…looks stunning.

Definitely my favorite Taylor – visually and musically.


You used to be so pretty.  Now your lipstick isn’t even applied straight.

This isn’t going to be a post about weight and Hollywood, it’s going to be a post about dressing for your weight.

Look at the first two pictures of Gabby Sidibe.  Quite frankly, she looks awful.  The bright fuchsia satin should not be worn by anyone who has any excess fat – satin makes you look fat and bright pink satin doubly so.  And the black dress is too shiny and doesn’t fit well at all – also those arms need to be covered, not drawn attention to.

Now look at the second two photos – stunning gowns in matte material that conform to the shape of her body rather than bulging and flattening in places they shouldn’t.  This is how a star Gabby’s size should dress.  I really feel that whatever stylist put her in the first two gowns was just cruel, they don’t look good and as a stylist your job is to make someone look as good as they can.

I know this is a touchy subject but a bright fuchsia satin dress is not going to look good on anyone Gabourey’s size, no matter what.  It makes me wonder why it even comes in that size.  I know that designers aren’t fashion police but you would think that if a designer makes plus size clothes s/he should make clothes that look good on plus size people.

Anyway I haven’t seen Precious, so I can’t comment on the movie, but I would like to say I really appreciate this improvement in Miss Sidibe’s appearance.  The first two photos look like they were taken at an urban prom, but the last two make her look like the talented, well recognized actress that she is.  Keep it up Gabby!

Treesje Dakota in lilac leather

I just ordered a purse off of Amazon. Normally I wouldn’t feel any guilt about buying a new purse but I won’t be working for awhile and I just bought a Kooba hobo a month ago, so buying another hobo bag right away just seems too much.

So why did I buy it? The leather.

I ordered a Treesje bag last year and with it I got a small makeup bag made with this divine lilac-grey leather.  Beautiful color, nice and soft and smooshy, I fell in love with this leather.  Then while browsing the Treesje website last month, I found the cutest clutch – the Harper – in that lovely lilac leather.  So of course I ordered it.  About a week and a half later I got an email from Treesje’s customer service saying the bag was actually out of stock. My heart fell…it was such a cute little clutch and it would go great with my style.

Alas. But I wasn’t ready to give up on getting a bag in that color.  It soon reached obsessive levels and I knew I had to act quickly before the Treesje lilac leather was gone for good.

There are now only 3 bags left that are available online in this gorgeous leather – the first is the Bel-Air, which is a long east-west satchel. Satchels aren’t really my style, and this one is just too long for my tastes, I can’t imagine it would be comfortable to wear on the shoulder.  Next is the Skylar, which is from the same collection as the Harper (same hexagonal appliques) but it looks a bit deformed – it’s a big round bag with tiny handles. Very trendy but not my style.

The Harper I loved and lost

Finally there is the Dakota.  Also from the same collection as the Harper and Skylar, it’s a cute hobo with a row of gunmetal horizontal plaques.  I like it.  It’s cute, the only thing I would change is the strap (a wide leather strap would look better, where the strap attaches to the bag looks a bit incongruous) and most importantly it’s made with my dream leather.  I really don’t know how to stress how much I love this leather.

So I’m pretty excited.  I’m also scared that I’ll get an email from Amazon saying they’re out of stock (I doubt it, since an out of stock message went up straightaway after I placed my order) or that the bag will be in some way defective and I’ll miss out on this beautiful lilac leather.  Either way though I’m going to keep hunting Ebay for that elusive lilac Harper.



If you type “illuminati” backwards into your browser and add a dot com to it – in other words if you go to http://www.itanimulli.com – it takes you to…

Oh I’m not telling. Just click it and see for yourself.

Microsoft instigated an antitrust suit against Google basically complaining that since everyone uses Google search and nobody uses their new Bing search engine, Bing is always going to suck compared to Google.

I’ll let the irony sink in there – Microsoft. Is filing. An antitrust suit.

I really hope that Google strikes back by making an awesome OS that totally makes Bill Gates irrelevant.  I never really hated Bill Gates until I heard my husband rant about him, and then a quick bit of research shows how scummy the guy really is.

Anyway Bill, your new search engine? Sucks.  Case in point – I “binged” the phrase ‘why does bing suck’ (sans quotes) and the #5 site was a Yahoo Answers question about beating the game Halo 3, while the #6 site was another Yahoo Answers question – “Why does it suck being gay?”

I then googled the same search terms and got a front page full of sites answering exactly that. Including a video.  Which I didn’t watch, but it appears that Microsoft’s new “decision engine” has decided that when I want to know why their product is complete fail, what I really mean to ask is why it is so bad to be gay. Which it isn’t. Double fail, Bill.

Apparently a lot of feminists are upset about how women are portrayed in Hollywood. They think that women in chick flicks are only interested in losing weight and finding a man.  And that this is Hollywood’s fault, not a reflection of society.  Or rather, this is men in Hollywood’s fault.

But according to Melissa Silverstein, founder of Women & Hollywood, a marketing company specialising in films featuring women, the dumbing down of women on screen has a more earthy motivation. “One-dimensional female characters are created because the men making and directing the films are only interested in one thing: that these women titillate male audiences on the least challenging, most obvious of levels,” she said.

Melissa Silverstein, you are an idiot.  The first two examples given in the article were Confessions of a Shopaholic and He’s Just Not That Into You. I dare anyone to say that these movies or the other chick flicks listed were made to “titillate male audiences.”  If Hollywood execs expect the majority of their revenue from chick flicks to come from men who find them “titillating” they are doing it wrong and fail at both their jobs and life.

Also interesting (read: retarded) is the comparison between the most enduring classics of the Hollywood golden era with the junk food empty carbs of today.   Dr. Diane Purkiss, who is living proof that having a PhD does not mean a person possesses critical thinking skills, says that “for every Juno, Little Miss Sunshine or The Devil Wears Prada there is a glut of films that “reduce women to explicitly anti-feminist stereotypes”, such as 27 Dresses, Made [sic] of Honour and What Happens in Vegas.”

I’m going to ignore the fact that these “anti feminist stereotypes” that women are “reduced to” are obviously easy enough to relate to that ‘chick flick’ remains a genre in its own right, and skip onto the real point: bad movies are nothing new.  Purkiss could easily have said “For every Gone with the Wind or Katharine-Hepburn-plays-feminist movie there is a glut of awful films like Duffy’s Tavern and Deep Waters.”

What are Duffy’s Tavern and Deep Waters, you ask?   I have no idea, I haven’t seen them. But I do know that 60 years from now, one of our grandchildren, reminiscing fondly about Hollywood’s “Blockbuster era,” is going to point out how great movies like Juno and Little Miss Sunshine were, and how bad movies of her time are in comparison, and I’ll bet anything that she’ll never have heard of the movie Confessions of a Shopaholic.

Anyway I wonder if this is going to be a new trend, feminists talking about how much better women had it in the 1940’s and using the word “emancipated” to describe a Victorian literary heroine. Because really there is nothing better than a political movement arguing that the world was better off before it came into existence.

Sometimes I don’t know how they can keep a straight face.