes off kind of... boring. How is that possible, in light of the aforementioned nude illusions? And the fact that it's slit up to her baby factory? How can one be a NAKED FRUMP?
