Part 1: This has got to be the most boring Us Weekly of all time, except for the cover, which basically says that Tom Cruise brainwashed Katie Holmes into giving him her womb.

Part 2: This issue is so boring, in fact, that this week we concentrate on pressing issues like the terror of spending a six-hour flight next to a woman saying, so loudly, “That can’t be a four. That can’t be a four. That can’t be a four. That can’t be a four or a seven.” For all six hours. Argh fucking grrggh sudoku.

We are going home, and like the adopted tiger that eats the little boy because it is his nature, we will immediately revert to the local custom of dark jeans, black tank top, and glittery clutch. First of all, that metaphor seriusly got away from us, and secondly, dark jeans \ tank top is like a global cliche, not just a local one, so whatever. It is so late at night, and we are so screwed with this whole getting up before the sun rises thing.

Anyway, there is such a thing as the perfect tank top and the perfect clutch. We would like to talk about both of these things, but we hit several road blocks. The actual platonic-ideal tank top is from Velvet, but their site is so retarded that they only show like four of their tank tops. Which seems to defeat the purpose of an online store, but whatever. And the runner-up is from Abercrombie, but after their even more retarded “Baghdad Ass Up” t-shirt, we’re never linking to them again. It’s sort of like an unrequited thing, where we’re all like, “You’re an asshole!” and they’re all, “Are you the girl from chemistry?”

The clutch situation is much better, and we present two choices from Lorelei NYC. Top, gold. (They don’t do … we think they’re called “deep links,” or something, so you have to fish around a little, but it’s there.) You’re like — at least, we’re like — do I want to spend $184 on a clutch? And you don’t, but you want the clutch, and … did we mention how tired we are? We want the clutch. It’ll go with just about everything, especially those boring black tank tops we were just talking about.

And we love, love, love this one. Emerald. Eelskin. Next week is going to be so much better here, we swear to God. Did you know Anne Rice has turned into a totally psycho born again who writes books from Jesus’s perspective?

Well, you don’t get cocaine, which is sort of what expected. You get instead clothing you can only fit into if do cocaine. Or have anorexia. We endorse neither. In fact, we were recently quizzed, in a classroom full of people oh so much younger than us, and when the teacher asked who had never done drugs, we raised our hand. We were the only one. Besides the TA. Humiliating. Always, always humiliating, but that’s what you get when you go back to school when you should be popping out some babies, like apparently the whole goddamn world. All we want is a little refugee baby like Angelina Jolie, who is, in fact, older than us, possibly in 5-15 years.

This was supposed to be about Kate Moss.

1. This is a 50′s VINTAGE STYLE POLKA DOT DRESS! SEEN ON KATE MOSS!. Also “SO GWEN!” Really? Actually, we quite like this dress.

2.DRESS KNITTED V TRENDY AS SEEN ON KATE MOSS. NAVY-8-12. Hmm. V trendy? Really? It looks a little handmade, actually, not in an entirely positive way. It does, however, prove the point of putting a random style icon’s name into your eBay listing, as it’s currently going for $80.

3. Vintage Kate Moss low cut black waistcoat 12 sold out. This would really be a lot better if the picture was a little better. Or if the waistcoat was a little better. We just can’t get past the double-breastedness of waistcoats. Like this one.

4. Now these, these are actually excellent. BNWT SASS & BIDE MISFITS BLACK 28/10 SKINNY KATE MOSS. Don’t you kind of feel like models who do coke to stay skinny are sort of like baseball players who take steroids? They’re fucking up the playing field for all of us.

We mention this only because it is so heinous. Heinous like having sex with a crackhead heinous. What could that possibly be like, we wonder? Dirty, we bet. Not in a remotely positive way. But anyway, what the fuck is this, this BNWT UGG PINK SHEARLING MESSENGER BAG SO KATE MOSS? Holy shit, it looks like a giant pink sheep pouch, and then what, you take this outside? Shocking. Unbelievable. Bizarre. But “so Kate Moss”? The problem with talking about Kate Moss now is that it’s impossible, because she’s just this punchline, even though — seriously, what is it, 97% of the fashion industry does coke? And embraces hypocrisy? But she, even on her worst, got-screwed-by-a-crackhead-all-night, did-coke-all-day, days, is a style icon, and would never, ever touch this bag.

Paris Hilton might, however.

Part 1: This is undoubtedly the most rigorously boring Us Weekly of all time. It’s like they saw the Cruise-offspring exclusive in People and sent the writers right back to their dungeons. Auto-pilot, here.

