Worst outfit ever worn by a royal?
Not counting Princess Diana's wedding dress and the King of Thailand's crop top and low rise skinny jeans pairing, poor Queen Maxima's mustard colored evening gown with flouncy graduated tiers is jaw-droppingly ugly. And too tight, to boot, for a big gal like Maxima. Who let her leave the palace in this horror?
P.S. I realize that Beatrice and Eugenie have had more than their fair share of hideous outfits so they're retired to my Hall of Fame.
|by Anonymous||reply 344||9 hours ago|
Sweet Mother-Fucking Confucious with a Red Beard!
|by Anonymous||reply 1||Last Wednesday at 7:11 PM|
I think you win, OP. That's really pretty hideous, although she doesn't seem that big, or the dress too tight?
|by Anonymous||reply 3||Last Wednesday at 8:16 PM|
Oh, wow, R2! I'm 😵 (dizzy) from looking at Queen Elizabeth's Harlequin gown. She deliberately dressed herself as a court jester.
But, yup, in contention with Maxima's Big Bird dress. Would win the contest if the yellow weren't so mustard and brighter.
|by Anonymous||reply 4||Last Wednesday at 9:13 PM|
R5 - She's one of the GOAT which got her disqualified from contention as a Hall of Fame member.
|by Anonymous||reply 6||Last Wednesday at 9:35 PM|
Sorry, OP. I like the romantic fairy princess look of Diana's wedding dress. Kate Middleton's wedding dress wasn't horrible but it was underwhelming.
|by Anonymous||reply 7||Last Wednesday at 9:37 PM|
Dynasty x Jiffy Pop, Valentine's Day limited edition
|by Anonymous||reply 8||Last Wednesday at 9:38 PM|
Looks like bad taste is hereditary.
|by Anonymous||reply 9||Last Wednesday at 9:41 PM|
Fergie never quite got it right.
|by Anonymous||reply 10||Last Wednesday at 9:52 PM|
Diana at 1981's Royal Ascot
|by Anonymous||reply 13||Last Wednesday at 10:00 PM|
Imperial Margarine — fit for a king!
|by Anonymous||reply 14||Last Wednesday at 10:02 PM|
Maxima's dress could have been saved if the flounces on the sleeves were gone and those on the top part of the dress. Smooth paired with just a few tiered flounces is ok. The belt could have been a dark velvet as well for a bit of contrast.
|by Anonymous||reply 15||Last Wednesday at 10:07 PM|
I think some of those outfits that Sarah and Diana wore were fancy dress for one of those priest and prozzie parties.
|by Anonymous||reply 16||Last Wednesday at 10:10 PM|
Good heavens. Where did she find this rag?
|by Anonymous||reply 17||Last Wednesday at 10:12 PM|
Maxima again, looking like a piñata
|by Anonymous||reply 18||Last Wednesday at 10:13 PM|
R5 It was the hat that was hideous. The coat and accompanying dress were Valentino. She wore it again without the ugly fascinator at another wedding and looked perfectly fine.
|by Anonymous||reply 19||Last Wednesday at 10:14 PM|
Thank you to the posters with enough historical memory to pull up all of Sarah's nightmares. It should be a course at any fashion college and a side note in a Genetics 101 textbook. The extreme bad taste of the new York family. The parents cannot escape their grasping and tacky nature through their words and deeds, as their daughters sought to rebel through sartorial humiliation. Again.
|by Anonymous||reply 20||Last Wednesday at 10:16 PM|
Liz looked like such a frump next to Jackie.
|by Anonymous||reply 21||Last Wednesday at 10:17 PM|
This bizarre space helmet
|by Anonymous||reply 22||Last Wednesday at 10:19 PM|
At R21, Jackie’s hairline looks like Theresa Giudice’s of Real Housewives of NJ. Jackie’s hairdo is atrocious.
|by Anonymous||reply 23||Last Wednesday at 10:20 PM|
Not the worst outfit ever worn by a royal (or royal by marriage), but too costumey, too old for her and just an outdated look. She looks too much like an actress playing a role.
|by Anonymous||reply 25||Last Wednesday at 10:27 PM|
OP here. Many thanks to the posters with Fergie's exceedingly weird and questionable cavalcade of misused satin.
I left for college between the Wales and York marriages and effectively stopped reading anything about them in gossip magazines since I got cut off from my aunt's supply.
Wow. I thought modern day Sarah Ferguson lived in a fantasy world, but even her wardrobe back then suggested she was in the ether.
|by Anonymous||reply 26||Last Wednesday at 10:34 PM|
I know you don't want photos of Beatrice and Eugenie, OP, but this look is inspired in its badness.
|by Anonymous||reply 27||Last Wednesday at 10:37 PM|
Great choice, R28. Breast implants I presume.
|by Anonymous||reply 29||Last Wednesday at 10:40 PM|
Please do not name your daughters Maxima.
|by Anonymous||reply 30||Last Wednesday at 10:40 PM|
R27 - I just didn't want them named WOAT again. They were always on top and didn't want them to be sole names on the list, but as per usual DL unearths the most worthwhile gems for resurrection.
I do actually welcome any evidence when rich folks keep evidence.
[Quote] I know you don't want photos of Beatrice and Eugenie, OP, but this look is inspired in its badness.
|by Anonymous||reply 31||Last Wednesday at 10:51 PM|
In stark contrast to R28, here's Stephanie at age 36 (!!) in full mother-of-the-bride mode.
|by Anonymous||reply 32||Last Wednesday at 11:09 PM|
Oh my. She has the shoulders of a linebacker.
|by Anonymous||reply 33||Last Wednesday at 11:11 PM|
Yikes. The excesses of the 80s.
|by Anonymous||reply 34||Last Wednesday at 11:20 PM|
I think that's why I had a crush on her as a gayling, R33.
|by Anonymous||reply 35||Last Wednesday at 11:21 PM|
Haha. If shoulder pads ever come back into fashion, she won't need them.
|by Anonymous||reply 36||Last Wednesday at 11:26 PM|
Maxima at R18 is like something Ugly Betty would have worn to the office.
|by Anonymous||reply 37||Last Wednesday at 11:33 PM|
^ Kate really loves that designer
|by Anonymous||reply 39||Last Wednesday at 11:49 PM|
Gah! The black suede platforms at R38 are the worst! How did Kate even wear those heels with that satin floral gown? Yes, I am shallow enough to notice .
|by Anonymous||reply 40||Last Wednesday at 11:49 PM|
Sometimes the late Diana, Princess of Wales got things right fashion wise. Other times you wonder were there no mirrors anywhere at all before leaving for event, and or whoever came up with outfit in question ought to have been shot.
Could be wrong but think one thing behind the often awful choices of fashions by HM and all female members of BRF is limiting themselves to or preferring British designers/fashions over say Italian or French.
|by Anonymous||reply 41||Last Thursday at 12:04 AM|
British women (including royals) ought to wear British clothes; well so goes that train of thought.
HM does mix things up with accessories by Chanel, Hermes, and other names from the Continent, but much of her day to day wardrobe has always been and still is done by British designers. This makes sense to an extent as one job of the monarch is to promote British industry.
Princess Margaret OTOH wore French couture and told anyone who dared call her out on it to basically "fuck off".
Diana IIRC was pretty much along same lines; from that ghastly wedding dress (by David and Elizabeth Emanuel) on down through the years of her marriage. Again being second lady of the land job of Princess of Wales was to promote British industry where possible.
|by Anonymous||reply 42||Last Thursday at 12:15 AM|
Prince Harry got his mother's wedding dress. What will happen to it in future is anyone's guess. Likely end up back on display somewhere..
|by Anonymous||reply 43||Last Thursday at 12:17 AM|
R43, he has it?
Oh, Meghan’s getting that in the divorce.
|by Anonymous||reply 44||Last Thursday at 12:29 AM|
Well, there's something the BRF can't wait to duke out among themselves, no pun intended, right?
|by Anonymous||reply 45||Last Thursday at 12:36 AM|
That a divorced women with a husband living insisted on marrying again in white, with a veil and in church was bad enough. The Markle woman wouldn't have dared touch Diana's wedding gown. Diana-maniacs would have savaged her in the press, if not rushed to rip the thing off MM's back.
|by Anonymous||reply 46||Last Thursday at 12:41 AM|
Zandra Rhodes was responsible for two of Fergie's monstrosities above. Here's Diana in three others.
|by Anonymous||reply 47||Last Thursday at 12:46 AM|
Wiki entry may have things muddled; other sources state Diana's wedding dress was given to joint custody of both Duke of Cambridge and Duke of Sussex.
|by Anonymous||reply 48||Last Thursday at 12:48 AM|
Micaela, Countess of Paris
That oft used DL phrase fits here; "oh dear".
|by Anonymous||reply 49||Last Thursday at 12:50 AM|
Oh, my goodness, R47. It's like Olivia Newton John for Xanadu!
|by Anonymous||reply 50||Last Thursday at 1:02 AM|
Princess Diana’s wedding gown looks much better in person than it does in photographs. However, when you cram that much silk taffeta into the small space of a carriage it comes out looking like used tissue paper from a gift box on Christmas Day. In 2010, the gown was part of an exhibit that featured Diana’s best outfits. On display, smoothed out and lit properly, the gown looked stunning. It was the wrong choice of fabric for how it traveled on her wedding day.
|by Anonymous||reply 51||Last Thursday at 1:19 AM|
Anything Fergie wears as well as Meghan Markle. They both have appalling taste.
|by Anonymous||reply 52||Last Thursday at 2:05 AM|
I actually love that outfit at r49. It's perfect for a woman of a certain age who's not afraid of color. The only thing I would change is the shoes and the clutch -- I'd have gone with simple pumps and a silk clutch to match either the fuchsia or orange of the outfit. Probably the fuchsia.
|by Anonymous||reply 53||Last Thursday at 2:14 AM|
Did someone say royal?!
