Bohemian Elegance: Wedding Guest Outfit Ideas To Celebrate In Style
As wedding season approaches, many of us find ourselves eagerly awaiting the joyous occasions that
Derek Jeter, 42, married model Hannah Davis, 26, in St. Helena, California
Do people genuinely care about Derek Jeter? Let me ask that another way: besides Yankees fans, do people care about Jeter? Well, in case you care, Jeter is married! The 42-year-old retired Yankee married 26-year-old swimsuit model Hannah Davis this weekend. Yes, I’m still rolling my eyes at the age difference too. Jeter was actually one of New York’s most famous bachelors, and over the years, he romanced everyone from Mariah Carey to Jessica Biel (remember that?) to Minka Kelly. Hannah and Derek had gotten engaged last fall after dating for a few years. Surprisingly, the wedding didn’t take place in New York. Or the Hamptons. It took place in St. Helena, California, at a Napa Valley resort. Hannah wore a custom-made Vera Wang gown and from what I’ve seen, the Daily Mail has the best pics – you can see them here. The gown is sleeveless, with a high lace neck. Not my style, but she looked lovely. Wedding guests included Yankees Jorge Posada, Andruw Jones and Tino Martinez, as well as Jeter’s family and some of Hannah’s modeling buddies. There were less than 100 guests and Hannah had said in past interviews that she was trying to keep the wedding pretty simple. What else? In all of the media coverage of the wedding, people are noting that Hannah bought an Italian Mastiff puppy for Jeter for Christmas. The puppy’s name is Kane. Oh, and all of this time I thought Hannah was from somewhere like Pennsylvania, but she was born and raised in the US Virgin Islands. Sources also tell Page Six that Jeter is “definitely ready to be a dad” and that he and Hannah plan on starting their family quickly. Honeymoon baby? PICTURE EXCLUSIVE: Derek Jeter and model Hannah Davis marry in California https://t.co/1jQZ9UJk4h pic.twitter.com/wwDbduVWgY — Daily Mail US (@DailyMail) July 10, 2016 Photos courtesy of WENN.
People: Ben Affleck ‘still doesn’t want the divorce & he might get his way’
Forgive me for missing this story when it came out yesterday but in my defense these Ben Affleck and Jennifer Garner stories start to run together after a while. It’s like the same story every few days with some minor tweaks. I guess we have to give them credit for sticking to message, which they’re hammering home. On the Fourth of July Ben Affleck and his maybe not-so-estranged wife, Jennifer Garner, were seen out together at a Fourth of July Parade with three of their children. You can see those photos here at the Daily Mail. The kids are dressed in red, white and blue but Ben is wearing a black t-shirt like he can’t be bothered and Jen is in a white sleeveless shirt with a black jacket over it. How hard is it to find something blue or red to wear on the Fourth of July? Maybe nothing is fitting Ben right. Just like last week, this week there’s another story in People about how these two are “making it work”. Instead of Jen being “adamant” about divorcing though, it now sounds like she’s given in and that she’s not going to push it. It’s been just over one year since Ben Affleck and Jennifer Garner announced their plans to split and during that time the two have maintained a close relationship – and still haven’t filed divorce papers. So what’s really going on? They’re still figuring things out,” a Garner friend tells PEOPLE in this week’s issue. “Ben still doesn’t want the divorce and he might actually get his way.” While the former couple have downplayed reconciliation rumors over the past year, they have continued living together, going on weekend outings with their kids and even vacationing as a family. This spring, Garner and their three children, Violet, 10, Seraphina, 7, and Samuel, 4, moved to London for several weeks with Affleck, sharing a rented house and sightseeing in Europe while the actor filmed Justice League. “She had the best time in Europe with Ben and the kids,” says her friend. “She seemed much happier when she returned to L.A. Jen went from being very adamant that a divorce would happen to instead avoiding any divorce talk.” [From People] People’s cover features the story of kidnapping survivor Jaycee Dugard, I remember that so well and am glad she’s doing well, and Ben and Jen got an inset to the upper right. This is not the first time they’ve had a sidebar on the cover since their split – they