I just spent way too much time looking through photos of Nicole Kidman and her Lips of Doom. No, seriously, I wasn’t really trying to look at her lips, but they were like an alien tractor beam sucking me in. My real purpose for going through the Kidman photo archives was to see if we had any photos of her wearing this cross necklace mentioned in the following story. Unfortunately, we don’t have any photos of it. So… picture it in your brainsicles: a big, expensive-looking diamond and emerald cross pendant necklace. That’s what Keith Urban gave Nicole Kidman as a “push present” for baby Faith.

She didn’t give birth, but Nicole Kidman still got a “push present” from husband Keith Urban when their baby daughter Faith was born to a surrogate.

According to a friend, Keith designed an emerald-and-diamond cross that he gave Nicole soon after Faith was delivered.

“Keith worked with a jeweler, but he pretty much came up with the look,” a friend explained. “He spent around $120,000.”

[From In Touch Weekly, print edition]

My only criticism is that it shouldn’t be called a “push present”. Just in general, I find that term very patronizing, and in this particular case, inaccurate. That being said, I like the idea of a man giving his wife/baby-mama a significant piece of jewelry upon the birth of their child. I think it’s a lovely way to mark the occasion, and it’s a tradition that works. Just don’t call it a “push present”. Especially when another woman did the pushing, for the love of God.

Photos courtesy of WENN.

Last night was the big premiere for Just Go With It in New York City. The temp was 24° – so of course Jennifer Aniston went strapless and sheer in Dolce & Gabbana. Too drunk to feel the cold? Well, I’ll let the photos speak for themselves. CB thinks the D&G dress is nice-but-boring, and gives Aniston points for nice boobs. I think from the waist up, the dress is fine. But with the too-long sheer skirt…. I don’t know, I just don’t think it flatters her body. She’s not tall and leggy – this dress is for a tall and leggy woman. Sometimes, she just kills me – she works so hard for that body, and she should know by now how to show it off to its maximum potential. The hair looks good, though – it looks like it always does, maybe with a little extra blowout.

Brooklyn Decker also wore D&G – do you think they discussed it beforehand? Hm. Now, I like some animal print in general, even though I think this dress might a touch too loud and too bold, especially for Brooklyn. The cut is good, though, and she styled the dress correctly.

Don’t even ask me about Nicole Kidman. I like the idea of this – Nicole in a sleek black leather suit. It should have been good. It should have been “kittenish dominatrix” which is a good look for Nicole. But Nicole ruined it with what I first thought was a NUDE scarf and what I know realize is a NUDE blouse with some kind of funky neck thing attachment. And I don’t like the blazer-cut of the jacket, at all.

And here’s a touch of Dave Matthews, for those that adore him:

Photos courtesy of WENN.

Here are some more photos of Nicole Kidman in YSL at the Oscars luncheon yesterday. I know many of you disagree with me (that’s part of the fun of it!), but I still like the print and the color, and my main problem is with the fit and weird cut of the top. Anyway, Nicole has some new interviews today. The first one is just more of Nic’s Marie Claire interview, which we covered last week. These quotes are new, though:

She’s celebrating her Oscar nomination for her role in Rabbit Hole now, but ten years ago, Nicole Kidman admits she was in a very bad place. Kidman opened up even more at the Cinema Vanguard Awards this past weekend about her painful 2001 split from ex-husband Tom Cruise. She recently told Marie Claire UK she was “really damaged” after the divorce.

At the time of the break up, Kidman, 43, was making the 2002 film The Hours. “I was so depressed…I did not want to do it,” recalled Kidman. She attempted to back out but the film’s producers wouldn’t let her. “So I had to show up in England and I think my inner turmoil was very much a part of the things that [my character] was going through as well.” Her pain paid off: She won a Best Actress Oscar for her portrayal of author Virginia Wolff in the film.

Alluding to Cruise, 48, Kidman joked that she appreciates obsessiveness in directors, but “not necessarily in a husband.” Yet despite the couple’s split, Kidman did praise Cruise’s work ethic while filming Eyes Wide Shut.