Sorry I’m late! My invitation must have been lost. Is this seat taken?
|by Anonymous||reply 54||Last Thursday at 3:21 AM|
OP - Thanks for a refreshing fun royal thread!
Obviously, the York sisters own this thread. Second place: Princess Anne. Third place: Meghan Markle (the de la Renta tablecloth dress, the green tent at the polo match, and the eye-wateringly hideous olive green belted thing with white scarf she wore to the mosque in Morocco - those three alone gain her a place in the top spots).
Honourable Mention: Queen Maxima of The Netherlands and Queen Margrethe of Denmark (a/k/a Mother Goose)
|by Anonymous||reply 55||Last Thursday at 3:49 AM|
^* Sarah Ferguson has to pip Meghan Markle, I omitted her.
All right, Meghan drops from third place to Honourable Mention. Even she cannot outdo Fergie in the Bad Dress Chromosome contest.
|by Anonymous||reply 56||Last Thursday at 3:50 AM|
R38 - Erdem is the absolute worst. I have only once seen a decent gown of his, and that was on Benedict Cumberbatch's wife at some evening event. For one thing, his wife had the sort of colouring that worked, and the gown while flowered with pockets was at least on a black background and didn't have flounces.
Actually, I think Kate wore an even worse Erdem whilst visiting pregnant, I think, with Charlotte? It was in Sweden and it looked like it was covered in Victorian ormolu.
Re: Diana's wedding dress - it wasn't the wrinkles - they were actually rather endearing and smoothed out quickly once she was out of the carriage. It was simply incredibly fussy and the meal-bag sleeves seen from the back made a tall slender 20 year old look like a giant square. It was just overdone to the nth degree.
Had the sleeves been fitted to offset the dizzying array of beads, bows, lace, sequins and ruffles, the gown would have worked. But the huge sleeves ending in ruffles trimmed with bows totally did the dress in.
It looked like something an eight year old girl would have designed for herself.
|by Anonymous||reply 57||Last Thursday at 3:56 AM|
R24 "too costumey, too old for her and just an outdated look. She looks too much like an actress playing a role."
That's exactly what she was: an actress playing a Duchess sweeping in determined to mow down the audience, and coming off looking like nothing so much as Cruelle de Ville.
Not to mention, yet again, the outlines of an (unnecessary - this wasn't a strapless gown or summer tee) strapless brassiere clearly outlined underneath, just as she did in Ireland with the grey Roland Mouret dress that otherwise would have looked quite elegant).
|by Anonymous||reply 58||Last Thursday at 4:01 AM|
R41, Princess Diana was a total frump when Charles married her, and she stayed that way till after William's birth. Around 1985, though, she woke up, went properly blonde, got a good stylist and after that she is rarely seen in a fashion disaster. The occasional dud, sure, but considering the number of outfits she modelled they are very occasional indeed. In a few cases you need to make allowances for what was fashionable in the 80s, but her good stuff is mainly pretty timeless. And nobody could team a hat with a suit like that gal.
She was never hit-and-miss. She was always Miss, then after that particular point in time, almost always Hit. Glamour personified. It would be interesting to try to work out exactly when the change occurred.
Meghan, by contrast, is a fashion disaster. She could look very good all of the time if she wore the right clothes and hair, but she positively insists on doing the opposite of what she should to bring out her best. She has the superpower of making Givenchy and Chanel look like Target.
|by Anonymous||reply 59||Last Thursday at 4:30 AM|
“She was never hit-and-miss. She was always Miss, then after that particular point in time, almost always Hit.”
So she was always hit and miss.
|by Anonymous||reply 60||Last Thursday at 4:34 AM|
[quote] OP - Thanks for a refreshing fun royal thread!
+1 with r55.
The 1980s pix of Diana and the rest makes me appreciate how very disciplined one must be to achieve restraint when one is battered by a prevailing storm excess. For example, even Jackie O's discipline and restraint wavered, as is plain as day when seeing some of her 1970s choices. They were mind-bogglingly bad.
Now, I see Q E II as among the best dressed women in the world. There's a certain genius to her uniform. It's exactly what I want to see on her. It's singular, instantly recognizable, and appropriate to her global presence.
Her wardrobe is analogous to the Golden Arches of McDonald's, and I write that as a compliment.
|by Anonymous||reply 61||Last Thursday at 4:35 AM|
R57, did you see this article? The Emmanuels had made a back up gown in case the first choice was leaked. It wasn’t completely finished but it did have fitted sleeves to the elbow and then two layers of ruffles. It’s very 18th c except for the neckline.
|by Anonymous||reply 62||Last Thursday at 4:36 AM|
[quote] Meghan, by contrast, is a fashion disaster. She could look very good all of the time if she wore the right clothes and hair, but she positively insists on doing the opposite of what she should to bring out her best. She has the superpower of making Givenchy and Chanel look like Target.
Agreed. I've consistently argued that the needs to find that sweet spot between flair and severe, and by this point, I don't know that she's capable of it.
|by Anonymous||reply 63||Last Thursday at 4:39 AM|
Why doesn't Liz get a new 'do? She's been sporting the old lady wash and set forever now. Even my grandmother didn't have that in her old age. She had a modern, easy to care for short, sassy cut.
IMO, fascinators are the absolute worse headgear for women who don't style their hair. The only time they look good is on a model type with hair pulled back into some kind of chignon. All that long hair hanging with a stupid little thing pinned on the side or front just looks stupid or sloppy.
|by Anonymous||reply 65||Last Thursday at 4:54 AM|
What is that fabric? There is no collar, and it looks like they just used scissors on it. The fit is terrible. The color is inexcusable. She is too mature for flounces no matter where they would be placed, especially on the occasion of the opening of parliament.
|by Anonymous||reply 66||Last Thursday at 5:02 AM|
Maxima sure does love the color orange (well, her husband is head of the House of Orange).
|by Anonymous||reply 67||Last Thursday at 5:12 AM|
He never had the legs for it.
|by Anonymous||reply 68||Last Thursday at 6:01 AM|
The dress at R67 is quite nice.
Louis really did have bird legs!
|by Anonymous||reply 69||Last Thursday at 6:31 AM|
Princess Beatrice when she got it right, wearing an Alexander McQueen split tuxedo dress at a 2015 V & A gala.
|by Anonymous||reply 70||Last Thursday at 9:09 AM|
[quote] Why doesn't Liz get a new 'do? She's been sporting the old lady wash and set forever now. Even my grandmother didn't have that in her old age. She had a modern, easy to care for short, sassy cut.
Totally agree. Maybe something like this.
|by Anonymous||reply 71||Last Thursday at 9:13 AM|
Liz should wear a wig like Raquel Welch.
|by Anonymous||reply 72||Last Thursday at 9:16 AM|
Kate showing her stuff when touring Canada.
|by Anonymous||reply 73||Last Thursday at 9:18 AM|
Queen Elizabeth, The Queen Mother's funeral dress.
|by Anonymous||reply 74||Last Thursday at 9:19 AM|
It doesn't show off her cunt, r25.
|by Anonymous||reply 75||Last Thursday at 9:26 AM|
Another of the Grifter Cunt of York.
|by Anonymous||reply 77||Last Thursday at 9:27 AM|
All that glitters is not gold.
|by Anonymous||reply 78||Last Thursday at 9:28 AM|
Duchess of Cambridge nearly caught it with that floaty yellow dress. Someone should have known better and it mustn't be allowed to happen ever again.
Kate Middleton gave the world quite a show from the rear (a la Marilyn Monroe in Seven Year Itch scene).
|by Anonymous||reply 79||Last Thursday at 9:31 AM|
Dress was too short and of flowing material with the latter doing what it does when it catches a breeze.
|by Anonymous||reply 80||Last Thursday at 9:31 AM|
She was just entertaining the soldiers, R79. Nothing wrong with that.
I guess the hem of the dress should be weighted.
|by Anonymous||reply 81||Last Thursday at 9:34 AM|
To be fair plenty of other British women and girls had issues with skirts and wind.
|by Anonymous||reply 82||Last Thursday at 9:35 AM|
This little layered dusty old mess on CPB make me howl when I first saw it. Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall arrives at the Hofburg Palace for a State Dinner on April 5, 2017 in Vienna, Austria. Looks like a very old duster she dug up from Wiltshire farm attic and had modified for Austrian visit. Poorly fitted, but the worst offence are the layers which look like granny's old faded lamp coverings accumulated over a century. Does nothing except draw attention to perpetually chronic saggy royal hooters.
|by Anonymous||reply 83||Last Thursday at 9:35 AM|
Another thing; Duchess of Cambridge needs to do something with that long hair. She isn't a school girl any longer nor even a young woman; but yet HRH constantly is either touching, playing with, arranging, or trying to control her long hair.
|by Anonymous||reply 84||Last Thursday at 9:37 AM|
"Princess Diana was a total frump when Charles married her"
To whom are you referring?
There never was any such person as "Princess Diana". Despite what current and previous Earl Spencer may think they are not British royalty.
Lady Diana Spencer was daughter of a peer prior to her marriage. Afterwards she became H.R.H the Princess of Wales, then busted down to "Diana, Princess of Wales after her divorce.
|by Anonymous||reply 85||Last Thursday at 9:42 AM|
[quote]Princess Diana was a total frump when Charles married her, and she stayed that way till after William's birth.
She was a Sloane Ranger, basically the British version of a preppy.
|by Anonymous||reply 86||Last Thursday at 9:47 AM|
Queen Mathilde of Belgium often wears matching masks with her outfits but this printed one is a fail.
|by Anonymous||reply 87||Last Thursday at 9:50 AM|
As stated previously, one must make allowances for 1980's fashions. It wasn't just royal ladies (British or otherwise) but most around world were subjected to a decade of some what dubious fashion designs.
