Charo Brings You CGM, Salma, and a Child of Destiny

Here, the Randomizer Gods led us to two very age-appropriate matches. Vote while you can, because polls close Wednesday.

(2) Salma Hayek vs. (10) Kelly Rowland 

These two have very different fashion senses, and I got a great laugh out of imagining the two of them sitting around and swapping wardrobes. For example, please picture Salma in this.

It’s a pants-robe-jumpsuit, and it is way, way too complicated to exist. And yet.

This is also an experience:

I feel like the lady who owns that should also listen to a LOT of Crystal Gayle and the Mandrell Sisters, and have a bongo chamber in her sprawling split-level ranch.

Oh, Kelly. Your red overalls are NOT successfully hiding your bralet.

This enormously oppressive thing has turned her into a rectangle with a head. It is a truth universally acknowledged that Kelly Rowland sometimes likes to drown in the details.

Or, she just lives by When In Doubt, Order Pizza. This gown is actually objectively very beautiful, but it’s super see-through. And this is VERY intricate, in a distracting way:

And all of them are outfits that would look hilariously bad on Salma Hayek in a totally different way. And for her part, I think Kelly would laugh Salma’s outfits right out of the room.

Salma, you’re not in A Very Ingalls Wedding. Put down the dress.

I know some people weren’t sold on this dress’s fugliness, but I honestly can’t say I know on whom it would NOT look costumey. She looks a bit silly, and Salma Hayek should never look silly — which is the linchpin of her entire candidacy here. Her husband OWNS half the fashion world, and yet she ends up in this?

Even if you’re thinking, “Oh, that’s not SO bad,” I suspect you took it back once you got to the shoes. She also tromped around in those omnipresent Gucci platforms that are just egregious, in addition to yet more stuff that was not tailored to fit.

One of the many confounding things here: the zipper. It’s so ugly in the front of this.

One of the many confounding things here: everything. Ditto this outfit, which is draped in pearls, as if that would ever distract us from its problems.

And this, like SO MANY Gucci outfits, had potential if only it were something else:

I’m glad she’s wearing the bra, but try to take in all the OTHER things about his dress that could be catching your eye, and now realize that you keep snapping right back to the strapless tube. Way to harsh EVERY bit of buzz we had, Hayek.

Oh, and…

Reader, IT’S PANTS. And a bra.

Archives: Salma Hayek, Kelly Rowland

(3) Chloe Grace Moretz vs. (11) Nicola Peltz

Ah, Nicola. She hasn’t worked a ton since getting written off Bates Motel in 2015; now she’s dating Anwar Hadid, aka brother of Bella and Gigi. He’s 17. She’s 22. Does that strike anyone else as weird? When I was 22, I would never in a MILLION YEARS have looked back at some kid who was the age of a senior in high school and thought, “HELL YES.” If it seems like I’m being pearl clutchy about it, I am. If the genders were reversed I’d be clucking for sure, and honestly, all five-year gaps are not created equal. My husband and I are five years apart, but at age [REDACTED] and *choking noise*, the maturity gap is completely different than 17 and 22. Those are big years.

Wow. Sorry. I just fell into a rabbit hole. Her Instagram is full of photos of them making out, or of him looking as dead-eyed as she often does on the red carpet. But, although it’s gossipy, it’s immaterial — other than, I guess if you like being seen, you WOULD date a younger and technically-still-jailbait Hadid. And Nicola definitely isn’t averse to eyeballs:

Nope. Not shy. That is… not clothes.

Sometimes I imagine actual celebrities at these parties, sitting and knocking back Champagne as the Youngs strut around in their leotards, and thinking, “Fools. FOOLS.” Like, you know Cate Blanchett has THOUGHTS about all this whenever she is asked to coexist with it.

Are you getting the theme here yet? Nicola likes it to be black and transparent.

That slit looks totally reasonable by comparison.

Oy. It’s quite a rut she’s in; given that she’s turned up at some major fashion shows, like the time she wore some sort of buckle-strapped mini to to Givenchy, I hope she uses that access a little better next year. But I have low hopes. And honestly: DON’T listen to us, Nicola. Ever. Fug Madness is more fun that way.

Now, lest you think, “How will Chloe Grace Moretz fight back against all those sheers?”, the answer is: via sheers.

This was the big premiere she attended with Brooklyn Beckham on her arm — the whole thing, I think, being a showcase for Check It Out I’m Not A Child Actress Anymore. And we get it, and I DO like her shoes, but that outfit is a post-apocalyptic mess of a lap dance.

 

And THAT looks like biochemical warfare. I hope someone flipped her a free Z-pack.

Too often, in fact, Chloe picks things that swallow her up. Like this:

And this, which Rita Ora wore as a dress in this eligibility window, but which Chloe stretched over pants.

Sadly, the correct answer was c) Don’t Wear It At All.

Remember this old thing?

The haircut is really what sealed it. The suit looks terribly boxy on her, but on its own — picture it on Heidi Klum, for example — might have worked. The rocker shag, though, is not Chloe’s best look.

Also, she’s still at it with the neck bows…

… and she might actually have been the first person we saw in those Gucci shoes in the wold. They remain a demon scourge.

This might even be halfway reasonable, but somehow she made it shlumpy and sad-looking. But this seems sadly cheap:

And this might’ve been okay, but AGAIN, it’s not for Chloe. It squares her up and swallows her alive.

Y’all have your work cut out for you here, but you know what to do.

Archives: Chloe Grace Moretz, Nicola Peltz