Part 2: However, you wouldn’t want to miss the three images of Britney Spears wearing the same wide-strap $12.99 white bra under spaghetti-strap tank tops, or Sienna Miller’s post-break-up bob.

A question from a very excellent member of our BS community:

Dear Bunnyshop–

I am writing to ask you what you think of this look.

I am not talking about the Mexican wrestler’s mask, because I know that looks awesome.

I am instead talking about the puffy vest under the suit jacket look.

I first started wearing this in Colorado, where you need a puffy vest with everything.

Now that I am traveling the other 50 United States besides Colorado in support of my book, I am wearing it all the time.

Now, I will be candid: I get some looks. I get some comments like: “what are you doing? why are you wearing that?”

(A: It provides comfort, warmth, protection, and pockets. Also: it looks deranged, yet strangely snappy. Which is the kind of look I’m going for.)

Then they sort of look at me. It is hard to tell if it is the “it’s-so-crazy-it-just-might-work” look, or if it’s the “that looks stupid” look.

Here is a link to other examples of the outfit, without the mask.

Knowing that I will not change my behavior no matter what you say, would you still feel inclined to lend your estimable insight.

I thank you.

Jh

–

We will only say here that we find the Mexican wrestling mask deeply disturbing, but we quite enjoy the puffer vest \ suit jacket combo. Okay, maybe not with the suit. The problem with vests, puffer or otherwise, is that we buy them, and then we never wear them, because only, say, eight minutes out of every calendar year offer vest-wearing weather. The addition of the suit may or may not solve this problem.

And now, fair readers, if you have ever believed anything we have ever said, you will certainly buy this, and then possibly this.

We open the floor to debate.

1. The Jarhead trailer where Jake Gyllenhaal is all psycho buff and then, even better, Jamie Foxx says “Hoo-ah,” all weird and psychotically, and then, even so much better, there’s that crazy editing to “Jesus Walks.” It riles us up so much, we don’t know. It kind of makes us want to fight, which can’t be the point. It’s not even that we can’t wait for the movie. We would just like to sit in a dark room and watch that trailer over and over again; that would be fine.

2. Zoom Shop. What? How can it be, that you can buy Philosophy in a vending machine? 24-hour access to Philosophy? This is better than the Internet. We would like one of these everywhere we go, please.

3. If by “best” we mean “worst”: Wolf Blitzer on CNN asking Jerry Falwell if — post-hurricane, -tsunami, -earthquake, etc. — “these are the End Times.” Fuck you, Wolf Blitzer, and fuck you, CNN. It’s over between us, and we’re never coming back.

OK, not exactly a siege. But last week we were in the unlikely position of being locked in our apartment thanks to a malfunctioning lock, which we are pretty sure is some sort of fire hazard. So we called the apartment manager. Three times. Then he called us back. We called him back, and he was all, “I have to ask someone what to do.” And we were like, “Well, we’re fucking locked in here, so we’ll probably be here when you get back, unless there is some sort of life-taking inferno we need to deal with.” So we waited, and an hour later, as we are wondering how old cheese can be before it becomes cheese you should not actually eat even in cases of encroaching starvation, he called, and left a message, because we were also busy trying to jerk the door open with a damp towel. And on that voicemail, he advised us to fax a service request to his office. Because we have a fax in our apartment. Next to our jacuzzi, which we feel is an aptly ’80s, extraneous object appropriate for designation as a metaphor for a fax machine. We called him back and left one of those you-are-a-fucking-moron voicemails that ends with “Thank you so much for calling” and “I appreciate your return call at your earliest convenience.”

Shortly after that, a representative of our building who was not a moron heard us trying to yank the door open and managed to body-slam it, releasing us from our prison. He called maintenance. We love him, in some sort of Stockholm Syndrome way.

Our favorite part of this story is how three hours later, as we were enjoying our sunny freedom, the moron called us back to remind us that he wouldn’t “be able to send anyone over about the door open until [he got] the faxed service request.”

We hope we do not sound crazy and bitter in this little update, because we generally estimate ourselves to be un-troublemaking. But: trapped resident. Fax machine. Please.