Proof of this is in how much of fashion from that era just isn't wearable today.
Few years ago spent a rainy Sunday afternoon helping a trannie friend clear out her closets. Vast amounts of jackets, blouses, dresses, gowns, etc... from 1980's all simply had to go. Shoulder pads alone often made things seem so dated and there just wasn't anyway to change things.
|by Anonymous||reply 88||Last Thursday at 9:50 AM|
There are no words to describe the mess that is Queen Margrethe of Denmark.
|by Anonymous||reply 89||Last Thursday at 9:52 AM|
Lady Diana was truly a Sloane Ranger, as befitting her rank and set she ran around with at the time.
|by Anonymous||reply 90||Last Thursday at 9:53 AM|
The Danish Queen sometimes looks like a bag lady.
|by Anonymous||reply 91||Last Thursday at 9:54 AM|
I have a theory about the long hair on Kate, r84. Trying to emulate the aristocratic "country set" look in Norfolk like Rose Hanbury. Kate wears clothes way too young for her. She could take a few tips from Charlene of Monaco but no she's still into the frills, high collars, florals, long skirts, ....so .....country. Some day, she'll cut it off, the hair, but she's just not ready to give up her Young Innocent Girl look just yet.
|by Anonymous||reply 92||Last Thursday at 9:55 AM|
Like Diana, Kate Middleton also seems totally ignorant about wearing a slip under sheer frocks or skirts that don't have linings.
One has to wonder if there is a shortage of experienced and well trained lady's maids in royal households nowadays. That or maybe not enough mirrors......
|by Anonymous||reply 93||Last Thursday at 9:57 AM|
Here's Charlene looking sophisticated in an egg blue silk tailored outfit. Stunning. Notice Kate keeping her eyes firmly fixed on Wills and Charlene chatting....lol Not a ME! fan but honestly, Kate needs to ditch the country look when in London and look more "continental."
|by Anonymous||reply 94||Last Thursday at 9:58 AM|
Sophie Wessex in a jumpsuit at Ascot was a big failure.
|by Anonymous||reply 95||Last Thursday at 10:00 AM|
She looks like she’s pooping fabric, R24
|by Anonymous||reply 96||Last Thursday at 10:01 AM|
Full marks to Fergs for matching undies anyway.
|by Anonymous||reply 97||Last Thursday at 10:01 AM|
R93, note that Kate’s white lace dress does have a lining but when the sun shines through, it’s still sheer. The problem with a slip is that it doesn’t move with the dress. If she bends down from the waist, eg to accept a bouquet of flowers from a child, the dress would raise up in back but the slip would remain, showing an unflattering several inches of nylon tricot.
|by Anonymous||reply 99||Last Thursday at 10:04 AM|
Swipe for Maxima's wedding guest outfits.
|by Anonymous||reply 100||Last Thursday at 10:05 AM|
One suspects dss of Cambridge will remain with her current look until the duke inherits either Wales or the throne. Then either as new princess of Wales or queen Kate Middleton will grow up and sort herself out fashion wise with a nod towards a more conservative look. It simply will not do for a queen consort or Princess of Wales to have her skirts flapping away in the wind.
|by Anonymous||reply 101||Last Thursday at 10:05 AM|
If you're going to go "native" in India, at least get your feet fixed. Or wear socks.
|by Anonymous||reply 102||Last Thursday at 10:06 AM|
Camilla and (dead) Duchess of Alba. Are good support bras that hard to find??
|by Anonymous||reply 103||Last Thursday at 10:09 AM|
On the occasion of Beatrice's 18th birthday, or Halloween.
|by Anonymous||reply 104||Last Thursday at 10:13 AM|
R102, the hand looks more puffy than the foot. What the hell is going on with Prince Charles? Why is he so puffy-looking all the time?
|by Anonymous||reply 105||Last Thursday at 10:15 AM|
Disagree about Kate Middleton's hair. It still looks great to me and age-appropriate. It's one of her best features and, IMO, she should wear it long as long as possible (no pun intended).
The flying-up dress / skirt. I think Kate knew that would happen. Despite being almost anorexically thin, she has a great lower-half of her body, still rounded. Must be kind of a bummer to have a great, young body and not be able to show it off like a normal woman.
|by Anonymous||reply 106||Last Thursday at 10:19 AM|
While she's had her share of misses, Princess Michael of Kent otherwise nearly always is spot on fashion wise.
There is something to be said for being born and raised outside the damp chilly climate of Britain. One's first thought when dressing isn't always how to keep warm......
|by Anonymous||reply 107||Last Thursday at 10:19 AM|
That one isn't that bad r108. The silver Wonder Woman belt is a bit much, but otherwise she looks fine.
|by Anonymous||reply 110||Last Thursday at 10:25 AM|
IMO, Princess Diana didn't dress horribly, but I didn't really like her style. Same with Jackie O. Mary Tyler Moore (from the show) also comes to mind as someone who looks put-together but you don't really like their style.
|by Anonymous||reply 111||Last Thursday at 10:25 AM|
Where is the waistline here? It's distorting her proportions.
|by Anonymous||reply 112||Last Thursday at 10:25 AM|
In spite of everything, I can't help but like it.
|by Anonymous||reply 113||Last Thursday at 10:27 AM|
Can we just agree to forget the 80s ever existed fashion-wise?
|by Anonymous||reply 116||Last Thursday at 10:43 AM|
R97, that's not underwear.
That's plaited hairpin. A tight weave. Waterproof.
|by Anonymous||reply 117||Last Thursday at 10:48 AM|
I love Diana’s dress at R114.
What you bitches consider her “frumpy” era was my favorite. All the darling little hats and flowing fabric suited her type better than the killer Dynasty suits that followed.
|by Anonymous||reply 119||Last Thursday at 10:58 AM|
I don't mind Diana's Sloane Ranger looks at R90. I just don't like the frilly, ruffled, unsophisticated Romantic dresses like R108 and R114 which she wore early in her marriage.
|by Anonymous||reply 120||Last Thursday at 11:07 AM|
Kate is not "anorexically thin". She has always, as has her sister, been athletic and toned. Naturally, a woman nearly forty and a girl of 25 have different levels of smoothness in the face, but Kate has worked well with the figure she has. It has some great points (slim hips, flat backside, great legs, a nice up top, and for a girl her height, small feet) and some disadvantages (primarily a longer torso that shortens her legs). She looks good in a bikini, good in evening gowns, good in sharp tailoring, good in short flirty skirts and long skirts, and good in coatdresses. She doesn't look good in fussy and over decorated, even with her height.
Some women really are born to slenderness, just the way some women can never pull it off (Fergie and her daughters are the poster illustrations of women just NOT born to slenderness).
When you want to look at someone clearly in the grip of an eating disorder, you have to look at those ghastly photos of Diana with her cheekbones sunken in and her shoulder blades protruding. There's a photo of her somewhere in a strapless gown with a taffeta plaid skirt and ruffled black satin or velvet top that is horrifying in what it said about her mental state. You can't miss it.
Kate does not now nor has she ever looked like that.
|by Anonymous||reply 121||Last Thursday at 11:13 AM|
They're going to a Halloween party, right?
|by Anonymous||reply 122||Last Thursday at 11:18 AM|
OMG, what in the fuck is that at R2?
|by Anonymous||reply 123||Last Thursday at 11:22 AM|
R123, maybe Liz is going to a Christmas party and she's trying to upstage the Christmas tree.
|by Anonymous||reply 124||Last Thursday at 11:25 AM|
Was QEII considered attractive when young? She looks alright in some pics but in others not so much. It must be hard to be young and forced to dress like a frump and matron before you are 30.
|by Anonymous||reply 126||Last Thursday at 11:51 AM|
"It looked like something an eight year old girl would have designed for herself."
Diane supposedly told the designers that she wanted a "fairy princess" wedding gown. So they gave her one: an 80s "fairy princess" gown, which meant that it had too much of everything: silk, taffeta, lace, pearls, sequins, and a fucking twenty-five foot train. Diana looked weighted down under the tons of fabric. The gown was the epitome of 80s excess and it was hideously overdone. But it's supposedly "Iconic" and a classic wedding dress. She would have looked so much better in something more simpler and elegant. Poor Diana. On her wedding day she spilled perfume on her wedding gown, staining it. Her gown and train were noticeably wrinkled because all that fabric was stuffed into a small carriage.She had a massive headache the entire day because of her heavy tiara. And she flubbed her wedding vows, calling her Prince "Philip Charles” Arthur George." Maybe somebody up there was trying to tell her something by all those mishaps. Something seemed to be warning her that her marriage was a big mistake.
|by Anonymous||reply 127||Last Thursday at 11:53 AM|
r93 I think everyone, including the York girl, looked good that day in your video. I loved the lace dress on Kate. Her body can work is the clothes are fitted properly. From head to toe, it was a win. The Queen's dress, under the coat, was a minor drab-looking think, but she's 300 years old so I'll cut her a break. Camilla also looked good, but she perks up when she's around horses.
Really fun seeing the Queen interact. I know they say that Kate is as dull as a broken lightbulb and only offers superficial comments about nothing. I wonder if the Queen is a good conversationalist and if she's ever just left alone in a room. Michelle Obama said that during their first trip to BP, she found herself off to a corner and the Queen happens to be in the area. They had a light-hearted chat about wearing shoes at these events where your standing for long periods of time. I wonder how often the Queen may not be the center of attention outside of formal events.
|by Anonymous||reply 128||Last Thursday at 12:15 PM|
r94 as head of a ruling Principality, would Charles and William (and everyone else) bow to the Prince of Monaco? I know they have a higher rank as rulers of a sovereign nation, but since they aren't kings, do they receive a bow?
|by Anonymous||reply 129||Last Thursday at 12:18 PM|
R13 wins. In that outfit, she looks like the love child of Stan Laurel and Ronald McDonald.
|by Anonymous||reply 130||Last Thursday at 12:19 PM|
Duchess of Kent is seriously the most beautiful, or formerly beautiful, woman to join that family. Shame she's a racist bitch.
|by Anonymous||reply 131||Last Thursday at 12:21 PM|
Kate's wedding dress was underwhelming. A boring choice.