were on the Kelly Ripa cover in May. Of course Ben and Jen got two People covers last summer, in July and August, when they split. Isn’t that what this is all about? Informing us of their daily mood changes so that we’ll keep covering them? It works, and people are interested. It’s kind of fascinating to watch, especially since Ben looks so emotionally checked out in paparazzi photos (to be fair maybe he just hates the paparazzi) with his family but still insists on keeping his marriage. It’s like he doesn’t want to be with Jen but doesn’t want to let her go, either. For what it’s worth she seems ok with it, if only because she wants her family together. For those of you who believe in ring watch – neither Ben nor Jen is wearing their wedding rings. I think Jen first took hers off last August, because she told the press all about it. Ben wasn’t wearing his by September. photo credit: FameFlynet
Duchess Kate is spending more of Charles’ money on high-end clothes this year
2016 has brought us a “new and improved” Duchess of Cambridge, or so her PR would have us believe. Five years into her role as duchess, Kate is supposed to be feeling more comfortable in her royal role. We’re also supposed to believe that she’s successfully transitioned from her mass-market High Street looks to more expensive and sophisticated designer clothes. Personally, I don’t see much of a difference in her style in the past few years other than the price tags. Which I suspect is the point of this piece at the Daily Mail. While Prince Harry is shopping the bargain bins at Waitrose, Kate is spending her father-in-law’s money on undercooked cinnamon bun hats and doily dresses. She was once hailed ‘Queen of the High Street’ for championing mid-range clothes within reach of the average woman’s budget. But the Duchess of Cambridge has been re-crowned the ‘Designer Duchess’ after replacing her trusted Zara dresses and Topshop bargains with haute couture. Once a reluctant style icon, Kate –who famously wore a £50 blue Zara dress the day after her wedding – is now almost exclusively choosing high-end gowns, coats and shoes. And the 34-year-old’s new tastes do not come cheap. Much of her working wardrobe is paid for by the Prince of Wales, who funds William, Kate and Harry’s official activities. Royal accounts published last week show Charles’s ‘other expenditure’, which includes money spent on Kate and his sons, rose 9.5 per cent in a year to £3.2 million – although aides refused to specify how much of that went on Kate’s wardrobe. The transition has come with the help of an in-house tailor and her personal dresser, 29-year-old Natasha Archer, also based in Kensington Palace. The most expensive item Kate has been seen in this year was a £7,000 pale blue Catherine Walker coat dress, which she wore to the Service of Thanksgiving at St Paul’s Cathedral last month. While her clothes are now of a better quality, she is increasingly ‘recycling’ outfits she has worn before, including a £2,000 cream-coloured Alexander McQueen coat dress seen at Trooping the Colour in June. And she has finally ditched her trusty £145 LK Bennett court shoes in favour of pumps by Milan-based Gianvito Rossi, costing about £450. ‘Kate is wearing pricier pieces for semi-formal engagements,’ says Susan Kelley, editor of the website What Kate Wore. ‘We’ve seen her in three Dolce & Gabbana lace dresses in the past year which cost more than £6,000 in total. Now, almost all of her special occasion dresses are upscale, luxury labels.’ [From The Daily Mail] I understand that her wardrobe is supposed to be seen as a “years-long transition,” rather than an overnight change from middle-class girlfriend to high-end duchess. But what strikes me about Kate’s wardrobe is that you really can’t tell which pieces are high-end and which pieces are mass market, and I don’t mean that as a compliment. Some women – the Diane Krugers and Cate Blanchetts of the world – can make inexpensive clothes look rich. Some women – like Kate – make high-end pieces look mass-market. One of the biggest issues with Kate’s clothes is how much she’s spending on personalized tailoring, most of which is unneeded. Or worse yet, the tailoring actually screws up the look. And you have to look no further than her absolutely awful bespoke piece at the Battle of Somme centenary event last Friday to see that this is Kate’s (expensive) vision for how she’s supposed to look. All with Charles’ money! Photos courtesy of WENN, Fame/Flynet.
