Brad and Angelina engaged

[SweetAsscher]

I'd want to design my own ring. Plus I wouldn't like to receive the same gesture he's done for all his other relationships. Yea it's special to have him design her ring but he already did it twice before. jmo

 

[Ara Ann]

I don't love it or hate it...but I do think keeping those clear, large step cut diamonds CLEAN would be very difficult...can you imagine how smudged that ring is going to be, with six kids hanging on her hands all day?

 

[Logan Sapphire]

Not that Brad asked my opinion, but I don't care for it. Before I knew it had multiple stones, I really liked it and thought it did go well with her finger. Plus, there's something super elegant about a solitaire emerald cut or a three stone emerald cut. But something about her ring just makes it look like there's no differentiation of anything on her finger- like it's just emerald cuts repeating themselves over and over. I do like her hands better than Jen's though

 

[Black Jade]

[quote="laylah|1334611958|Wow.

I think their sentiment was lovely. Gays should marry.They likely have many gay friends and/or family members. They are everywhere ya know.

What could possibly be wrong with two people marrying because they are in love? Gawd, I am so glad I live where I do, not only am I married, gay, free and happy, I don't actually know (in r/l) anyone with your point of view.

Ok, back to lurking. [/quote]

Wish you well, laylah. some of us don't believe that marriage is just simply about 'being in love' . Having gay friends and family members has nothing to do with it. We all have those (I certainly do) and many support civil unions as a compromise that can protect the meaning of marriage for the future of society and children while still meaning that people won't be put in a position where they have no rights vis a vis someone they have been been with for a long time,but want marriage left intact.
I do not mean to threadjack and will say nothing further on this subject in this place, which is not about marriage but about Brangelina. I truly get annoyed however at the attitude that I find on Pricescope where some truly hot button issue which is NOT settled yet is spoken of as if it were something that 'everyone' is on board with. Referring to gay marriage as 'marriage rights' is an example of this behavior. Among other things, this kind of plaing with language puts you in a bit of a false position, you know. You get the false idea that everyone ( or everyone important) agrees with your opinion when this is far from true. If there is no one in r/l with my point of view why has it been so hard to get gay marriage legalized? Why has it never been voted in by the people anywhere that it exists?
Pretending that there are no opposing opinions does not make them go away, i'm sorry.
And shoving legislation through against the will of the majority of the people is a short-sighted thing to do.

 

[librarychickie]

I really like it! I wonder if she'll wear a wedding band with it? It's a stand alone ring in my opinion.

 

[Maria D]

why has it been so hard to get gay marriage legalized? Why has it never been voted in by the people anywhere that it exists?
Pretending that there are no opposing opinions does not make them go away, i'm sorry.
And shoving legislation through against the will of the majority of the people is a short-sighted thing to do.

BJ, as an educated person you surely know then that in the history of this country there have been rights that took a long time to be legalized and were finally legislated through rather than put to popular vote. Women's suffrage and the 19th Amendment come to mind.

 

[stargurl78]

I think the ring is just meh... Its not awful but not spectacular either. I wonder if she had a say in the design...

 

[pregcurious]

I think the Angelina's and Jennifer's rings are very similar in that they both have a repeating element that tapers off. For Angelina's, it is a rectangle that repeats and becomes smaller. For Jennifer's, it is a circle that spirals out. It's an interesting concept.

 

[Imdanny]

I think small minded people are destructive to society.

+1

actually +1 X ∞

Add me to this list.

Me too!

I have to agree because it's true. If you say a minority group (in any way, shape, or fashion) is destructive to society, you are saying that a group of people who have historically been oppressed (and GLBT's put in Hitler's concentration camps with their own insignia- a pink triangle- and systematically murdered and their bodies burned in ovens is more than enough information from a political science point of view, albeit a tiny fraction of what I could list) is said to be 'destructive' to society, society is harmed. In fact, Hitler said about Jews and GLBT's exactly this, that they were destructive to society, thus had to be eliminated. It is simply bigotry; it is not rational thought, to suggest that GLBT's having equal protection under law is destructive to society.

Now where's that infinity sign? Add me to the list.

 

[JuneRose]

Well according to my friend who reads gossip magazines they will be moving to my area for the next 2 years! ... Maybe I'll try and get some real life photos for you guys... LOL

 

[haute_couture]

I don't like the ring and I didn't like the ring he designed for Jennifer Aniston either. But I just want to say that I think promoting marriage, all marriage, is good for society. I don't see it as destructive to society at all.