Isn't Charlene that poor thing that was basically kidnapped at the airport trying to get out of Monaco? Seems like it was big stinko at the time that was hushed up quickly.
|by Anonymous||reply 132||Last Thursday at 12:23 PM|
She’s also not the Duchess of Kent, R131.
|by Anonymous||reply 133||Last Thursday at 12:23 PM|
Whoever the fuck she is, she was a beauty. If she was nicer the family might have given her a higher profile and I'd know her proper title. Something with a G, correct?
|by Anonymous||reply 134||Last Thursday at 12:25 PM|
I happen to like the dress. I’ve seen way, way worse in this thread.
|by Anonymous||reply 135||Last Thursday at 12:25 PM|
Aren’t facinators supposed to be outrageous and ornamental? Because if they are, Bea’s is perfectly fine. I like the 3-D effect and sculptural quality,
|by Anonymous||reply 137||Last Thursday at 12:29 PM|
I'm surprised at the comments about Kate dressing too young for her age. To me, her look is often quite mother-of-the-bride.
|by Anonymous||reply 138||Last Thursday at 12:41 PM|
I also think she looks very matronly r138
|by Anonymous||reply 139||Last Thursday at 12:45 PM|
The curse of royalty is having to dress so conservatively and old for your age. Never being allowed to wear fun stuff. I mean can you see a royal dressing like Carrie Bradshaw?
|by Anonymous||reply 140||Last Thursday at 12:46 PM|
Why do they never think to ball up a pair of socks and press/steam the darts into submission? Meghan Markle has had the same problem a few times.
|by Anonymous||reply 142||Last Thursday at 12:55 PM|
OP’s choice reminds me of this in nature:
|by Anonymous||reply 143||Last Thursday at 12:59 PM|
I love it when couples dress alike, R125.
|by Anonymous||reply 144||Last Thursday at 1:00 PM|
R103 I think that such wealthy and powerful women letting their boobs be all saggy and hang out might be a dominance display. “ I’m so rich I can afford to be comfortable; the rest of you will have to just deal with it“ seems to be the unspoken message.
|by Anonymous||reply 145||Last Thursday at 1:00 PM|
Did she just get out of prison?
|by Anonymous||reply 146||Last Thursday at 1:00 PM|
r11 gets my vote. I kind of like the Big Bird dress.
|by Anonymous||reply 147||Last Thursday at 1:01 PM|
^^^ Fergie doesn't look bad, except for the hat.
|by Anonymous||reply 148||Last Thursday at 1:02 PM|
Fergie at R146 doesn't look bad.
|by Anonymous||reply 149||Last Thursday at 1:02 PM|
Isn’t r11’s dress from Pretty in Pink and r12’s from the Wizard of Oz?
|by Anonymous||reply 151||Last Thursday at 1:12 PM|
This is the most daring gown I've seen Liz wear. Not bad.
|by Anonymous||reply 152||Last Thursday at 1:14 PM|
I'm sure the pedants will correct me, but I think Zara Tindall deserves a place in this thread.
|by Anonymous||reply 153||Last Thursday at 1:16 PM|
"Kate's wedding dress was underwhelming. A boring choice."
Not really. It was perfect and suitable. Compare it to Diana's dress, which was overdone. Compare it to Meghan Markle's, which which was underdone. Kate got it exactly right.
|by Anonymous||reply 156||Last Thursday at 1:21 PM|
Di's wedding dress was beyond awful.
About 8 sizes too big with granny sleeves, the whole god awful outfit seemed to be swallowing her alive.
|by Anonymous||reply 157||Last Thursday at 1:21 PM|
I thought Meghan's wedding dress was more elegant than Kate's.
|by Anonymous||reply 158||Last Thursday at 1:23 PM|
Kate’s wedding gown was a safe choice but the pointy bust darts were terrible, that’s all anyone could see. Compare that with the white lace dress (posted above in the no-slip discussion) (at least I think that was in this thread) she wore at Ascot. Another McQueen but they got that bodice and waist absolutely *perfect*.
|by Anonymous||reply 159||Last Thursday at 1:27 PM|
To each his own R156. I found it boring. Not ugly per se just dull.
|by Anonymous||reply 160||Last Thursday at 1:31 PM|
What are you bitches talking about? I'm beautiful.
|by Anonymous||reply 161||Last Thursday at 1:34 PM|
Even skiing, Fergie can look horrible.
|by Anonymous||reply 162||Last Thursday at 1:34 PM|
R92 - Kate has been wearing her hair long since her midteens. She isn't "copying" anyone, her long, thick, wavy, glossy hair has been a trademark since she was a young woman - before she started dating William. Suggest you google some photos of her in school.
If anyone is copying anyone, it's Rose Hanbury copying Kate.
|by Anonymous||reply 163||Last Thursday at 1:36 PM|
Oh dear. Very amateurish.
|by Anonymous||reply 164||Last Thursday at 1:37 PM|
Princess Mabel's wedding dress, from her wedding to the late Prince Friso. The further down the dress, the larger the bows get; by the end of the train, they're the size of pillows. Maybe "worst" isn't the right word here. It's so OTT that it's a work of art.
|by Anonymous||reply 165||Last Thursday at 1:38 PM|
R131 - You mean Princess Michael of Kent. The Duchess of Kent is married to the Duke of Kent. Princess Michael is married to the Duke's younger brother.
And with those elephantine ankles, I would hardly call her beautiful. In fact, the actual Duchess of Kent, the former Katharine Worsley, was much prettier, a very English delicate blue-eyed blonde.
|by Anonymous||reply 166||Last Thursday at 1:38 PM|
I prefer Princess Grace's wedding dress to Kate's. More modest for a church ceremony. I have nothing against small chests on women, but Kate's dress made her look flat-chested in a bad way.
|by Anonymous||reply 167||Last Thursday at 1:38 PM|
Might be sacrilege, but I think Grace's dress is overrated. It's by no means ugly, but I find it a bit "stiff", if that's the right word. I think the reason it's so popular is that Grace herself was so beautiful that she elevated the dress.
|by Anonymous||reply 168||Last Thursday at 1:42 PM|
Grace Kelly's dress was amazing and totally iconic. No one's has compared with it, ever. It was designed and done by MGM's Helen Rose and took six weeks and hundreds of seamstresses to make. It was MGM's wedding gift to the bride.
I liked Kate's wedding dress very much except for the much-remarked upon darts. And the thing is, she isn't flat-chested: she has a nice medium sized bosom. Perhaps they were afraid of jiggling. But I loved everything else.
Meghan's dress was boring and poorly tailored. It didn't even seem to fit properly. I heard that she wanted to go sleeveless but was told No Fucking Way and that sleeves were added on after ward. But it was so . . . nulle, as the French say. And that endless veil including over the face on a 36 year old d-list divorced actress!
If you want to see that sort of gown done correctly, look at Maxima's (Valentino, it was gorgeous and simple and fitted within an inch of its life) and a very similar type dress designed and made by the bride, Princess Angela of Lichtenstein.
Two classy examples of what Meghan and Givenchy got so wrong.
|by Anonymous||reply 169||Last Thursday at 1:44 PM|
R168 - Must disagree. The dress was made for a huge Catholic cathedral ceremony and I think the silk taffeta skirt and cummerbund gave the gown a luxurious yet decorous look, and the cummberbund accentuated Grace's tiny waist and delicacy. It was also very 1950s. It was perfect on her.
|by Anonymous||reply 170||Last Thursday at 1:47 PM|
I also prefer the way that Grace's skirt area ballooned out under the waistband, vs. Kate's more A-line skirt area.
|by Anonymous||reply 171||Last Thursday at 1:50 PM|
At R164, that dress makes her look like little orphan Annie.
|by Anonymous||reply 172||Last Thursday at 1:53 PM|
I’m a big fan of Maxima - she wears practically all of the Royal jewels when she goes out. Looks fantastic.
Kate got the memo - everything she wears is safe and correct. You really can’t complain except that it’s so boring.
|by Anonymous||reply 173||Last Thursday at 2:45 PM|
If I were Kate I'd at least be a bit adventurous. They are not going to kick you out of the family so there is no harm in being a bit fun. She will be queen no matter what.
|by Anonymous||reply 174||Last Thursday at 2:47 PM|
No, no, no. Too matronly.
|by Anonymous||reply 175||Last Thursday at 3:02 PM|
Meghan Markle's wedding dress looked like it was made out of bed sheets. And she wanted to wear a showy emerald tiara with the thing. What execrable taste.
|by Anonymous||reply 176||Last Thursday at 3:14 PM|
I had to google the MM dress. It was very plain but hardly ugly. Very modern looking and I dont think the headpiece was all that showy. If anything she could have worn something much showier.
|by Anonymous||reply 177||Last Thursday at 3:20 PM|
Kate's dress at r175 looks like something Diana would have worn in the early years of her marriage.
|by Anonymous||reply 178||Last Thursday at 3:26 PM|
This dress below falls into the 'worst ever worn' category because of the drama it created. For an event in the Solomon Islands, the plan was for William to wear a local shirt which was to be left in his room by the welcoming committee. Kate was going to wear her own dress.
When it was time to get dressed, the shirt was there as well as a dress. With the members of their staff all assuming someone else had changed the plans, they both got dressed in the clothes left for them and off they went.
One problem: the dress was from the Cook Islands — 4,500 km away — and had nothing to do with the Solomon Islands. It was the same as wearing a maple leaf to meet people in New Zealand or a silver fern in Canada.