People Mag writer calls out celebrities & publicists in a hilarious resignation letter
Sara Hammel may be my new hero. Hammel was, up until recently, an award-winning entertainment journalist working for People Magazine. Hammel had been working for People Mag for 14 years as a freelance writer, and she had covered some really big entertainment stories, like Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes’ Rome wedding. Well, after 14 years, she had enough. Enough of the celebrities, enough of their bats—t crazy publicists, and enough of the not-so-subtle changes with how People Magazine functions as an entertainment news source. So when Hammel resigned, she did so in a letter which is being called “bridge-burning” and “scorched earth.” And not only that, she made the letter public, so anyone can read it. Here you go: Dear People Magazine, I quit. It’s not me, it’s you. It’s been a wildly dysfunctional 14 years, and you’re an entirely different magazine than when we first got together. I swear half the current staff doesn’t know my name, despite my contribution to something like fifteen hundred stories in your celebrity annals, so here’s a refresher: I worked inside your London, Los Angeles and New York bureaus, covered breaking news in nine countries, and dealt with too many celebrities to remember (I know this because I was cruising through your archives recently and found my name on files I had no recollection of writing, and interviews with people I have no memory of meeting, like Ellen and Portia together, plus both leads in Nip/Tuck and that guy from Burn Notice). My first celebrity assignment for you was Spice Girl Geri Halliwell in 2002. My last was Robert De Niro in April 2016. In between, there were memorable encounters galore, including making the gorgeous and empathic Mariska Hargitay ugly-cry (turns out she cries at like every charity-related event, phew), enduring an Oscar winner’s public bullying over an intimate dinner, facing a personal crisis at Tom Cruise’s wedding in Rome, getting basically, kind of spat on by a snotty J. Lo (okay, it was like a very wet pffttt in my general direction, really obnoxious), having fun with endless lower-key celebs like Rosario Dawson and Kyle MacLachlan and Michael Douglas, observing just how stiff and awkward George Clooney is around kids, insulting Sheryl Crow’s baby, and getting groped/harrassed by an A-list [omitted] performer in New York and Paris (that’s not to be flip—it was violating as hell. I’m still pissed I didn’t jab him in the balls with my pen). This is just what the entitled stars and their bat—t crazy publicists put me and many other talented, hard-working reporters through. You people, as it turns out, are worse. Stupidly, we expect loyalty and support from you after years of service. We are naïve. Despite your nicey nice, glossy and chirpy veneer, some of us think of you more as the Leo DiCaprio of magazines, using up every beautiful model that crosses your path (“beautiful model”= “award-winning journalist” in this scenario), discarding them, and pretending you leave no wake behind you. I’m oddly surprised my tenure here is ending not with explosive hatred stoked by a cold dismissal from an insensate behemoth (i.e. you)—a fate I watched ashen-faced friends and colleagues endure before my eyes during the Los Angeles bureau’s 2008 culling—but with a slow fade-out and a final venting of my gossip-weary spleen. Then again, that’s why I’m happy being freelance. I’ve survived something like eight rounds of layoffs where talented colleagues were bitch-slapped into oblivion and, I hope, will never give their nights, weekends, relationships and sanity again to keep up with an email chain about whether Jennifer Aniston is pregnant at 47 because of those tummy photos and what kind of mom will she be, when really she just had an extra burrito at lunch; but oh, wait, the rep says it’s just a rumor so there’s no story this week after all. Read the rest in my mini-memoir. I will say, what happens after that is that my debut teen mystery, the one I spent my adult life making into a reality, but which, despite the schlock regularly featured in its pages and online, People decided to ignore—more to the point, they ignored me entirely—even after I toiled away for them for 14 years. They wouldn’t even give me a digital post that I wrote, sourced, and agreed to remove the name of my book from (LOL). That book is called The Underdogs. I’ll leave