<![CDATA[Jezebel: we're grumpy]]> http://tags.gawker.com/assets/base/img/thumbs140x140/jezebel.com.png <![CDATA[Jezebel: we're grumpy]]> http://jezebel.com/tag/weregrumpy http://jezebel.com/tag/weregrumpy <![CDATA[TMZ Sincerely, Honestly Cares About The Children]]> TMZ posted a photo of Courteney Cox and David Arquette with their little daughter Coco Cox rowing happily along in a kayak a little while ago. Coco is sitting her dad's lap, and guess what—she isn't wearing a life jacket! So TMZ got its "Celebrity Justice" knickers all knotted up, and they checked and found that "according to Hawaii state law, children 12 and under are required to wear life jackets," and then they called David Arquette's rep for a response. Then they probably called the cops. Why? Because they care about Coco? Maybe we have a little of the PMS today, but this pisses us right the fuck off.

The kid will be fine! In the extremely unlikely event that she falls out of the kayak, what is she going to do, sink like a stone? Our dad used to drive us around with a big old snifter of cognac in the front seat of the car (on the gearshift, actually!), and we turned out fine. If TMZ wants to be in the child-protecting business they can go right on down to our local Target, take some photos of the parents there whacking their kids, and call Child Services on them.

Courteney And David Pull A Britney? [TMZ]

]]>
http://jezebel.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=292441&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[Is A Pair of Jeans 'Ever' Worth $555? 'Marie Claire' Sure Isn't Saying!]]> Of all the women's 'service' magazines, Marie Claire seems the most well-meaning. Unlike its competitors, the magazine has none of those Jekyll & Hyde-type "Love Your Body... But Lose 10 Lbs. Fast" sorts of stories. No ridiculous tips on incorporating foodstuffs into sex play. And it has a global perspective often missing among its competitors (in the August issue the magazine reports on the disturbing trend of Western women who 'outsource' their pregnancies to women on the Indian subcontinent). But the good intentions only go so far — especially when fashion editors and prickly advertisers are involved!


MC0807JeansDeconstructed.jpg Take the magazine's regular front-of-book feature 'Shopping Deconstructed' — seen at right — which purports to explain to readers why being fashionable costs so damn much. The August installment breaks down a pair of Diesel 'Rancho Deluxe' jeans, presenting an insider's view of the stitching, fabric, and little details that make the 'Rancho Deluxe', so, well, luxe. (Check out the video accompaniment to the feature here; is it just us or does shopping editor Zoe Glassner get a slightly-scary second-degree from Marie Claire's editor in chief, Joanna Coles?) The implication of 'Shopping Deconstructed' is that, with a few well-placed call-outs, Marie Claire can prove there's a good reason why anyone should want — nevermind spend — over half a grand on a pair of denim pants. "Rust-colored ferric oxide lends a patina of bygone luxury to the inside lining" explains one call-out. "Each all-metal (no nickel) zipper tooth is polished by hand" says another.

Well, congratulations to Diesel designers for their unabashed creativity — yes, we own a few pairs! — but honestly, so what? Fashion editors can gush about handiwork and "airdrying" and "four-hour" washes and "antique" treatments until they turn blue in the face. Doing so still doesn't mean — or prove — anything. The problem remains that women's magazine editors who purport to "serve the reader" often do exactly the opposite, even with stories as seemingly benign but inherently dishonest as 'Shopping Deconstructed'. In fact, due to their fear of taking a stand against expensive shit, editors send a tacit message of approval to advertisers that they can continue to push overpriced consumer goods down everyone's throats. Because when the majority of the fashions featured in a magazine fall on the outrageous end of the price scale — and yes, Marie Claire shows some "cheaper" jeans in a denim feature in the same issue, although the average price of those jeans is still a whopping $153 — that majority becomes the new "normal". And yet there's nothing normal about $550 jeans (o $153 jeans, really) no matter what Marie Claire editors, assorted Hollywood style 'icons', or the executives at Diesel, Habitual, or Miss Sixty would have us to believe. Maybe it's time for magazines like Marie Claire to just drop the charade altogether and subtitle their fashion features "For Average Household Incomes Of $100,000 And Up". At least then they'd be honest to readers and keep the class-conscious luxury advertisers happy at the same time.

