The Tom & Lorenzo Archives: 2006 -2011
Our current site is here:

In or Out: January Jones

January Jones attends "The Model as Muse: Embodying Fashion" Costume Institute Gala at The Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York City in modified Michael Kors.

We saved this one for an In or Out because we're not sure what to think of it. Have a look:

Michael Kors Fall 2009 Collection
Model: Frankie Rayder

Now be honest. If we didn't put her name on the top of the post, looking at these pictures, would you know who that was?

January Jones is a beautiful, but not particularly striking woman and when she dolls herself up as "Generic Starlet #4" she instantly becomes....well, anyone you want her to be. Wasn't she in that movie where she...? Didn't she sing that song about...? Isn't she on the show with the...? She could be any one of the literally hundreds of thin, blonde, pretty, under-30s in the entertainment industry.

It's not that it's a bad look, per se (although the hair and makeup aren't so hot and the dress is only so-so), it's that it's as bland and unimaginative as red carpet looks can get. And when you're already blandly pretty, that's a big no-no in the world of need-to-get-my-picture-taken.

[Photos: WireImage/Celebutopia]

Post a Comment

I guess she's trying to be Marianne Faithfull?

If so, PASS! I like it.

I agree completely with this assessment -- I've always been confused about why I could be so in love with Betty Draper but never recognize January Jones when I see her at awards shows. Now I know why!

I agree, there is something very generic about her, even though she is quite pretty. She reminds me of Sienna Miller and Robin Wright Penn here. There is something vaguely Vegas about this look, and I don't like it. Something along the lines of Sharon Stone in 'Casino.'

I wouldn't know who it was because although I've heard the name, I don't know who she is. She probably looked good in person -- some things look better with movement than in still pictures -- but based on the pictures I'd say it's neither in nor out. Harmless. Not especially flattering, but not horrible. I give it an "eh."

Even after staring at the pictures, I don't recognize her. She looks like a completely different, hundred times more generic person. Yikes.

Not even the same dress. She lost the dynamic asymmetrical hem, the slightly too long sleeves, the neckline, the color --- and was left with bleh. I could have picked this up at TJ Maxx and worn it to my husband's work Christmas party and gone unnoticed. I would have paired it with better shoes at the very least.

That's what makes her perfect as an actress though. Much like Gary Oldman, who is rarely recognized himself, but everybody recognizes the characters he plays.She plays her role of a 60's housewife well. Because she's a morpher, I'd consider January Jones for just about any role.

Are you kidding? Craptacular dye/highlighting job. Those roots are showing like hell. She looks like she accidentally wandered onto the red carpet and doesn't know why these photographers are taking pictures of her. I bet the paparazzi were asking themselves the same.
To be fair, the dress is kinda cool, and complements her quite well. But she looks so bland. She's not owning or even wearing that dress. Really, the dress is wearing her.

She looks terribly sad- emotionally, that is. She looks like she's wondering who she is and why she's there. Poor girl.

Who is January Jones again?

Ugh. That dress aint particularly flattering. Are you sure that it isn't Zulema's "Clothes Off Your Back" gold dress? Is there a back view?

The dress is okay, but I liked it better in black. Her hair OTOH is bo-o-o-oring.

All I can see is tummy pooch in that dress. I don't know who January Jones is, but she just looks kind of sad, sickly and blah.
I like the dress much, much better in black. And I agree with Deborah Boschert that it's not even the same dress...not remotely.

I never thought something so glittery could be so YAWN! And like you boys said, I had no clue who she was when I saw this picture. Better shoes, maybe an updo and some form of jewelry (maybe just rocking earings) and this could have been better.

Oh my. At first glance I thought that was Playboy bunny Brande, who I only "know" from Celebrity Apprentice, with some sad bedhead.
This isn't a BAD look, but does nothing to make her look special.

I like her more in 1963!! Does that mean we should start wearing riding clothes and big, poufy shirtwaist dresses?

Joe and January look more striking in their archetyple Mad Men roles.

Did anyone notice how much Betty Draper looked like Cybil Sheppard when she was drunk and unraveled?

There's something really off about the proportion, but not sure if it's the dress or her body. There seems quite a distance from her shoulder to her boobie which streches the dress out and adds to the yawn factor.

The slightly too short and flared hem also adds to the cheep effect.

Overall an OUT for me.

It's kind of sad for her to wear that, since she looks so fabulous on Mad Men. She really should stick to that 50's-Early 60's fashion because that just works so well with her look, not to mention that she needs more structured hair-dos.

Yeah, she doesn't look bad, but you're right -- if you hadn't put her name above the picture I'd be sitting here trying to remember WHATISHERNAME? It's just... unremarkable.

