Angie shed the dove grey, which has been her color of choice this awards season, for a serious black strapless gown.

But even better than the simple, but elegant gown is her hair. Love it long and curled.

And check out those emerald earrings ... real?

On anyone else, I don't think this gown would have looked as good ... especially the color. But on Angelina? True elegance! I love that she didn't feel the need to glam it all up with lots of big jewelry (which would have been tempting!) and instead just chose simpicity.

She wore it to VH1's 14th Annual Critics Choice Awards last night. Her clutch is by Herve Leger by Max Azria.

Makes me even more excited to see what she and everyone else wears to the Golden Globes on Sunday! Be sure to come back on Sunday or Monday morning to see the hits and misses!

Because of my "Changeling" review:

"I have never in my life read an article in a major newspaper where I was actually bothered enough to sit down and address it.  I'm not even sure now exactly what is prompting my sending you this email other than to ask, are you a total misogynist or what??  I haven't seen 'Changeling,' nor do I intend to see it because I think it looks like yet another bad movie.  But your review was so anti-women, I was totally blown away.  Simply put, I did not expect your review to rampage against movies and/or film roles depicting women in empowering or otherwise feminist ways.
 
Besides the fact that your review barely addresses the movie, how can you objectively review a film where you so obviously hate the lead actress?  ... How can you review a movie that stars a woman in a non-stereotypical manner when you so clearly hate even the idea of such a thing?  You seem to malign Jolie's choice in roles, actually being so overly generalized to bitterly accuse her of picking roles where 'she beats men figuratively and literally.'  So when a man fights a man that's just Movie Plot 101, but if a woman assume the role as the [expletive] kicker she's effectively accused of hating men?  When you chose the words you used in your article, even without saying this outright, didn't you think this would be the underlying message your readers would pick up on?  Strong woman = secret desire to dominate and kill all men.  Absolutely ludicrous.  And why does her character's choice to challenge the system in this  movie even equate to her trying to beat up anyone, let alone men?  So if Will Smith plays a role as a homeless black man who succeeds financially - according to your formulaic way of looking at things, it's really a story of the black man bringing down whitey?  You may think this an odd comparison, but, thematically, isn't that what your saying?  Sounds like you think a woman who fights the system is automatically fighting 'the Man.'  Very misogynistic, and clearly a man threatened by women.
 
Here are some choice descriptions from your article discussing women and, in particular, Angelina Jolie and her (to use your choice words) 'world's greatest pair of lips': 'screeching,' 'female thorns in the force's side,' repeated images of women making men 'pay' for somehow wronging them, etc.  My favorite, however, was your poo-pooing having to have seen a film that is 'shameless and insufferable' ... '[and] gives us a tale of feminine perseverance in an age of punishing masculine oppression.'
 
Get over yourself.  Women don't hate men (although based on your review, the same may not hold true for you vis-a-vis your opinion of women).  Stop being threatened by strong women.  No one's going to hurt you, I swear.  ... Even Angelina Jolie and her lips, which, as an aside, seem to be the only part of her you can stand.  Ironic, huh?  You love her lips, but watch out for what comes out of them!  Likely just another attempt for her to beat up men.  Puh-lease.
 
Very offended reader who doesn't understand why men are threatened by women, and/or how your editor allowed such an anti-woman article to go to press.
 
Thanks for your time."

— Jessica 

— Two reviews: “Tropic Thunder” (in Wednesday, Life, etc.) and “Henry Poole Is Here” (in today’s ‘Sup).
— A Pop Life interview with “American Teen” director Nanette Burstein, which already incited an irate reader to call me up and chastise me for not calling the filmmaker on her more “outrageous” statements. (She also said this is what she expects from a “bad journalist” who wrote a piece a few weeks back about lusting after Angelina Jolie, even though that’s so not what I said in the piece. Oh, nutjob readers, how much you amuse me!)

As for film-worthy things to do in the next few days, right now, the Carolina Theatre is in the LGBT swing of things with its 13th Annual Gay & Lesbian Festival (which I reported on last week).

Later in the week, the Colony will have His Royal Badness performing in one of their auditoriums. That’s where “Purple Rain” will play as this month’s “Cool Classics” flick on Wednesday night. (Jealous, Jason?)

Finally, I just have to report that you will have not one, but two chances to see “Juno” on a gigantic outdoor screen tomorrow night. The N.C. Museum of Art will be playing it at 8:30. However, 30 minutes later, the NCSU Campus Cinema will have one of its free “Screen on the Green” shows at Harris Field and play it there. If you are blind or have low vision, I suggest heading over to the N.C. Museum, since it will include audio description courtesy of Arts Access. If you’re just broke, head over to N.C. State.

CORRECTION: In my "Henry Poole" review, I say the water stain in the movie looks like Jesus Christ. But, according to this TV ad I just saw and several other reports to the contrary, it's actually the "face of God." (Call me crazy, but I thought it was Christ since it's more plausible, considering there are paintings of him and all that.) So, remember, it's not Jesus, it's his daddy. I can't wait until the church-going folk get on my case about that one — "It's not Jesus, it's God! Do your research!"