Someone at Neiman Marcus has made a terrible, yet wonderful, and possibly career-ending mistake, and that is his inability to correctly price the Mulberry Rockley bag, long a favorite of this site despite the fact that it is totally a boy-y bag. (Perhaps this is suggested by the fact that a boy is holding it in the picture above. But it’s in Neiman’s women’s handbags department.) Okay, to be fair, we only know how much the Rockley costs in Britain, and that is £495, which equals, oh, we have no idea, maybe something like $850? And yet they are being sold at Neiman Marcus for $565. Which is something like $565, or about $300 less than they’d cost in the UK, which is way more than that everything-is-so-freaking-expensive-in-London-I-seriously-can’t-afford-McDonald’s-here problem. In fact, a Neiman’s sales woman said: “I think they made a mistake.” We love, absolutely adore mistakes like these. We will say this: The only thing we enjoyed about The Ring was Naomi Watts’ leather work bag, and this is the closest we have come to it in however long it’s been since The Ring came out, and if we can figure out a way to eat nothing but toast for a month, and still afford cable TV and some Tamiflu, we will totally buy it. Because it is beautiful.

If you are with us on this, don’t bother looking online, because it’s not there. We were informed that there were “one on the West Coast, and two in Chicago, and a few more in New York.” Just writing that makes us a little panicky.

Part 1: The cover line of this issue actually reads “Fucking Liars” rather than “What Now?” if you look very, very closely.

Part 2: Well, because we’re fucking idiots, we left this post up all day yesterday, just hanging out like some rich suburban Juicy Couture mom showing off cleavage at a Green Day concert: in other words, conspicuously. But now it is in its proper place.

Velvet blazers. We are so sick of them. We know: velvet. Blazers. Fine. But typically, when we see them on people, we think, why are you wearing a smoking jacket, like Mr. Burns, in domestic scenes, from The Simpsons? Tss. But more than the smoking jacket thing, it’s all those fashion “articles” we read, about, like, five must-buys for fall, and velvet blazers were tops every time. Velvet blazers are that girl in our high school who managed her extreme popularity through a micro-managed niceness assault on everyone in our class. She was the ultimate vote-getter, and yet, she was so bland, that if you took two seconds to think about it, we’re all, “Why in the world would I want to be friends with Maggie Dunmeyer? She sucks.” That, in a nutshell, is precisely how we feel about velvet blazers.

But we like velvet: warm! Soft! In fact, velvety! These are our favorite things — indeed, five must-buys for fall! — involving velvet, but not in a blazer-y way.

Velvet pants are so L Word \ Shane. We should send a photo to Sally Hershberger and ask her if she likes these Seven For All Mankind “Mia Velvet Pant Stretch, Black“s. We’d like them even better with the loud denim detailing (that silver hardware is a little bright), but they’ll do fine, and although we know we are about five years too late on this, we are total converts to the Seven fit. $176

Martine Sitbon’s bags are so excellent. Usually we think of the more structured, leather-ish, utility \ city bags, but this is a totally random, slouchy, velvet bag with a heart. It loves you! Oh, that is so sad, that accessories could take the place of people, because you know it’s totally happening. In fact, we saw it happen several times at Neiman Marcus last weekend, with like a half dozen wives, husbands they do not like, and their new Louis Vuitton bags. Anyway, Martine Sitbon: $450, from aloharag.com. We’ve never seen this site before, or been to the store, but we feel like real losers admitting that, because they have an excellent collection of unbelievably hard-to-find people (online, at least) like Junya Watanabe, Balenciaga, Bernard Willhelm, Martin Margiela….

This is velvet, and it is a jacket, but it is not a blazer, and that’s all we care about. Vanessa Bruno velvet jacket, $347. We would totally buy this if we lived in a rich suburb, and all the mean moms had velvet blazers from Nordstroms. That color, if it’s impossible to tell, is apparently a “darkest green.”

And also Vanessa Bruno, we would like to do a second mention of her excellent, so excellent, fall bags. $238

If you go to Anthropologie.com and do a search for “velvet,” you’ll get 299 results. Yeah, okay, we get it. This Pickford Silk Cami is so Marc Jacobs without being too derivative or obvious, and all that detailing is pretty nice for $88.

And further proof we should named this post “Velvet, But Not Blazers, And Only By Vanessa Bruno,” this excellent asymmetrical velvet dress. Usually we are too skeeved out to do a full-body velvet presentation — it’s like wrapping yourself in banana leaves and then going outside, or something, just a little too much texture — but luckily, there’s not that much material actually being used here, due to the sleeveless-ness and the top-of-the-knee length.

Our knee-jerk impulse is always to point to the Marc Jacobs velvet ballet flats, but honestly, the colors are a little annoying, and they’re a little Kool Aid, no? So instead, these black velvet ballet flats from bebe. Very nice, very basic, totally reliable and great in most occasions, casual to formal — which is, these days, our taste, we realize, in shoes as well as men. $87.99