It turned out that the member of the welcoming committee charged with leaving the shirt and other official gifts had also smuggled in a few of her own, leaving the dress right next to the shirt.
The funniest thing was when the government of the Solomon Islands issued a statement blaming the poor woman, by name, for the whole thing. And they didn't even bother trying to be diplomatic. It was more like, 'We're disgusted by what happened. This was 100% Shitty Little Anne's fault'.
|by Anonymous||reply 179||Last Thursday at 3:31 PM|
I like Kate’s dress at R38; and the link to some of Maxima’s dresses shows some very nice gowns.
I love Helen Rose!
|by Anonymous||reply 180||Last Thursday at 3:38 PM|
R104 And don't forget Andy's former BFF was there, with his gal pal Ghislaine. Brought even more glamour to the event.
|by Anonymous||reply 181||Last Thursday at 3:40 PM|
R175 - You do know that that under that "matronly" blue lacy thing Kate wore to Ascot last year, in some photos it became clear that she was wearing a most unmatronly black g-string?
|by Anonymous||reply 182||Last Thursday at 4:01 PM|
The Duchess of Alba wedding dress:
|by Anonymous||reply 183||Last Thursday at 4:05 PM|
All that material...and wrinkled, no less! It was like the designer just said "throw more fabric on. No, more fabric...more...MORE FABRIC!!!"
Makes Dorothy Zbornak's wedding gown look chic by comparison.
|by Anonymous||reply 184||Last Thursday at 4:08 PM|
The Duchess in her pretty bikini:
|by Anonymous||reply 185||Last Thursday at 4:09 PM|
Re: Meghan's wedding gown - I didn't really mind that it was loose-fitting. Brides don't have to wear tight dresses. The problem that it was just so boring. Obviously the difference between "elegantly minimalist" and "boring" is in the eye of the beholder, but I'd put Carolyn Bessette's wedding dress in the former category and Meghan's in the latter.
|by Anonymous||reply 186||Last Thursday at 4:12 PM|
A fashion miss here for Kate. A previous poster was erroneous in saying that Kate's breasts were larger. As this shows, she is a solid A cup. When you are engaging in near-extreme dieting, it's hard to keep that fat on!
She is starting to get Angelina arms/hands.
|by Anonymous||reply 187||Last Thursday at 4:16 PM|
Carolyn’s was a boring slip!
|by Anonymous||reply 188||Last Thursday at 4:17 PM|
Carolyn was American "royalty," but, yes, I thought her dress was boring.
|by Anonymous||reply 189||Last Thursday at 4:21 PM|
The Duchess of Alba's husband at R185 looks like Steven Spielberg.
|by Anonymous||reply 190||Last Thursday at 4:26 PM|
Meghan Markle should not have had a huge formal royal wedding at ALL. She was a divorcee, for God's sake. But she wanted the whole bridal bit, the white gown, the tiara, the long veil, as if she were a young, first time bride. She wanted her day of glory. How gross and unseemly.
|by Anonymous||reply 191||Last Thursday at 4:30 PM|
No, R182, I did not know that but the overall effect is too old fashioned and prim and proper. It must be difficult to come up with a flattering outfit given all the conservative rules that members of the royal family must follow but she still could have done better than that. Not horrendous but a definite fail.
|by Anonymous||reply 192||Last Thursday at 4:31 PM|
Caroline Kennedy's wedding dress. How times have changed. Now all brides want low cut strapless dresses regardless if they have the figure to pull it off.
|by Anonymous||reply 193||Last Thursday at 4:36 PM|
Not dressed conservatively here. Don't care for it.
|by Anonymous||reply 194||Last Thursday at 4:39 PM|
I don't understand- can't most of these Royals afford a stylist? At least the more prominent ones. I understand it's an additional expense, but when you're both in the Public Eye all the time AND representing the Heritage of the Nation, I don't think it's an unreasonable expense. In addition, I understand the importance of the Crown to support National designers and trade, but good- god, some of these nations are quite small and they can't all have a plethora of quite talented designers. I don't see anything wrong with purchasing an outfit from a couture house in France once-in-a- while- especially if it were for an important event and not *astronomically* priced.
|by Anonymous||reply 195||Last Thursday at 4:46 PM|
[quote] Meghan Markle should not have had a huge formal royal wedding at ALL. She was a divorcee, for God's sake. But she wanted the whole bridal bit, the white gown, the tiara, the long veil, as if she were a young, first time bride. She wanted her day of glory. How gross and unseemly.
This was Harry's first wedding. Harry was not divorced.
|by Anonymous||reply 196||Last Thursday at 4:46 PM|
R191. Yes, it is atrocious for a divorced woman to wear white at a second wedding.
Here is that hussy Princess Anne, a divorcee, daring to wear WHITE at her SECOND wedding and how could she hold flowers, which symbolize virginity.
|by Anonymous||reply 197||Last Thursday at 4:50 PM|
Here is a link for Hussy Anne in white at her SECOND wedding.
|by Anonymous||reply 198||Last Thursday at 4:51 PM|
I didn't know Anne got married in a Mormon church. Looks like Elaine Benes as well.
|by Anonymous||reply 199||Last Thursday at 4:55 PM|
Yes, Anne would fit in nicely in a LDS polygamous community. And they tend to have horses in these communities.
|by Anonymous||reply 200||Last Thursday at 5:00 PM|
I heard Anne was a hussy, though.
|by Anonymous||reply 201||Last Thursday at 5:03 PM|
Anne sewed this dress herself.
|by Anonymous||reply 202||Last Thursday at 5:10 PM|
R93, maybe William gets off on knowing the royal cooch might potentially be blasted into public view. He might be encouraging Kate to wear those revealing dresses, because he knows there is a possibility of the exposure of Her Royal haunches.
Remember, these guys were all raised by nannies. They must have loads of psychological issues with women.
|by Anonymous||reply 203||Last Thursday at 5:35 PM|
"Here is that hussy Princess Anne, a divorcee, daring to wear WHITE at her SECOND wedding and how could she hold flowers, which symbolize virginity."
Her wedding outfit was CREAM you silly twat, not virginal white. Anne's second wedding was VERY understated, as was her wedding outfit, not the blowout that greedy Meghan's was. She was described thus:
"As a second time bride, Anne chose a cream suit with a high necked jacket over a knee length dress. Her only accessories were a small spray of blossoms worn in her hair and a simple bouquet of white heather. With the world’s media descending on Crathie to catch a glimpse of the House of Windsor at its lowest ebb, Anne opted for discretion."
|by Anonymous||reply 204||Last Thursday at 5:42 PM|
Whoever said upthread that Kate should cut her gorgeous hair is nuts. It’s shiny and healthy and suits her. I can’t imagine her with a bob (which it would end up being.) It would make her look like a frau.
|by Anonymous||reply 205||Last Thursday at 5:45 PM|
R27 it looks like our girl Bea is being held-up by a stanchion up her ass.
|by Anonymous||reply 206||Last Thursday at 5:58 PM|
r193 I'd say Kennedy's dress was low class looking. I'd expect an Amish girl to wear something so ugly. Straps or strapless is fine. It all depends on the style. We can't sit on DL wringing our hands at religion, then get upset if the confining rules from sid religions are thrown out the door. Brides covered up because they'd go to a house of worship. Royal brides used to have a party of courtiers, at least in France, outside their bedroom door to make sure the poor girl got fucked.
Times are changing. As long as tits aren't hanging out like it's a cow farm, then most brides are alright. Don't forget their parents and grandparents are present. Most bides are dressing like "sluts".
|by Anonymous||reply 207||Last Thursday at 6:07 PM|
r204 Meghan had a normal royal wedding. Meghan being black and American brought positive light (until her family acted out) to the royal family. They wanted that wedding just as much as she wanted that wedding. The media and her family were hell-bent on destroying her day. Stop with this second marriage bullshit. Most of the royal marriages under the Queen's control were failures. The next Queen will be a divorce that harassed the Duke of Cambridge's mother. No way they could force Meghan to have some back from Princess Beatrice country wedding when Americans any many people of colors within the Common Wealth were interested ins seeing.
Get your hateful head out of your ass and remember that this family is playing politics. No matter who Harry married, he was going to ensure that his bride received her proper wedding given his former senior royal status.
|by Anonymous||reply 208||Last Thursday at 6:14 PM|
My first partner, a fashion designer, told me that the first strapless gowns were held up with spit and a prayer. By the 1950s, they were so heavily boned and deeply constructed they would stand up by themselves if sat on the floor.
|by Anonymous||reply 209||Last Thursday at 6:16 PM|
The pioneer of the strapless gown was none other than our very own...Brenda Frazier!
|by Anonymous||reply 210||Last Thursday at 6:23 PM|
I thought Jackie Kennedy's wedding dress was beautiful but she didn't like it. She wanted something more "modern" but she acquiesced to her future husband's (or maybe her future husband's father) desire for something more traditional. The dress, which is considered one of the most famous and iconic wedding dresses ever created, was designed by and African American designer name Ann Lowe. Lowe worked her ass off to create a gorgeous wedding dress. But A flood in Lowe's Lexington Avenue workshop 10 days before the wedding ruined the bride's gown and nine of the bridal-party's dresses. The designer and her staff worked through eight days (the original time was eight weeks) to reconstruct the gowns and get them delivered on time. Instead of an estimated $700 profit, Lowe lost $2,200 on the project. Poor woman, she really got stiffed. Snotty Jackie never appreciated her work. When asked who made her dress, Jacqueline Kennedy dismissively said it was made by a "colored woman."
|by Anonymous||reply 211||Last Thursday at 6:31 PM|
[quote]R27 it looks like our girl Bea is being held-up by a stanchion up her ass.