The Masthead With Marie Claire: Episode 14 [MarieClaire]

]]>
http://jezebel.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=281621&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[In Which We Recognize Spencer Pratt And Heidi Montag, The 'Life & Style' of 'Life & Style' Cover Subjects]]> You might have noticed that this week's 'Midweek Madness' trailed off somewhere around the Bauer Publishing titles, otherwise known as In Touch and Life & Style. Here's the thing about those magazines: They should really not exist. We know we say that a lot and it is getting old and by the way fuck you, but what we mean is that these magazines are right up there with mint mojito flavored gum in the things we didn't ever want to have to look at in line at the drugstore checkout, and yet they persist to exist. What's more, these magazines have persisted in creating a whole clique of idiotic celebrities we really don't want to look at, the most idiotically persistent of whom are named Heidi Montag and Spencer Pratt. With nary a DUI charge nor a drunken romp at church nor a single incident of coked-up knifeplay, these two blond people-esque beings have dominated the Bauer celebrity magazines for weeks in an almost sinister streak of publicity that smacks to us of those elections where someone like, we don't know, Saddam Hussein or Mao would win like 99% of the vote. After the jump, Intern Maria takes her celebritologist microscope to the coverage in a plot that begs the question, Who is Paying Whom And Can't The Feds Freeze All Their Assets Already?

On May 14, Heidi and Spencer spoke to In Touch about the L.C.-Heidi "feud", with no official comment from L.C. In Touch featured a box about who was winning the "war" between them (pages 40-41).

Then on May 21, InTouch also ran "candid" shots of Spencer and Heidi frolicking on the beach, replete with enhancements, describing the couple as "so-in-love" (page 12). The same week, Life & Style announced the results of a poll of readers as to whether they believed Heidi had received cosmetic surgery, thus injecting an element of doubt into the procedure that by all accounts did not actually exist, with an accompanying boob-beach-frolicking photo (page 64).

On May 28, Life & Style chose to print another batch of "candid" love-bird photos wherein Heidi and Spencer wore matching shirts and rode roller coasters ("so in love!"). In the accompanying text, Heidi was quoted saying the "doesn't think there is one thing [she] doesn't love about Spencer" (page 42).

Always eager to demonstrate their devoted readership, on June 4 Life & Style printed a picture of Heidi "candidly" reading an issue of the magazine, neglecting that she might have been reading it because she was also on the fucking cover (page 18).

And finally this week, Life & Style runs a photo of Heidi and Spencer at a pediatric AIDS benefit that apparently The Hills co-star Lauren Conrad attended as well. Spencer also announces that he and Heidi are going to Cabo San Lucas (page 13) for what will no doubt be a "so in love!" vacation under the sun. It would be nice to say we wish the couple a relaxing sojourn south of the border, but you know what? We're not always nice and we don't. In fact, we hope the two contract a particularly virulent strain of Montezuma's Revenge and crap themselves in full view of the assembled paparazzi there to record their every fucking move.

Earlier: Jennifer Aniston's New Boyfriend: A Bigger Prick Than Vince Vaughn?

]]>
http://jezebel.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=268628&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[Donald Trump Can Shove It]]> Having posted our occasional Hollywood casting-roundup yesterday evening (and it being the morning and all) our eyes glazed over when we spotted the word "Trump" in a headline in Daily Variety today. But thank god we took a closer look! It looks like Donald Trump was so inspired after saving onetime Miss USA Tara Conner from herself that he's now developing a reality show with Fox called "Lady Or A Tramp, "in which girls in love with the party life will be sent to a charm school." Over the course of the series, reports the trade paper, the young women will be "required to wear tweed skirts and pearl necklaces, and taught the finer points of skills like flower arranging and needlework"; in addition, Trump himself will probably make periodic appearances to "evaluate" the contestants' progress. We've been meaning to say this for a long time (and it's been said better by Rosie O'Donnell) but you know what? Fuck Donald Trump.