you with the kicker: As I was crafting this letter, a Tweet came through from one of your top editors, Kate Coyne, crowing about her full-page People feature promoting her brand-new book, accompanied by a colorful screenshot. “Don’t ask how, but I got in touch with someone at @people—now I’m in the new issue. So grateful!” You should be, Kate. Enjoy it while it lasts. Sincerely, Sara Hammel [Letter via the NY Post] That’s some good dirt! I want to know the identities of those two blind items: who is A) the Oscar winner who publicly bullied Hammel over an intimate dinner and B) the A-lister who groped and harassed her? I love all of the named shade too – while I love J.Lo, I have no doubt that she’s spat/phlegm’d on reporters. And I think the whole idea of Clooney being really awkward around children is HILARIOUS. Granted, I’m awkward with kids too, but I’m not George Clooney! As for the email chains about Jennifer Aniston’s burrito baby… that’s a very “how the sausage is made” story about editorial decisions, isn’t it? That People Mag reporters are email-chaining about Aniston possibly being pregnant at 47 is… sad, I think. Covers courtesy of People Magazine.
Jennifer Garner & Ben Affleck ‘making it work,’ not sure if they will divorce
When Ben Affleck gave his kind of slurry arguably drunk sports show interview, many of you noticed that he referred to Jennifer Garner as his “wife.” He was telling the same narrative we’ve heard from him before about how Jennifer Garner made his career possible by holding down the homefront, which is nice because it shows he doesn’t take that part of their relationship for granted. I didn’t put much stock in Affleck calling Garner his wife, but it may have meaning. ET Online has a pretty long story they’re billing as an exclusive, with quotes that they’re “making it work” and the detail that their source does not know if these two will ever file for divorce. It’s carefully worded, but it hints at a reconciliation. Three weeks ago we heard that Garner was “adamant” that she would divorce Affleck. Does this mean that he’s still holding out hope or are they back together? It’s been almost one year since Ben Affleck and Jennifer Garner announced their split, and Wednesday marks the 11th anniversary of their wedding. However, while the two are separated, they still remain legally married. “They still have not officially filed paperwork for a divorce,” a source tells ET, adding they “don’t know if that will ever happen…” Affleck also recently referred to Garner as “his wife” in an interview on HBO. They’re “making it work,” the source notes about the pair, and as the months have flown by, the estranged couple has settled into a new normal of co-parenting and “the year of wine,” as Garner put it in a February sit-down with Vanity Fair… Affleck didn’t travel too far following their separation. Reports swirled shortly after they pulled the plug on their longtime romance that the 43-year-old actor was still a presence at their family home. “He still lives on the property in Brentwood, California, but in separate living quarters,” another source tells ET. There are no boundaries between them when it comes to their kids. The proud parents have been seen out and about together as a family on countless occasions. So much so that it has sparked reconciliation rumors, especially after their family trip to Paris and London in May while Affleck filmed Justice League. But will it happen? A source close to Affleck tells ET, “They’re in a good place and co-parenting the best they can.” [From ET Online]] So are these two still telling the press every up and down in their relationship or did ET ask and get this kind of non-committal answer? ET had another story a couple of weeks ago saying that they were “fine.” Whatever is going on, The tipster who sent us this story also pointed to this story in the Daily Mail in which Affleck was seen visiting a “friend’s” place in LA over the weekend. (Those photos are below.) He has wet hair so he may have been going for personal training or a massage or something. People has a competing story that Ben doesn’t want the divorce but Jen is “adamant” about going through with it. It sounds just like their story from earlier in June. It was a year yesterday since they announced the divorce and then dealt with nannygate: A friend of Garner’s says that “Ben still doesn’t want the divorce” but that Garner has denied reconcilation rumors to pals. She “doesn’t