Haha. Yes, it is an unfortunate angle in that sense but it does show the dress in all its glorious awfulness.
|by Anonymous||reply 212||Last Thursday at 7:01 PM|
R207, I agree that Caroline's dress is too cutesy and unsophisticated, though the church probably had a rule about women covering their shoulders.
Then again, I disagree that the current trend for strapless wedding dresses is for everyone.
|by Anonymous||reply 213||Last Thursday at 7:10 PM|
Oops, silly me. That's obviously not a strapless dress. I meant low cut.
|by Anonymous||reply 214||Last Thursday at 7:11 PM|
[quote] Around 1985, though, she woke up, went properly blonde, got a good stylist and after that she is rarely seen in a fashion disaster.
And yet, in the posts above you, people have posted photos of her in MULTIPLE fashion disasters since 1985. Did you not see them?
I'm always fascinated by posters like this. They never even bother reading what preceded them on the thread because they're in such a huge rush to act like an expert.
|by Anonymous||reply 215||Last Thursday at 7:21 PM|
"Meghan Markle should not have had a huge formal royal wedding at ALL. She was a divorcee, for God's sake. But she wanted the whole bridal bit, the white gown, the tiara, the long veil, as if she were a young, first time bride. She wanted her day of glory. How gross and unseemly."
It's 1952 anymore. What a weird reason to hate her.
"Whoever said upthread that Kate should cut her gorgeous hair is nuts. It’s shiny and healthy and suits her. I can’t imagine her with a bob (which it would end up being.) It would make her look like a frau."
She already looks like a frau. A frau with boring hair.
|by Anonymous||reply 216||Last Thursday at 7:57 PM|
Princess Margaret wasn't rocking this look
|by Anonymous||reply 217||Last Thursday at 8:06 PM|
[quote]Meghan Markle should not have had a huge formal royal wedding at ALL. She was a divorcee, for God's sake. But she wanted the whole bridal bit, the white gown, the tiara, the long veil, as if she were a young, first time bride. She wanted her day of glory. How gross and unseemly.
You sound like some Victorian maiden aunt. Hopefully, you are being sarcastic.
|by Anonymous||reply 218||Last Thursday at 8:40 PM|
[quote]Meghan Markle should not have had a huge formal royal wedding at ALL. She was a divorcee, for God's sake. But she wanted the whole bridal bit, the white gown, the tiara, the long veil, as if she were a young, first time bride. She wanted her day of glory. How gross and unseemly.
You sound like some Victorian maiden aunt. Hopefully, you are being sarcastic.
|by Anonymous||reply 219||Last Thursday at 8:40 PM|
The Duchess of Kent at Prince Harry's wedding.
Another ghastly Erdem outfit, and those trainers would seem an unfortunate choice But we can forgive it all as the duchess is going on...
|by Anonymous||reply 220||Last Friday at 12:00 AM|
Duchess of Kent at her wedding day....
|by Anonymous||reply 221||Last Friday at 12:01 AM|
Jacqueline Bouvier had just returned from France and wanted something simple, elegant and French for her wedding gown. Grasping and climbing Jack Kennedy, Sr. who was footing bill for much of the wedding and thus was in charge would hear none of it....
Anne Lowe was not unknown to the Bouvier or many other white women of upper classes. She supplied them with dressmaker suits, gowns and other creations of French couture quality for very little money. They took horrible advantage of the "coloured dressmaker" in way such well off white women did and still do; by haggling down Ms. Lowe's prices and or otherwise threatening to go elsewhere (and tell their friends to do same), if she didn't play ball.
In terms of equality well off Protestant/WASP women often treated dressmakers who were Italian, Jewish and any other non-white nationality or race (as they saw things) with same treatment.
As such Anne Lowe knew who Miss. J. Kennedy was and so forth. There is some dispute as to whether or not Jackie Bouvier actually referred to Anne Lowe as "some coloured dressmaker". Also the bride to be had no idea until much later on about the disaster with her wedding gown and bridesmaids dresses.
Dresses were delivered by Ms. Lowe personally to Newport, RI, and at first the lady was told to go to service door; AL shot back if she and her gowns couldn't enter via front door she and they were going back to New York City. That was last thing Anne Lowe had from her clients until bills were settled.
Years later when Mrs. Kennedy was now no longer first lady and a widow she heard that Anne Lowe was deep in debt and being hounded by IRS. Someone paid off Ms. Lowes tax debts, and at least Ms. Lowe suspects it was JBK.
|by Anonymous||reply 223||Last Friday at 2:12 AM|
Brides wearing white was a tradition that started with Queen Victoria so it’s not that old. Virginal brides wearing a veil over their faces is much older and exists in different cultures. MM’s veil was OTT, especially paired with a minimalist gown that had a sweep train.
|by Anonymous||reply 224||Last Friday at 4:43 AM|
I love Dutch Queen Maxima's wedding dress. Here is a video.
|by Anonymous||reply 225||Last Friday at 5:05 AM|
R225 Yes, her dress is very lovely and chic. The style is quite similar to MM but while Maxima hits it out of the park, MM misses by a mile. The fabric and fit, as well as some design details, make Maxima’s so perfect. I’m sure the fabric of MM gown was quite luxe up close, but in all the photos and videos I’ve seen, it looks like thick, cheap double-knit. Far too heavy for a late spring wedding. I won’t go into the fit of MM’s gown since it’s been discussed endlessly. Maxima’s veil is beautiful as is MM’s, but MM’s is far, far too long. Apparently even HM questioned the Markle veil.
|by Anonymous||reply 226||Last Friday at 5:45 AM|
I don't think it really matters that Meghan wore white. As a previous poster mentioned, it was actually Harry's great-great-great-great-great granny Queen Victoria who started the trend for white wedding dresses. It had nothing to do with virginity - she chose white because it complemented the lace of her dress.
I do think it's a bit much when divorcees have big white weddings. Second weddings can be a bit awkward for the guests if they've already heard at least one party make those "lifelong" vows to someone else. But in fairness, it was Harry's first wedding. If it were the other way around, I doubt anyone would have expected Meghan to have a small wedding because Harry was divorced.
|by Anonymous||reply 227||Last Friday at 6:20 AM|
Yes, but the hoopla around the wedding is mainly focused on the bride...gown, veil, maids dresses, bouquet. The groom, divorced or not, just stands at the altar.
|by Anonymous||reply 228||Last Friday at 6:40 AM|
LOL, the MM haters are fucking hilarious. They will pick her apart for any transgression. The veil was fine. The dress was so simple it needed that OTT.
|by Anonymous||reply 229||Last Friday at 7:16 AM|
R92 Rose looks like a buck-toothed hag with frizzy, unstyled, bad hair next to Kate.
|by Anonymous||reply 231||Last Friday at 9:26 AM|
Halloween costumes don't count. It's when someone is trying to look fashionable and fails miserably.
|by Anonymous||reply 233||Last Friday at 10:14 AM|
Fascinator? Portable satellite dish?
|by Anonymous||reply 234||Last Friday at 10:23 AM|
[R21] The sapphire brooch alone makes her the best-dressed in that pic IMO.
|by Anonymous||reply 235||Last Friday at 11:37 AM|
"Someone paid off Ms. Lowes tax debts, and at least Ms. Lowe suspects it was JBK."
Jackie Kennedy paid off Lowe's tax debts?! HAH! Sounds like total bullshit to me.
|by Anonymous||reply 236||Last Friday at 11:56 AM|
"It's 1952 anymore. What a weird reason to hate her."
I don't waste energy hating vapid celebrities. But Markle's behavior was indicative of her ego and greed. She wanted the huge wedding bash and got it, except for the emerald tiara she coveted. She could have gone for something much less overblown but that's just not her style. Tacky, I would call her.
|by Anonymous||reply 237||Last Friday at 12:06 PM|
Let it go r237. You didn't have to watch and it brought in tourist dollars. The Royal family shines at weddings. Even the sun was out in full force. You really need to get a life outside of bashing some woman's wedding, that you didn't even pay for.
|by Anonymous||reply 238||Last Friday at 12:08 PM|
"You really need to get a life outside of bashing some woman's wedding, that you didn't even pay for."
You really need to get a life outside of defending some celebrity that you don't even know. By the way, she's a public figure, and fair game for comment, even if it does tear your heart to hear any criticism of her.
|by Anonymous||reply 239||Last Friday at 1:00 PM|
R229, R230 It really is not about “hating” on MM. This is a thread about Royal fashion fails, and much of her bridal ensemble, IMO, was a fail. Was it a disaster? No, of course not, but it was very underwhelming and quite disappointing. However, there are aspects of her wedding attire that are lovely - her bouquet was beautiful and perfect; the tiara was also a perfect highlight. (Of course, we now know this particular tiara was not her choice.) I also love her engagement ring. How refreshing to see a beautiful and fairly modest ring instead of an OTT, ginormous rock. I thought her hair and makeup were fine, despite many opinions to the contrary. Perhaps she wore this softer version for her groom, as Kate did for William. But at the end of the day, MM is a frightful fashion fail. She obviously tries quite hard to be “frightfully chic” but misses the mark (for varying reasons) time and time again.
It is strange to me that one must have complete and total reverence for all things Markle; anything else and you’re a “racist” or “hater”. At the time of their wedding the vast majority of people were happy and hopeful for the couple. It is only afterwards that the sentiment changed when Meghan showed the world, without question, who she really is.
|by Anonymous||reply 240||Last Friday at 7:52 PM|
No fan of La Markle here, but I thought her Givenchy bridal gown and overall look was the height of simple clean bridal chic. I prefer it over Kate's, which I mostly liked. MM's overall fashion presentation since marrying Harry has been very hit or miss; she does well with her color and accessories choices, but has terrible trouble with fit and need obvious use of a tailor.