“Poor Tom. He worked every single day on that film and that’s extraordinary…I remember him just not wanting to let Stanley down and just whatever it was going to take, it was going to take,” said Kidman.

Kidman’s now happily married to country music star Keith Urban, 43. She recalled hearing of her recent Oscar nod while at home with him and their two daughters, Sunday Rose, 2, and Faith, one-month old. “Suddenly they said my name and Keith was like ‘yeah!’ and jumping around the kitchen and Sunday was like, ‘wh-wh-what’s happening? Why are you crying?’ She goes, ‘why are we sad?’ and I said ‘no we’re not sad Sunday, we’re happy.’ So that will be my memory of this nomination: My daughter and my husband jumping around the kitchen.”

[From Us Weekly]

Ugh, Eyes Wide Shut. That turd of a movie. I remember the gossip that Kubrick needed to hire some kind of sex therapist for Nicole and Tom for their “love scene”. And I do remember those scenes being extremely awkward, although I do give Tom credit for befriending Kubrick and working with Steven Spielberg to carry on Kubrick’s legacy. Whatever.

At the luncheon, Nicole also told reporters that her daughter Sunday is going to be picking out her Oscar dress: “Sunday Rose has a pretty strong opinion, and she chooses what she calls ‘pretty dresses.’ She has a strong voice in what I’ll be wearing on the night of the Oscars. Fingers crossed, I could be wearing a tutu.” Oh, God. Nicole, no pink, for the love of God. Wear something gorgeous and epic and bright. Stop with the frills and the pastels.

Photos courtesy of WENN.

These are some photos from Monday’s Academy Awards luncheon. Can I just say something? God bless Natalie Portman’s bitchface. I’m being completely sincere. If she’s not holding a trophy, Natalie looks totally and completely over it. Yes, I know, she’s probably uncomfortable and she probably wants to get out of those shoes and she probably wants to just sit on the couch eating vegan bacon (Is that a thing? It should be.). I know Natalie has a very good reason to be wearing a bitchface for months on end – she’s creating the creation. I get it. But I still love that she’s so bad an actress that she can’t even grin and bear it with good humor for the cameras. The camera always catches her bitchface, whether it is the “natural bitchface” (as many of us have as our default expression), or whether it is true discomfort and true bitchiness. Anyway, the dress is Lanvin. I think it’s really pretty – the color compliments her bitchface beautifully.

Also – maybe Natalie is upset that her fiance Benjamin Millepied came across like an unprofessional famewhore (emphasis on the whore) in a New York Times profile a few days ago. Yet another reason to wear this season’s must have accessory: the bitchface.

Oh, and here’s Nicole Kidman, wearing Yves Saint Laurent drapes, I think. No, the dress is YSL, a label that is an old favorite of Nicole’s. Nicole put on her game face and she looks much happier to be at the luncheon than Natalie. I hate the faux-halter cut of the top of the dress, but I actually love this color and print on Nicole. It makes her look younger – the holy grail for Nicole.

Photos courtesy of WENN.

Nicole Kidman was honored this weekend at the neverending Santa Barbara Film Festival (seriously, I think it’s been going on for a month…?). Nicole picked up some kind of acting award, probably for Rabbit Hole, the role which has yearned her an Oscar nomination for Best Actress. Nicole wore this white/cream Nina Ricci dress for the event. Thoughts on the dress… I don’t really care for Nicole in white or cream, just because she can look so good in other colors. That being said, I like this. It has a slight matronly vibe that is appropriate for the event, but it’s still chic and beautiful. It seems like the kind of dress an older society woman would wear to a charity luncheon, right? But that ends up being a good look for Nicole. Here’s more about her award:

NICOLE KIDMAN was the toast of the Santa Barbara International Film Festival in California on Saturday (05Feb11) as she was honoured with a top prize.

The Moulin Rouge! star received the coveted Cinema Vanguard Award, which recognises stars who take artistic risks and make a significant contribution to film, at a special tribute as part of the 10-day event.

Taking to the stage to accept the trophy, Kidman told the audience, “I suppose that’s in my blood. I don’t even see it as taking a risk, I just see it as staying true to my heart and instinct.”