Trying to do Bardot, and not succeeding very well. Jan needs some good gays to advise her.

I definitely would NOT have known who she is if you hadn't put her name there.
I do like the dress, but I agree that it's boring for a gala event like that.
Pair a boring dress with the matchy-matchy shoes (and bag? can't tell if it's gold or black, but still), and she's one big yawn. No wonder nobody knows who she is. We're too busy snoozing.

She could and should have done much better.

She'd look fabulous if that dress were another color. Her hair, skin and dress are all the same tone and value, she pretty much disappears here.

I wonder why they elimanated the front swag on the dress. That would have made it a little more interesting.
But it looks to me like she isn't that in to dressing up or events. If that is the case she should just stay home, no one would miss her ( she just ain't that big a star).

I totally agree with the comment comparing her with Gary Oldman. We don't recognize her out of her "Bette Draper costume, which is how she blasted onto the scene and into our memories.That said, she totally needs better support in that dress.

I think she looks great, it's glam, but not overly done. I think we are so use to seeing her as Betty Draper or at least styled within that era on the red carpet that anything diffrent leaves one confused. She's giving me Kate Moss ( in a good way) with a dash of Sienna Miller ( on her best day)and I like it. IN!

Okay while she is still IN, in my book a good pair of spanx wouldn't have hurt...I'm seeing a pooch :|

I never, ever recognize January Jones. Every awards show, even when she's wearing something memorable, there is something completely void about her own presence and appearance. It's not the generic features, it's a lack of personality or any emotional at all -- I don't mean to say she doesn't HAVE one, she just doesn't seem to ever SHOW one. Other than perhaps slightly annoyed.

Either she should've just worn the black version, OR as someone has said before, just do an updo with some better foundation garments.

Even though I kind of see a hint of a Nancy Sinatra thing going on here. Maybe she should've worn go-go boots?

I'm not crazy about the eye makeup. Her eyes look tiny, and she just looks really sleepy or...annoyed or incredibly sad or upset.

a third laura

so oatmeal.

some colour would have been nice!

if i were her, and had her lovely yet boring looks, i would wear one of those bright, insane, artistic creations from Agatha Ruiz De La Prada!

I don't know who she is.
But her name, and how she looks....reminds me of one of those "Rock of Love" gals.

Love her, love her on Mad Men, but that outfit is a little slutty, no?

Meh - she reminds me of a baguette sticking out of a paper bag - no color, no interest.

OUT, love the hair and makeup though. I find the runway look a lot more interesting.

Sadly, short, shiny and tarty? Heidi, without the personality. And it makes it look like she has a pouch. Which I'm sure she doesn't.

Girlfriend needs a good bra.

another laura

I was wondering what you would do about her when I saw pics of her at the Getty website.

As an actress, it's great to be a blank canvas. The audience can project whatever they like on her. But man, it's so true, she just projects absolutely nothing of her own self when she's doing these events. "nothing" is okay as Mrs. Don Draper, but she's scaring me now.

She's boring me. Out.

If you hadn't put her name at the top of the post, I never would have known who she was. And the gold dress on gold girl is so boring - Old Kate Hudson. Yawn....


She looks pissed to be there because so many starlets outshined her. The dress' color is awful for her skin tone. Give her credit for trying out a different look. But it is a fail. I understand that she doesn't want to be typecast as this ice-princess-50's-Grace-Kelly type. Has anyone seen Jon Hamn lately? He's growing out his hair like Spandau Ballet.


" Anonymous said...
She looks pissed to be there because so many starlets outshined her. "

She always looks pissed and/or uncomfortable on the runway.

The changes made to the dress combined with the gold color that washes her out plus the make-up and hair that do nothing for her equals boring, boring, boring.


Bad color, bad fit on the shoulders. She needs a good bra, some color on the lip and to stand up straight - the dropped pelvis stance popularized by Ms. Hilton does terrible things to one's figure, slim or not.

A supportive bra would have at least made it less sad. I kind of dig the make-up, almost the hair, but the dress is snorey.

But maybe it's a good thing she can be made up to look like almost anyone? It might not really help her recognizability on the red carpet, but in her roles, I think it helps that she can chameleon into a completely different look. Not a big fan of this look, but in general...I think she's gorgeous.

Somebody mentioned Nancy Sinatra, someone else Brigitte Bardot & I think the make-up and maybe hair support that period look, but the dress/accessorizing doesn't nail it.

The ultra-simple dress may have come off better in person, if her personality was lighting anything up from inside.

So, I'd go with just-barely in, giving the benefit of the doubt.

Has anyone seen Jon Hamn lately? He's growing out his hair like Spandau Ballet.Ha! You know, it's funny - I find Don Draper totally hot, but think Jon Hamm is kind of a floppy-haired goof. I can't think of another actor where I make a character-from-actor separation in terms of hotness.