Say what you want about her, but Kate's (usually boring) clothes fit her like a near second skin every time, and never a boring hair out of place.
|by Anonymous||reply 241||Last Friday at 8:01 PM|
Calling MM a fashion fail is a big stretch. Honestly most of her looks are decent but forgettable. No real disasters
|by Anonymous||reply 242||Last Friday at 8:21 PM|
R242 A stretch? Hardly. Her choices are quite simply - bad. She tries and some almost hit the mark but the consistent ill fitting garment does her in. I don’t understand that. Many of her choices are good but I can’t quite comprehend why they’re so poorly fitted!!! What happened?? Does she not own a mirror? She wore a gorgeous one shouldered, black evening gown that was really beautiful but...she ruined the esthetic by constantly clutching her bump. Ugh. God, how ridiculous.
|by Anonymous||reply 243||Last Friday at 8:36 PM|
Di usually had such great taste. Why the ugly wedding gown?
|by Anonymous||reply 244||Last Friday at 8:41 PM|
It took awhile for Diana to find herself both as a married woman and princess of Wales. Her figure also changed as in first few years of marriage she still was rather busty/bit heavy (not in a bad way), but far from the svelte fashion plate of later years.
Keep in mind Diana also was busy breeding children for early part of her marriage. Whoever choose her maternity clothing ought to have been shot. More ruffles, bows, and other
After her engagement and certainly marriage early on Diana was "advised" by the Queen Mother who sought to act as a part of a transition team if you will. HM also dispatched one or more of her most senior ladies to also aid in that effort. One assumes at some point Diana found herself and became more confident in discarding certain fashion advice and going with what she wanted.
|by Anonymous||reply 245||Last Friday at 9:27 PM|
Other royal brides before Victoria wore white; Mary, Queen of Scots did so for her first marriage to French Dauphin. However it was the popularity of Queen Victoria that set in motion a craze among noble, society and others who could afford to do so wearing white on wedding day.
There were then few issues with wearing white for marriage; as Mary, Queen of Scots was informed it is the color of mourning in some societies. Indeed in France and French speaking countries white mourning then and is still done.
Next came fact unless one is rather wealthy having a dress that could only be worn once was a luxury few could afford. Most brides in Victorian period married in their best frock or had one made for occasion, but either way it would be something that could be worn again afterwards.
As for the white ='s virginal thing, Godey's Ladies book was source of incorrect information who made that association.
|by Anonymous||reply 246||Last Friday at 9:37 PM|
Liz looking fabulous at the Royal Opera House Covent Garden in 1959.
|by Anonymous||reply 247||Last Friday at 10:12 PM|
This can't be real. I don't remember her being this chubby.
|by Anonymous||reply 249||Last Friday at 10:18 PM|
^^^Whoa. That is a very real fashion fail.
|by Anonymous||reply 250||Last Friday at 10:24 PM|
Yes, if she really was that overweight, there must be a better way of disguising it.
|by Anonymous||reply 251||Last Friday at 10:26 PM|
Image was taken at bad angle; photos were from HM and Prince Philip state visit to Thailand back in 1996. In other pictures HM's weight seems normal.
|by Anonymous||reply 252||Last Friday at 11:47 PM|
Lady Diana's first fashion "scandal" of sorts was that black strapless dress she wore on her first night out with Prince Charles after their engagement had been announced.
You can see, well you can see the 19 year old Diana Spencer was still a bit "chubby" and had a fuller bosom. What scandalized many was the décolleté (deemed by many too low for a yet unmarried young woman), and of course the color. As Prince Charles famously quipped upon seeing Diana "black is for funerals". Indeed royal ladies (and certainly HM) at lest then and many now do not wear black outside of mourning.
Another issue with that dress was no one (and this seems common with royal women still today), considered dress from all aspects when being worn. When Lady Diana bent low to emerge from car her entire cleavage was clearly visible.
Diana would go on to wear black ensembles or dresses again during her marriage, and Kate Middleton as done same in sort of homage to her husband's mother.
|by Anonymous||reply 253||Last Saturday at 6:29 AM|
What r241 and r243 said.
In fairness to Markle, she shouldn't be, in terms of how a garment drapes their bodies, unfavorably compared to Kate. Most women don't have what Kate has: At least 5'9', and not an ounce over, in my estimation, 122 lbs, if that.
Put another way, Kate, as did the late Carolyn Bessette Kennedy, possesses the physical dimensions approximating how a gown/garment drapes from a designer hangar. It's a much easier job to wear something that will look good.
Still, while Markle has the tougher job in choosing a garment, their is no excuse for ill-fit, and poor style choices. And, Satan only knows why she doesn't know that proper, foundational undergarments aren't optional. Nancy Pelosi's undergarments budget must match her wardrobe budget because she knows those dictate how a garment will most flatteringly drape a body, especially a body that isn't tall and thin.
I've written this before but I'll do so again- I envision Markle in a modified, semi-severe variation on, say, Yohji Yamamoto's ( a CBK favorite) designs inn bold color that provides only a canvas for her pretty coloring, face and hair.
|by Anonymous||reply 254||Last Saturday at 6:50 AM|
I don't get why everybody is all gaga over Queen Victoria and Prince Albert.
They were both ugly as fuck.
|by Anonymous||reply 255||Last Saturday at 6:58 AM|
I think Albert was deemed handsome for his time. Vic was never more than passably pretty and lost that fast and got fat as a cow. He could have done better.
|by Anonymous||reply 256||Last Saturday at 7:00 AM|
R255, when you are super rich, they lower bar in the looks department, I suspect.
|by Anonymous||reply 257||Last Saturday at 7:02 AM|
"Di usually had such great taste. Why the ugly wedding gown?"
Her wedding gown was the fashion style of the 80s: overblown, too much, over the top. More is more. That's what fashion was back then. It was awful.
|by Anonymous||reply 260||Last Saturday at 11:23 AM|
But couldn't they have at least ironed the wrinkles out, R260? It just looks so sloppy.
|by Anonymous||reply 261||Last Saturday at 11:24 AM|
Diana's wedding gown got wrinkled due to that huge amount of fabric stuffed into the small glass carriage that took her to the wedding. Just one of several wedding mishaps that day.
|by Anonymous||reply 262||Last Saturday at 11:30 AM|
R225 - Thanks for the video. In addition to the elegance and the fit, in the video you can see how beautiful the material was when it moved. MM's dress didn't have any of that even when you saw it in motion, and the long embroidered veil with the nothing bed sheet dress was awful. Everything was proportionally right in Maxima's gown: it was grownup without being boring, the 3/4 length sleeves were perfect, the little standup collar and neckline were perfect, and the panel around the sheath was perfect.
|by Anonymous||reply 263||Last Saturday at 12:13 PM|
Most people watching didn't care fuck all about the wrinkles, in fact found it endearing and human watching the young bride smooth out the dress without seeming to care too much.
Those wrinkles were nothing next to the migraine brought on by the crammed detail of the dress. Diana was 5'10-1/2" in her bare feet. To have a bride like that swallowed by a dress is no small achievement. The dress broke a cardinal rule: never let the dress wear you rather than the other way round. The Emanuels were experienced enough to know that. They made that dress for themselves, not for her.
|by Anonymous||reply 264||Last Saturday at 3:40 PM|
After Diana's wedding, copies were made of her dress (much cheaper, less elaborate copies) so brides could wear the "fairy princess" gown at THEIR weddings. But nobody seemed to want one. Well, I guess not!
|by Anonymous||reply 265||Last Saturday at 4:12 PM|
I love this dress and pearls. In person it must have been beautiful with quality fabrics:
|by Anonymous||reply 267||Last Saturday at 4:26 PM|
Thanks, R252. I didn't think she was ever that overweight.
|by Anonymous||reply 268||Last Saturday at 9:25 PM|
Sorry, Diana's wedding dress was beautiful, just like the person wearing it. If you disagree, you're half blind and have terrible taste.
|by Anonymous||reply 269||Last Saturday at 9:26 PM|
😲! Maxima in her wedding dress had the lowest set of Head of State boobs this side of Mamie Eisenhower's low hangers.
Maxie's tits are near her waist! 😵 And she was young then. If anything, she's learned the fundamentals of foundation garments.
|by Anonymous||reply 270||Last Saturday at 9:28 PM|
A quartet of ugly sweaters.
|by Anonymous||reply 271||Last Saturday at 10:21 PM|
[quote]Sorry, Diana's wedding dress was beautiful
I guess if you lived in a trailer park and found mess like that "fancy"...
|by Anonymous||reply 273||Last Saturday at 10:44 PM|
No, you'd actually have to be a tiresome pretentious twat to criticise it. She pulled it off.
|by Anonymous||reply 274||Last Saturday at 10:50 PM|
It looked like it swallowed her whole.
|by Anonymous||reply 275||Last Sunday at 1:45 AM|
R264, the Emmanuels weren't very experienced at all: the dress was a career-making milestone for them. And if you think Diana wasn't wearing exactly the dress she wanted to wear, you've got rocks in your head. It is well recorded that she wanted a train longer than anyone before her, for example. As for her not seeming to mind it was wrinkled: she had a lot on her plate that day, but you can be sure they heard all about it when she got back from the honeymoon.
|by Anonymous||reply 276||Last Sunday at 2:17 AM|
R276 - I believe the train was so long because of the venue. St Paul's Cathedral is HUGE.
|by Anonymous||reply 277||Last Sunday at 5:47 AM|
You are wrong r265. She set the style for 80s wedding dresses. Huge puffy or leg of mutton sleeves and full ball gown skirts in taffeta and satin. Before that the silhouette was slim, close to the body or a-line, in jersey knit (!) or chiffon and slim or bishop sleeves (fullness at the wrist). Wrinkles or no, Diana’s dress was a sensation, as was the black strapless she wore to the opera with Princess Grace.
|by Anonymous||reply 278||Last Sunday at 5:50 AM|
R253: what sort of a medieval analysis is that?! I seriously doubt anyone gave that much of a thought to a perfectly run-of-the mill, rather conservative formal dress in the 80s. Black was considered "Parisian chic" in England since the 1800 so there is no way it was such a scandal in 1980. Let alone a hint of female cleavage or arms. Were you raised by nuns?
|by Anonymous||reply 279||Last Sunday at 5:56 AM|
Diana's gown, love it or hate it, had nothing on those monstrosities those trashy gypsy girls wear. Talk about "big" gowns and UGLY.
|by Anonymous||reply 280||Last Sunday at 6:55 AM|
Upon viewing Diana's wedding on TV, I found her dress to be sort of a monstrosity. However, a decade or so later, I saw it on display in London and I must say, it struck me then as altogether glorious and regal!
|by Anonymous||reply 281||Last Sunday at 7:07 AM|
"If you disagree, you're half blind and have terrible taste."