seem to mind at all that [the divorce] is not finalized,” but “she seems adamant about going through with it,” the friend says. “She did have the best time in Europe with Ben and the kids,” says her friend. “She seemed to enjoy spending time with Ben again.” “They have a lot of admiration and respect for each other,” adds a source close to the couple. The couple are continuing to stay together at their family home when they’re both in L.A. as Affleck flies back and forth to London for filming. Another source close to the couple told PEOPLE recently that “nothing has changed” in the relationship: “They’re still all about putting the kids first.” [From People] So this seems to be the new normal for them. I mean this kind of tentative relationship along with competing stories in the press about whether they’re getting back together or not. As long as we’re talking about them, right? Radar reported that Jennifer’s mom and dad, who live in Charleston, WV where she grew up, have had their home destroyed by the devastating flooding there and are staying in a hotel. They state that Jen is planning a fundraiser to help, and she has also publicly asked for support for Save The Children, with whom she’s worked in the past and which is doing relief work on the ground. Incidentally, Radar claims to have an exclusive interview with Jen’s dad which “reveals how she won [Ben] back for good.” That’s what they write in the title, but all Mr. Garner says is that he is “awful proud” of Jen and “would prefer not to comment on her plans. Any news will come from her and not from us.” This is Jennifer Garner outside a business meeting. Like Ben, she also has wet hair. Credit: FameFlynet
Duchess Kate repeats a red Catherine Walker ensemble: fab or drab?
RED HEELS!!!!!! Duchess Kate is wearing red heels! No wedges of doom. No nude pumps. No beige stilettos. She’s wearing honest-to-God red heels! And they’re good, aren’t they? I also have to say, I’ve always had a great deal of affection for Kate in red. She wears a lot of blue, probably because she A) thinks blue is her signature color and B) wants everything to match Big Blue, her sapphire engagement ring. But red looks amazing on her and she wears it too infrequently. These photos are from yesterday’s Order of the Garter ceremony at Windsor Castle, William and Kate’s fourth public outing in as many days. Kate’s Catherine Walker dress and coat were repeats, but I actually didn’t remember them. She wore this ensemble for the first time in 2011, during her first royal tour to Canada. She actually styled it differently this time too – she wore her hair back and she wore a rather fancy hat. She accessorized with the same diamond drop earrings that she wore for her wedding (purchased as a gift by her parents), a silver pendant (which she has been wearing a lot lately) and an Art Deco-ish bracelet, which we’ve seen before. I’m totally fine with the whole look. And I’ll say again: she should seriously consider adding more red pieces to her wardrobe. And just say no to nude heels! Meanwhile, Vanity Fair reports that William and Kate will be stopping by the Royal Ascot this week “much to the Queen’s delight.” After a spectacular turn out for the Queen’s 90th birthday over the weekend, the royals will be out in full force again this week to celebrate Royal Ascot. Royal Watch has learned that the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge will make their debut at the annual race meet/high-society outing in Berkshire, much to the Queen’s delight. In the past, William and Kate have always turned down offers to join the Queen and her guests in the Royal Enclosure, but this year they are turning out as a birthday surprise for the Queen, who has attended every Royal Meeting at the Ascot during her reign. “They know how much Ascot means to the Queen and they will be there for one day this week,” says a source about the event, which commences Tuesday. “They will enjoy an afternoon in the royal box with Her Majesty.” [From Vanity Fair] What’s interesting to me is that the Queen has requested their presence apparently multiple times over the past five years and they were always too “busy,” I suppose? I always imagined that when the Queen asks you to go somewhere, it’s not a request, it’s an order. However will William and Kate recuperate from this harried work schedule? I mean, they’ll be doing five events in one week! That’s a lot of keen-ness. Photos courtesy of Pacific Coast News.