I don't know. I'm a bit torn.

I look at it and I'm thinking, "darker shoes, fix the color of the hair, "Bardot" it, more dramatic eyes and it would work."

Then I realize that if I have to change that much, then it's a fail.


She looks doped up.


She looks five months pregnant. I wonder if she has heard of those two fabulous fashion inventions: panty hose with tummy control or a body slimmer.


When I watch "Mad Men" I think she is absolutely gorgeous. Anytime I see her as herself and not Betty Draper, she always looks half-asleep or stoned or bored or all three. Would it kill her to smile or at least put some kind of expression on her face? Anything. And the dress is just eh. I feel like it is something the local Cougar would wear to the bar of a Saturday when she was thinking about crawling on the piano and singing a drunken version of "If You Leave Me Now". Out.

I think she looks kind of hot. I say IN.

She is indeed a snooze-fest here...particularly when it's an event like this. But the black dress? Frankie Rayder is workin' it on the runway! Nice moves.

The dress is pretty -- I like the modifications and she could have used a color that didn't blend with the rest of her.
Her hair is utterly dreadful. Did she even bother to comb it?

Out. Nothing happening here, skip it. Why bother? She couldn't seem less involved than if she were at Starbucks or the grocery store (and doesn't look any better)just overdressed. The fit of the dress is poor on her lanky overly long torso. Her chest looks bad in this. Out.

all my life I've hoped someone would call me "blandly pretty". Better than "aging troll"....


There apparently was a whole lot of ugly on the red carpet at the Met.

She looks terrible. Clearly she's not wearing any underwear and it doesn't look sexy, it looks sad and saggy. The droopy boobs, the tummy pooch - shocking, really. The color is all wrong for her and the dress itself is a total meh. She would have been fierce in the original black dress.

The hair is a disaster and so is the makeup.

No me gusta.

OUT that is goldfinger gone bad.

"Bailey said...
I agree, there is something very generic about her, even though she is quite pretty."

Yup. No matter what she wears, she always looks plain and boring, which is funny because on the show she has this tremendous presence, always wearing fabulous clothes.

She'd look counter-intuitively lovely in a darker hair shade, like the recently re-coiffed SJP. Plus, there are so many blonds trying to mimic the 60's long blond hair look that it's hard to distinguish her from the pack. Something a little more controlled might look better on her.

Getting really tired of the huge furry eyelash look. Less eyelash, more artistry with eye shadow, please?

The dress - eh. Long t-shirt in stretch metallic. This is bar wear.

So much smarter with the higher neckline, shown on the runway.

These photos make her look like she's got a lazy eye, but other than that I'd give the dress a B. It's almost her color. The shine gives it the texture it needs to not make her look too flat, but she could have picked a better color to offset her make up.

Even pretty young things need a little help from the right undergarments. A bra and some Spanx would have helped the immensely. I would have liked to have seen her in the original dress, and another color--maybe even black.

The makeup and hair are pretty bad. She's trying for that Brigitte Bardot look, but doesn't have the bone structure for it. Has she always been cross-eyed?

She looks so great in Mad Men; that time period is really her look.

I agree with the Sienna Miller comment, and there is another actress who has that kind of bland blonde look about her. Not Robin Wright, though; she has such stunning cheekbones and eyes.

I really like her in Mad Men -- I think she's just adorable. However, this is a major O-U-T.

She looks like a bad Tinsley Mortimer wannabe in a dress from H&M, complete with the "I've really got to pee" red carpet photo-op pose.



I like the look, I give her an IN, but as so many others have mentioned, what is with the utter lack of personality? Does she just not have one, is she shy, timid, bored, scared, stoned, what? I don't think I've ever seen a picture of her where she's even remotely having a good time.

i'm not dorothy gale

The color is too monotone; the black dress would have been better. And, uh, "Betty" your hairstylist.

She looks like Sharon Stone in that Vegas movie.

She''s so beautiful, but definitely not working it. Great site, guys!

I love Betty Draper's look, but I have concluded that JJ doesn't want to adopt Betty's style in the off season... too bad.

While there is a misstep or two, this is the best I've seen her look. I like the dress and really like make up and hair (although if I want to be nit picky, there are too many flyaways). I think she improves with each red carpet outing, she reminds me of Marisa Tomei, who needed quite a few swings at the bat before she got it right.

Anytime I see her as herself and not Betty Draper, she always looks half-asleep or stoned or bored or all three.Truth be told, that's how Betty Draper looks most of the time too. I wuv her.

BALMAIN for women

Blog Archive

Search This Blog


Project Runway