The honour has previously been presented to Vera Farmiga, Christoph Waltz and Peter Sarsgaard.

[From Contact Music]

Good for her! Even though I’m no longer a fan of Nicole Kidman in general, I have to admit, she’s one of the few people I really look forward to seeing during this awards season. When she’s on her game, there’s no one better. And when she’s not on her game, it’s horrible.

Photos courtesy of Fame.

Nicole Kidman is the cover girl for the March issue of Marie Claire UK. The photo shoot is… interesting. I actually like the rest of the photo shoot so much more than I care for the cover shot, which is all kinds of washed-out fug. And what’s with all of Nicole’s lace these days? I know she said she loved lace when she was on the SAG red carpet, but at some point, someone has to tell her that she looks like a big ginger doily. Anyway, the excerpts that are coming out of this interview are very, very interesting:

On Botox: “Well, I move my forehead, I frown…I tried it, I didn’t like it, so I’ve gone back to my own forehead. But I’ve never had plastic surgery on my face. People say I have but I haven’t.”

On Keith Urban: ‘I’m crazy in love, and I think you can live anywhere and do anything when you’re crazy in love. I wouldn’t have been able to do this in my Twenties – I’m very driven by falling in love. I fall in love and I’ll drop everything and change everything. I found my soulmate, and I don’t throw that term around lightly. I found the person that I just love being with. We’re both… it’s awkward to say it because it lessens what it is if I try to trivialise our relationship… He is very important to me.’”

On Tom Cruise: “”I knew he was a really big star, but after a while, to get to a real place in a relationship, that has to wear off. As a couple we were very private. We were not out a lot and we were very, very tight and that’s why we lasted ten years, which is a good amount of time, particularly when you get married at 23. That was a great relationship. I think it ran its course. I was never seeking to be a celebrity. But I was prepared to do that for love. And that is something that is hard to do. It’s hard when you’re young. But I’m ready to give up anything for love because, ultimately, that is what you have. You get so much from a relationship when it is filled with love.”

On the divorce: ‘I was really damaged and not sure whether that was ever going to happen again to me,’ she told us. ‘I certainly never thought I’d have a baby at 41. But we never know what’s around the corner.’

[From Just Jared, Cover Awards & Marie Claire UK]

I don’t think I’ve ever really heard her talk about Tom this way. It’s interesting to think about that – she was only 23 years old when they met and married. Of course she had no idea what she was getting into, and of course they were extremely “private”. That why there are still people fighting about what did and did not happen in their marriage even today.

Oh, and the Botox thing. Love it. Love the denials, love that she keeps getting questions about her Marble-head, and I love that she keeps on denying it. LOVE.

Photos courtesy of Marie Claire UK.

I’m not aiming for a repeat of yesterday’s chaos and judgment and accusation-throwing. Suffice it to say, many of us have a difference of opinion on Nicole Kidman and her newborn baby girl, Faith Margaret. In any case, Nicole’s happy baby news took the cover of People Magazine this week. I don’t know if this was always going to happen, and TMZ just stepped on Nicole’s formal People announcement, or if People Magazine just threw this cover story together quickly. The cover image certainly makes me think it happened really quickly, just because Nicole is positioned so awkwardly.

For Nicole Kidman and Keith Urban, the role of faith in their lives has never been more clear than since the arrival of new daughter Faith Margaret on Dec. 28.

The couple, both 43, announced their big news on Jan. 17, three weeks after the little girl was born to a gestational carrier at The Women’s Hospital at Centennial Medical Center in their adopted hometown of Nashville.

Faith Margaret takes her middle name from Kidman’s grandmother and her first from what her parents say they relied upon to fulfill their dream of expanding their family.

“They never gave up faith they’d have another child together,” says a friend of the couple. “They feel blessed.”

The new arrival, who is the couple’s biological child, joins big sister Sunday Rose, 2, and Kidman’s kids from her marriage to Tom Cruise, Isabella, 18, and Connor, 15.