This guy thinks he has any authority with regards to what constitutes mature behavior? Or women in general? Yeah, his daughter Ivanka turned out okay, but every time this blowhard has something negative to say about a woman, he invariably insults her physical appearance, femininity or personality. And of course, it's the opposite when he likes a woman, such as his own daughter, whose physical attributes he recently waxed poetic over. You know, as opposed to her fucking .
Trump's 'Lady' Comes To Fox [Variety]
Trump Skewers Stewart In Open Letter [People]
Trump: Miss USA Tara Conner Not Fired [People]
The Donald And Rosie: Pas De Dreck [Washington Post]

]]>
http://jezebel.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=268387&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA['Anthropologie' Could Use A Dose Of Lamictal]]> Looking through the latest "Anthropologie" catalog takes us back to that time we decided to keep starting and stopping our meds to see what would happen; that is, the time when we were crazzeeee. The catalog is all over the fucking place, price-wise; one cute cotton top on one page will go for $78, and an almost-identical piece 6 pages later is a staggering $200. And don't get us started on the handbags and shoes. Why do they not go above a size 10 in the styles that are actually wearable? Who spends $300 on flats with turned up elf-toes? And do these people really think someone's going to spend $500 on this?

bag.jpg

There's some cute stuff on display, do be sure. Like these shoes, which of course, don't go above a size 10. But until someone clues us in as to how to shop this retailer (and how it makes any money) we'll stick to our usual routine of hurling its damn catalog across the room.

]]>
http://jezebel.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=266894&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[Should Marcia Cross Get A Fucking Medal???]]> No, actually, that honor needs to go to the People magazine reporter who had the cojones to ask the Desperate Housewives actress if she was back to her post-birth "target weight" yet last night. Because, as everyone knows, most important thing to do after having a baby is to lose weight. But as everyone also knows, People has a reputation for lobbing softball questions, and tiptoeing around the really important things, especially in the case of celebrities like Marcia Cross, who being burdened with twins, at forty-five, inevitably had a tougher time with the whole postpartum flab kampf.

"I think it's the end of those last few pounds, I hope," she said. "It probably won't happen until I stop breastfeeding!"
Well thank God. So yeah, Nicholas White or whoever asked this question, pat yourselves on the back! Or better yet, your impeccably toned abdominal muscles!! No one puts People in a baby corner.

Marcia Cross: Baby Weight Is Almost Gone [People]
Related: Pregnancy And The Voguette [ViewFromTheFourthRow]

[Los Angeles, May 31; Image via FilmMagic]

]]>
http://jezebel.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=265169&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[Shear Genius, Sheer Stupidity]]> We've tried really hard all season long to like Bravo's Shear Genius: To care about the contestants; to make heroes and villains out of its judges; to have retained at least one quotable moment from the entire season. And for eight long weeks we've waited, hoping with each passing episode that maybe, (just maybe!) next time the show wouldn't be so damn boring, that someone would, you know, slip up with a straight razor and open a vein, or burn someone's scalp with a badly-mixed batch of haircolor. Something. But last night's finale was more of the same, where the contestants cut a fucking bob, Jaclyn Smith's eyebrows refused to budge, Sally Hershberger scowled, and Michael Carl from Allure tried to convince everyone that he was as vicious as Project Runway's Nina Garcia. (Note to Michael: We served with Nina Garcia; we knew Nina Garcia; Nina Garcia was a friend of ours. And Michael, you're no Nina Garcia). Anyway, Anthony won. We'd actually love to tell you something about Anthony and his "shear genius" (apparently he's good with redheads!) but what's the point, really? After an entire season, we don't know anything about the guy other than that he's from Britain and sexually ambiguous. And if a girl can't even tell if an English hairdresser is fucking gay or not, then, really, what good is she anyway?
Shear Genius

]]>
http://jezebel.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=264967&view=rss&microfeed=true