Same sentiments on all 3 counts.

I'm not invested in this triangular affair. I call it Hollyweird for a reason. I do find it amusing when I need a break from my everyday life!

 

[CrisM]

"I think their sentiment was lovely. Gays should marry.They likely have many gay friends and/or family members. They are everywhere ya know.

What could possibly be wrong with two people marrying because they are in love?"

Agreed. Give people the respect they deserve to live their lives fully expressed, just as you would like to be respected. It's their business and choice. If anything, marriage both hetero AND gay speaks to family values. I don't understand why social conservatives don't get behind that concept, as British Conservatives are now doing.

 

[T L]

I, for one, am totally sick of people dissing Jolie because of how they met while forgetting the details. I remember reading stuff at the time (before he and Aniston divorced) about their troubled marriage and him wanting kids and she didn't ... and then suddenly people forgot those reports about them being on the rocks over kids and it became "OMG ANGELINA IS AN EVIL HOMEWRECKER" when Aniston herself broke up a 10 year marriage by dating Justin Theroux, which apparently blindsided his common law wife. Where is the outrage that Aniston is just as guilty of being a homewrecker as Jolie is?

But Theroux was not a married man. Many women think guys who aren't married are "fair game." Living together is not the same as being married and taking vows. JMO.

I guess I give more weight to a 14 year live-in relationship than a piece of paper. Then again, Common Law marriages in Canada seem to have more weight than in the US, from what I have seen down here?

I give just as much "weight" to either relationship, but I don't subscribe to the notion that the break-ups of these marriages (certified or common-law) were the fault of the "other woman." Jolie and Aniston were both single when they ended up with Pitt and Theroux. THEY weren't the ones who took vows or otherwise committed themselves, why are they singled out for all the blame? Who cares what a woman thinks is "fair game?" I expect my husband to be faithful to me regardless of how many women throw themselves at him (which he tells me happens all the time, LOL).

I totally agree with you there; it's not like either man slipped and fell on a woman who wasn't his partner!

However, Jolie and Pitt did not go public with their relationship (and claimed they didn't get involved, which I have gotta be skeptical of, but whateves) until he was divorced, whereas Aniston and Theroux were all over each over in public while he was still definitely living with his partner. That is beyond grody, IMO. Yet, people still paint Aniston with this angelic brush and deride Jolie for 'wronging' Aniston. Where is the equal outrage against Aniston for doing the same thing, and outrage against Theroux for humiliating his partner of 14 years that way?

Angelina Jolie also broke up the engagement of Laura Dern and Billy Bob Thorton. She evidently doesn't care if a man is attached or not. I'm not saying Jennifer Aniston is a saint, but does it even matter? Angelina still carried on with a married man. Brad Pitt is no angel either.

In any case, the ring is nice, but I've seen far more beautiful rings in SMTB from PS'ers. It's large and architectural, which is nice, if you like that thing. I think Camilla Parker Bowles has a similar ring.

 

[innerkitten]

I like it. I'm surprised they didn't go for something more PC.

 

[monarch64]

I like it. I'm surprised they didn't go for something more PC.

Yes, I'm surprised there hasn't been mention of where the rough was found, or that they didn't choose something non-diamond. I have a hard time relating to Angelina Jolie and don't pay much attention to her, but I do look forward to seeing what she chooses to wear when they marry. If nothing else, her style is interesting and somewhat unique.

 

[VRBeauty]

I like the center stone - I do think it suits her style. I probably would have used fewer side stones, but hey - nobody asked me! I do hope we'll get to see some PS-quality pictures soon!

 

[movie zombie]

I really like it! I wonder if she'll wear a wedding band with it? It's a stand alone ring in my opinion.

me, too....i was wondering about a band, also. like you i think it can stand alone.

i so love emeral cut diamonds!

 

[FrekeChild]

Oh Brad. I'm not a huge fan of the diamond conveyor belt either.

I remember back in the day, Brad designed his and Jen's wedding bands, and threw a hissy fit when they got copied. Honestly I didn't think they were OMG original or anything, but apparently he did?

I'd take either of them and reset the center stones.

Frankly, my favorite celeb ering was Britney Spears to Kevin Federline (the one she paid for).

 

[baby monster]

If she's lucky, hopefully nothing. He shouldn't be designing rings. Angelina's looks like a blingy conveyor belt.