Kidman has spoken openly in the past about her struggles to conceive daughter Sunday, telling PEOPLE in 2009 that she and Urban hoped to have more children if they could: “We always say, ‘If it’s God’s plan.’ ”

Now that the have added another daughter, says the friend, “they’re just thrilled.”

For much more on the latest addition to Kidman and Urban’s family, pick up issue of PEOPLE, on newsstands Friday

[From People]

By the way, many of you were wondering what hot gossip commenter Camille had given me. I’m not saying this is true or anything, but Camille has an Australian source she considers unimpeachable who has basically implied that Nicole simply would not be capable to sustain a pregnancy for medical reasons. While that piece of (unconfirmed) gossip doesn’t really have any bearing on little Faith’s birth, it might have something to do with the (alleged) birth of Sunday Rose. I’ve always been a conspiracy theorist when it comes to Nicole, so I’ll believe it. Some of you don’t. That’s fine.

Photos courtesy of Fame.

While I want to believe Page Six’s Christina Hendricks story with every fiber of my being, I’m kind of thinking that Page Six is pulling this Tom Cruise and Nicole Kidman story out of their ass. According to sources, at the post-Globes CAA party, Tom and Nicole totally avoided each other like they were in friggin’ high school. Ugh.

Tom Cruise and ex-wife Nicole Kidman kept a safe distance from each other as they partied at the same Golden Globes bash. Cruise and wife Katie Holmes attended the Creative Artists Agency party at the Sunset Tower Hotel following the awards. Meanwhile, Kidman, who divorced Cruise in 2001, was across the intimate room with husband Keith Urban.

A spy said, “There was no drama, but nobody saw them have a conversation, either. Tom and Nicole stayed apart all night, but they must have seen each other. Everybody was mingling, but they kept their distance.”

Security was so tight that many CAA clients weren’t allowed in — even director David O. Russell had to wait in his car after being told he wasn’t on the list. Those who got in included Robert De Niro, Jane Fonda, Christina Aguilera, Anne Hathaway, Julianne Moore, Scarlett Johansson, Halle Berry, Oliver Stone, John Legend, Demi Moore and Jake Gyllenhaal.

[From Page Six]

I doubt this just because I doubt Tom Cruise was in town for the Globes – I think he’s still filming Mission Impossible in Canada, last I heard. Considering he wasn’t nominated for anything and he didn’t present anything at the Globes, why would he fly into LA just for a CAA party? But I do believe that Nicole and Keith were at the CAA party – just the ticket after a three-hour awards ceremony. You want to kick back and schmooze and have a few drinks and not be with your three-week-old newborn baby. Look, I get why Nicole went – she was nominated, after all. But Keith just had to come with her? Why? Because his job is holding her hand in front of cameras, not bonding with their new baby that they just had to have and announce conveniently before the Oscar nominations.

UPDATE: Okay, I’ve just been told that Tom was in town and was at the CAA party. Guess this story is pretty true, and Tom and Nicole really can’t even say hello to each other. Gawd.

In other “awkward, CAA” news, Life & Style is reporting that Scarlett Johansson and Sandra Bullock ran into each other at the same CAA party. Ooh, they got a confirmation from Bullock’s rep too:

As if wearing strikingly similar gowns to the Golden Globes weren’t awkward enough, Sandra Bullock and Scarlett Johansson came face-to-face for the first time since Sandra’s very public New Year’s Eve date with Scarlett’s soon-to-be-ex Ryan Reynolds. Sandra’s rep confirms to Life & Style that the ladies saw each other at a CAA-sponsored award show after party on Jan. 16 in LA.

The last time Scarlett and Sandra were spotted sharing the red carpet was at the 2010 MTV Movie Awards, where they shared a jaw-dropping kiss on stage. But that was before they shared a man.

“Scarlett and Sandra had dinner,” an insider tells Life & Style of the actresses’ run-in on Jan. 16. “They’ve always gotten along so Sandra explained exactly how she felt about the whole Ryan situation. She didn’t want anything to get in the way of their friendship. There is no awkwardness between Sandra and Scarlett.”

