Be Italian: We totally agree on the Penny Lane girl crush of course. We can’t even describe the levels of excitement we have for Nine. And Kate never fails to look super cute. Seriously this press tour is going to be out of control fashion-wise. {WhoWhatWear}

Not That Lisa Kline: But the one who styled Sarah and the rest of the Palin clan during the campaign finally comes out to clear the air. And she was asked to do the big makeover during a holiday weekend. Yikes on so many levels. {NY Times}

Change the Date: Fashion’s Night Out is moving to Friday September 10th so that you can drink champagne, shop, and shotgun beers all night long without having to show up for work the next morning. Sweet. {WWD}

That’s Me in the Corner: I (Abby) remember when all my REM tunes were actually on cassette tape. Hence I was automatically drawn to this one-off collaboration between Michael Stipe and Maison Martin Margiela. Though I don’t think I would try wearing it as an eye patch as someone in the shot did. {Racked}

When we saw November’s disastrous Vogue cover, we just assumed the women were too busy to get together in one place to shoot the image.

We figured Nicole Kidman was on a beach in Australia, Marion in the South of France, Kate in Malibu etc., or maybe in a studio and then superimposed onto the waves. But then we watched this video of them dragging their couture through the ocean and walking on sand in Christian Louboutins and realized that no, they were in fact all in one place.

Which means, just to clarify, that despite the hundreds of gorgeous pictures Annie took of the group, someone still felt the need to butcher it on a computer. (Also, for the record, our favorite part is when Annie says they took a “huge risk” shooting at the beach.)
On the upside, it looks like they had a blast.

This picture landed in my inbox because of the Bally bag Kate Hudson’s holding - which is cute - but I’m writing about it because of the kid.

It’s from the set of a shoot for Harper’s Bazaar (I swear we’re not trying to belabor our Bazaar feelings; it just keeps coming up) in which she’s modeling not just the latest fashion, but also her five-year-old son, Ryder.

The kid looks adorable, but it’s jarring to see him voluntarily put in front of the camera when so many people - famous people - complain about media attention toward their children. It’s something we touched on last year when Natalia Vodianova dragged her entire clan into the pages of Vogue and something we thought about again when Angela Lindvall posed with her kids in British Vogue and then gave her son a starring role in her Gap ad.

Is it okay because it’s a controlled environment, unlike the paparazzi on the sidewalk? Because they’re still kids either way, and they’re not the ones choosing to model, their parents just happen to be really, really pretty. Are we nuts? Or would you, too, prefer your fashion editorials without a side of child?

Ugh, yet again I’m feeling very disappointed with my old friend Project Runway. But here we go.

1. I said I wasn’t going to ask again and I won’t. You know what I’m talking about. And we are officially in a major fight, Lifetime.

2. Did anyone else have flashbacks to that disastrous Stella dress that Kate Hudson wore to the Oscars (for her Almost Famous nom) when they said there was a Western category?

3. Um, and I guess Western-haters didn’t know it was about to come around this season in Milan, did you? Thanks D&G.

4. How much does Christopher love Edward Cullen and all things Twilight? So much.

5. Also, don’t you want sit with Christopher “I don’t want to do a gingham dress” and show him Christopher Kane’s S/S 10 collection? I do.

You know how there are movies that you have to watch through to the end every time you catch them while flipping the channels. Almost Famous definitely tops that list for me.

I would so have loved living on the road with Penny, William, the girls, and Stillwater. And, of course, I would have been there because of the music. But the clothes, also right up my alley. I’ve always been especially fond of Ms. Lane’s jacket with the furry collar and the way it just envelops her in bohemia.

I’ve never understood why people change the way they dress when they’re in a relationship.

After all, you had a personal style when you met said person making him/her well aware of what your usual garb looks like. And guess what? This person found you attractive enough to want to date! So why the major transformations? I’m just not feeling it.

But apparently some people are. Take Kate Hudson, who morphs her style depending on who’s arm she’s on, or girl-next-door Katie Holmes going all Kate Cruise glam-bot. And, of course, don’t forget the boho brunette, John Mayer-dating version of Jessica Simpson.

I guess I just think style should evolve more organically, not based on some other person who may or may not be around in a few months.

Does your choice of clothing change when you’re no longer flying solo? Or should you stay true to your style no matter what your relationship status may be?

— CARSON GRIFFITH

Stella McCartney’s interviewed Kate Hudson for the January issue of In Style.

Stella asks the actress about the pros and cons of being in a relationship and what it’s like being a single mom - the usual.

But In Style’s Managing Editor told WWD, “Yes, we would certainly pair up celebrities again.”

They think it elicits the most candid interviews which should hold true in this case; the designer and actress are close friends.

But with the exception of Interview (which has been doing this since Andy handed it out on Soho’s corners), it’s like when magazines started ditching models in favor of celebrities. And if this continues like that, well, we can only imagine a magazine written by celebs, starring celebs and about celebs.

And we’d rather not.

“Every day I have a moment when I say to Chris, ‘Maybe we should cash in. I’ll make handmade lotion, and you’ll write music and sell it on the Internet.’ ” - Kate Hudson, in Vogue, June 2004.

We set out to find the perfect etched mirror for our new apartment this weekend, but ended up trying on the new Rag & Bone collection instead.

Their tailored white tuxedo vest, with ivory trim and a halter neck, was a painfully tempting purchase.

The salesperson pointed out that it’s the one Kate Bosworth wears in this month’s Vogue - then he claimed it looks better without a shirt underneath.

“It’s so hot!” he squealed.

We sent a skinny friend into the dressing room even though we were sure it’d look awful, but he was right, it actually looked kind of “hot.”

Kate Hudson might be the only one who can pull off the look with ripped low-rise jeans, and even she’s a stretch. But maybe it could work with something high waisted, or looser fitting?

There’s a part of us that knows this look really depends on the girl rocking it, and that at the end of the day, there’s something, well, cheap about it. But then again, we tend to always associate traditionally “hot” with cheap anyway.

Would you wear just a vest on top? Or is this trend pushing sexy menswear too far?

We’ve always liked Kate Hudson’s style. It’s usually laid-back and always very cute.

But we now may have to rethink her entirely after seeing her in the Dolce & Gabbana outfit at left.

We know it must be difficult to make suggestions to very important designers who are styling you, but we’re having a hard time finding an excuse for letting anyone dress you like a disco ball - actually, there is one excuse:

If the Dolce & Gabbana stylists dress you up, and even you don’t know about the outfit.

Kate seems to be dubious, telling Style.com “It’s too bright… I feel like disco balls fighting…”

Ookay Kate, you’re forgiven - but let this be a lesson to everyone else…

—ALISON COOL

“I’m trying not to shop anymore…I’ve gotten in the habit of making phone calls when I see something and saying, ‘Please, when that comes in, can you send it?’” - Kate Hudson, on how she won’t be buying anything at the new Dolce and Gabbana store.