Great description. It does look very industrial/masculine - all hard edges and sharp corners. IMO this has the style of man's ring circa 1950's.

 

[Circe]

I would like it, I think, if the taper was either more or less pronounced. This degree ... meh. Not outstanding. But the center stone looks gorgeous, and if it is, indeed, a ploy to placate their kids while putting off a ceremony, it's a good stand-alone ring. I do prefer this look to the one he designed for Jennifer Aniston ... looks like he's very much a too-much-is-never-enough kinda guy.

So, ARE there pics of whatever he did for Gwyneth Paltrow? Wildly curious now ....

 

[jaysonsmom]

I love Angelina's centerstone. If I ever got an emerald cut, those would be the proportions that I'd go for, it does suit her long skinny fingers (and mine). Not loving the entire look of the ring though. I've never been in love with verticle baguettes (or whatever those are).

 

[junebug17]

Idk, it's pretty but not really my taste I guess. I see rings here on PS that I like much better.

 

[maebelle]

So, ARE there pics of whatever he did for Gwyneth Paltrow? Wildly curious now ....

This is the only thing anywhere


unless someone wants to ante up $4 to buy this magazine?
http://www.ebay.com/itm/1997-People-Magazine-Brad-Pitt-Gwyneth-Paltrow-Engaged-/120715266596

 

[MissStepcut]

I love Angelina's centerstone. If I ever got an emerald cut, those would be the proportions that I'd go for, it does suit her long skinny fingers (and mine). Not loving the entire look of the ring though. I've never been in love with verticle baguettes (or whatever those are).

I really don't care for the sparkle on really elongated emeralds. That's the part I was the most surprised about, actually.

 

[Lula]

why has it been so hard to get gay marriage legalized? Why has it never been voted in by the people anywhere that it exists?
Pretending that there are no opposing opinions does not make them go away, i'm sorry.
And shoving legislation through against the will of the majority of the people is a short-sighted thing to do.

BJ, as an educated person you surely know then that in the history of this country there have been rights that took a long time to be legalized and were finally legislated through rather than put to popular vote. Women's suffrage and the 19th Amendment come to mind.

Ditto. Great post, Maria.

BJ, as a person who has commented in the past about the societal discrimination you and members of your family have experienced, I am surprised that you would hold such prejudicial views about another minority group. As Kenny says, people vary. Vive la différence.

As for Angie's ring, I think it's gorgeous and totally her.

 

[westjenn]

I wish we had PS-quality pics of all of these celebrity engagement rings!

There's a celebrity engagement ring thread in the diamond jewelry pieces section. I posted pix of A.J's engagement ring there.

 

[westjenn]

Agreed on Brad Pitt needing to stay away from the designers role for the rest of time. Jolies's is certainly better than Aniston's but maybe it's because we are looking at them through the lens of time?

And now off to try to find Gwyneth Paltrow's from 1997. They only thing I can find is this sentence: "Brad Pitt was also known for the ring that he designed for Gwyneth Paltrow, as it not only had diamonds on the topside, but on the underside of the band as well. "

I can't find good closeups online. It it was a large princess cut solitaire in yellow gold.

 

[Imdanny]

I think Camilla Parker Bowles has a similar ring.

Yes, and I don't like either ring. Camilla's is somewhat better than I expected (it's Cartier, '30's?) but the one in this thread is a train wreck.

Ok, ask me what I really think.

 

[FrekeChild]

Camilla's is way better. IMHO. (Although it looks terrible in this pic. I think I just like the squattier center and the sides that are significantly smaller than the center.)

http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2005/02/11/charles-camilla050211.html

 

[artdecogirl]

Do you think Angelina will come find PS to ask "My boyfriend put in a lot of effort into my ring, but I hate it - what should I do?"

[/quote]

Maybe we should start that thread!

After knocking me up me twice (once with twins!) and keeping me waiting for 7 years, my #$!!% boyfriend goes ahead and DESIGNS my engagement ring without any input from me. It's hideous! What am I supposed to do, it cost a fortune -- but not as much as he spent on his simpering bleached blonde ex-wife. I'm not even sure I want to marry the guy but our kids (all 6, but that's another story) keep bugging us.

[/quote]

That was awesome!

Regarding the ring, I was disappointed when I saw the full view, I had thought it was a fancy emerald cut solitaire and I think that is a classic elegant style that would suit her hand well, I think the acutual ring is overkill and loses some of the elegance but it does still suit her hand, he did well choosing angular cuts versus something soft say a cushion.