[From Life & Style]

Sandra Bullock: Always A Girlfriend First. That’s the message. And I’ll buy it, too.

Photos courtesy of WENN.

Wow, as everybody just announced in the links (LOL, sorry!), Nicole Kidman and Keith Urban announced this afternoon that they welcomed their second daughter. Via surrogate! Apparently the baby – a little girl named Faith Margaret- was born on December 28, and they’re just announcing it now, after they just spent the whole weekend doing a bunch of events together so Nicole could promote Rabbit Hole. Because…? I guess a newborn doesn’t need either of her parents…for a whole weekend…? No, I’m a bitch. I know that. You know that too. Since I’m going there, I guess I can also say that I look forward to many more interviews in which Nicole makes reference to her only TWO daughters, forgetting Isabella entirely.

It’s a girl – and a huge surprise!

Nicole Kidman and Keith Urban revealed Monday that they are the parents of a baby girl.

Faith Margaret Kidman Urban arrived Dec. 28 at The Women’s Hospital at Centennial in Nashville. Faith was born through a gestational carrier and is the biological daughter of Kidman and Urban.

“Our family is truly blessed, and just so thankful, to have been given the gift of baby Faith Margaret,” the family says in a statement. “No words can adequately convey the incredible gratitude that we feel for everyone who was so supportive throughout this process, in particular our gestational carrier.”

Kidman and Urban, both 43, had kept the birth a secret, saying nothing about being new parents when they attended the Golden Globe Awards on Sunday night.

Married in 2006, Kidman gave birth to daughter Sunday Rose in July 2008. Kidman and her ex-husband Tom Cruise also adopted two children during their marriage, Isabella and Connor.

[From People]

Good for them and congratulations. This is likely the reason that Nicole has been looking slightly off-kilter in her recent appearances – her mind is somewhere else, and she’s probably thinking about little Faith. That’s my mom’s name, by the way. Faith. I always think of it as such a Southern name, but I guess Aussies are embracing it too.

Bitchy side note: I’ve always thought that Sunday Rose was born via surrogate – perhaps Nicole’s sister Antonia – so it’s very interesting to me, conspiracy-wise, that Nicole and Keith are fine announcing that little Faith was born via surrogate, while we must believe that Sunday was the pillow-like lump that Nicole sported for a few months. I know, I know. I’m a C-U-Next-Tuesday. You don’t have to say it.

Photos courtesy of WENN.

Nicole Kidman looked like hell last night, didn’t she? It’s as if she’s punishing herself post-Botox marble-head. Now that her face is back to moving a little bit, Nicole was like “Eh, I’m just going to run a brush through my hair and throw on this ugly off-white dress.” You know what killed me about the dress? It was seriously unflattering on her body – Nicole ALWAYS wears clothes that will make her look thin, and this dress made her look like she had (GASP) gained weight. Maybe she has gained some weight – if she has, seriously, good for her. But she needs to learn to not wear ill-fitting off-white dresses with waist bows. I would have thought Nicole already knew that!

Milla Jovovich… maybe I don’t “get” her, but I thought the dress was ugly, I thought her styling was boring, and I didn’t know why she was there. At all. She was just one big WTF? to me.

Megan Fox in Armani… more pink than neutral, but whatever. My mom thought her dress was really pretty, and maybe it was and I just can’t see it. Megan could turn even the prettiest dress into something tacky and trashy. She just has that quality – even fine couture looks like a stripper’s coverup on Megan.

I honestly didn’t hate Jennifer Lopez’s dress, I really didn’t. It was an interesting choice for her, and surprising covered-up and mature. It’s like… she realizes she’s in her 40s! Gasp. However, her makeup and hair was horrible. The makeup especially was just terrible.

ScarJo makes it onto our bad hair post, and our bad neutrals post. I absolutely hated this gown on ScarJo. So matronly, and it washes her out terribly.

Kaley Cuoco – I would ordinarily ignore her, but she presented and she was kind of adorable when she got to give the Globe to her costar Jim Parsons. The dress is kind of awful, though. Just the wrong color for a blonde. It washes her out.

Photos courtesy of Fame and WENN.