Hon, you're the one with the myopia and tacky taste. Diana's dress was, in the words of one critic, "a poufy monstrosity."
|by Anonymous||reply 282||Last Sunday at 11:03 AM|
Di's dress was like a turtle shell.
She could have just slinked down into it and disappeared.
It was terribly ugly but so were the 80s so it fit in perfectly. It was functional as well to hide her less than thin (at the time) figure.
|by Anonymous||reply 283||Last Sunday at 11:05 AM|
Diana' dress would have been better with a simple deep V or sweetheart neckline and simpler sleeves. The big bouffant skirt and train were fine. Diana was NOT fat R283 if that is what you are implying. Her figure was fine.
|by Anonymous||reply 284||Last Sunday at 11:10 AM|
R17 She looks like Dobby, the free elf in that rag:
|by Anonymous||reply 285||Last Sunday at 1:07 PM|
Young Di was pretty stout. It wasn't until she started indulging in bulimia that she really got her weight under control and became the fashion icon the people loved and adored.
|by Anonymous||reply 286||Last Sunday at 1:47 PM|
[quote] Diana's dress was, in the words of one critic, "a poufy monstrosity."
Critics are often wrong. Take movie critics. Plenty of examples of prestigious movie critics who have trashed movies that are now considered classics or praised movies that are now completely forgotten.
|by Anonymous||reply 287||Last Sunday at 1:59 PM|
A healthy weight isn't stout. The pic of her in that see thru skirt reveals a very nice figure. Some of you bitches are crazy.
|by Anonymous||reply 288||Last Sunday at 2:01 PM|
I actually appreciate Di's wedding dress for what it was supposed to represent, her status as a senior royal. Think back to royal brides of the past, like Marie Antoinette. She wore an over the top gown that ran counter to even her general style, and she was considered rather daring at times. So a future Queen would wear a gown that's full expensive and a bit over the top. Given the mark she left on Britten, similar to Marie Antoinette in France, I think it's a perfect start to her doomed royal journey.
I wouldn't wear that dress, but I don't mind it.
|by Anonymous||reply 289||Last Sunday at 2:08 PM|
jfc she was NOT stout. She was, as the old personals ad would say: H/W proportionate. It’s comments like that which make gullible young women think eating a lettuce leaf is an adequate dinner. And yes, she lost weight later on because she became bulimic.
|by Anonymous||reply 290||Last Sunday at 2:25 PM|
Lol, R285. There is a resemblance. Fergie's attempt at edgy was just plain ugly.
|by Anonymous||reply 291||Last Sunday at 2:49 PM|
Diana COULD be called slightly pudgy when she first became involved with Charles. In earlier photos of her as a teen she had a very rounded, sometimes puffy face. This was evident in her engagement photos with Charlies. She also had little fashion sense. For her engagement presentation with Charlies she wore an ill-fitting, off the rack blue suit from Harrods with a "pussy willow" bow. A biographer said she looked "plump and uncomfortable."
|by Anonymous||reply 293||Last Sunday at 3:21 PM|
Wow Kate has stunning legs -- those pics in the yellow dress are keepers! Her hair is glorious and makes beautiful formal updos, so I wouldn't cut it.
I never saw Di look plump -- maybe pregnant?
|by Anonymous||reply 294||Last Sunday at 3:25 PM|
For many gay men, a woman is fat if you can't see her ribs.
|by Anonymous||reply 295||Last Sunday at 3:47 PM|
If one has a taste for bad German folk tales that include an illustration of a butter-churning milk maid wearing a dress made of crumpled Kleenex, than, yes, Diana's wedding gown was perfect.
|by Anonymous||reply 296||Last Sunday at 4:09 PM|
No, her dress was charming and romantic and everyone was in love with her. So many trends that have been praised by fashion critics in the past look ridiculous now. The same goes for what fashion critics criticise.
|by Anonymous||reply 297||Last Sunday at 4:19 PM|
R286: "Women, develop an eating disorder if you ever want to be loved and not called a fat whore."
|by Anonymous||reply 298||Last Sunday at 6:04 PM|
Diana, herself, said once she started the binge-purge cycle the media loved her and she felt incredible.
This allowed her to address land mines.
|by Anonymous||reply 299||Last Sunday at 6:25 PM|
Diana looking good. She's thinking "I hate him SO much".
|by Anonymous||reply 301||Last Sunday at 7:50 PM|
[quote] Diana would go on to wear black ensembles or dresses again during her marriage, and Kate Middleton as done same in sort of homage to her husband's mother.
Or maybe because black is a basic color for dresses.
|by Anonymous||reply 302||Last Sunday at 8:33 PM|
At R300 (photo), I feel sorry for Di. Not just the outfit, but I do think she tried to have a real marriage with Charles. He was cold to her from the start. I do believe she was a lot of drama and high maintenance, but I think we all want to be loved back.
|by Anonymous||reply 304||Last Sunday at 9:10 PM|
Diana's wedding dress put the husband and wife (now divorced) Emanuel team on the fashion map. They had done things for Lady Diana Spencer prior to her engagement, and of course that famous (or infamous) black strapless gown worn prior to marriage, but it was that "crumpled Kleenex" silk gown that brought house of Emanuel world wide notice.
Say what one will, good or bad; that dress was instantly copied and worn by hundreds of brides in months and years after Diana's wedding. Vogue patterns came out with their "designer" version for those who wished to run up their own, or have a local dressmaker do so. Of course one could take the pattern and adapt it to various other sorts of gowns or dresses.
|by Anonymous||reply 305||Yesterday at 12:19 AM|
If you believe following Emanuels received requests for copies of Diana's dress for years afterwards.
Also if you examine history of British royal brides and lades in below like you can see where designers drew inspiration for Diana's dress.
Lady Diana's wedding dress likely was the last gasp of pantimine fairy brides gowns. By the 1990's and certainly 2000's more and more brides were going with more slim, less bouffant wedding gowns, usually strapless or near enough.
|by Anonymous||reply 306||Yesterday at 12:23 AM|
Yes, but historically women of BRF only have worn black when in mourning. How often have you seen HM in black? Lord knows the Queen wears every other hue and shade of rainbow (even when they don't suit her), but rarely if ever black outside of funerals or mourning.
|by Anonymous||reply 307||Yesterday at 2:09 AM|
Lady Diana Spencer was just 20 when she became engaged. The young woman wasn't "pudgy" or "stout" but merely a healthy young lass with weight appropriate for her height. That fresh young and "healthy" appearance is exactly what eldest sons, heirs and anyone else marrying woman for (essentially) breeding purposes.
A man wanting to marry and breed an heir along with possibly a spare in quick succession out of the gate hardly would choose some emaciated skeleton a la Mary Kate Olsen.
|by Anonymous||reply 308||Yesterday at 2:16 AM|
Big bouffy romantic wedding gowns are still with us only they are strapless, the trend that will not die.
|by Anonymous||reply 309||Yesterday at 3:54 AM|
The strapless trend needs to die. Too many heifers with back fat rolls and untoned fat arms showing. They need a bolero or jacket of some sort.
|by Anonymous||reply 310||Yesterday at 4:52 AM|
and don't get me started on the tatoos.
|by Anonymous||reply 311||Yesterday at 4:57 AM|
and don't get me started on the tattoos.
|by Anonymous||reply 312||Yesterday at 4:57 AM|
and don't get me started on the tattoos.
|by Anonymous||reply 313||Yesterday at 4:58 AM|
Sorry for the triple post. Weird little glitch.
|by Anonymous||reply 314||Yesterday at 5:00 AM|
No, R277. Diana specifically told the Emmanuels she wanted her train to be the longest ever. I've seen video - can't remember whether it's one of them or someone from their atelier at the time - where it is explained that she did.
|by Anonymous||reply 315||Yesterday at 6:01 AM|
R295, that looks like a (much prettier) spin on Wallis Simpson's hideous wedding dress. Ironically, Wallis is the woman credited with coining the phrase "you can never be too rich or too thin", yet this photo proves there is DEFINITELY such a thing as being too thin. She has the body of a fourteen-year-old boy.
|by Anonymous||reply 316||a day ago|
[quote] The strapless trend needs to die. Too many heifers with back fat rolls and untoned fat arms showing. They need a bolero or jacket of some sort.
It's relatively easy to sew a strapless gown, that's why the trend is pushed. (I have a little bit of sewing experience.) Jackets and fitted armholes are more difficult. I watched an episode of Project Runway where, instead of women's wear, the contestants made men's wear, i.e., blazer jackets, pants, etc. My God, there was some amateur-looking stuff on the runway.
|by Anonymous||reply 317||21 hours ago|
[quote]She was never hit-and-miss. She was always Miss, then after that particular point in time, almost always Hit.
Not really. Look at any gallery online of Diana's best gowns, dresses, maternity wear, etc. and you'll see a period from late 1983 to early 1987 where she went back and forth between glamorous and hideous. The "teddy boy" suits in 1983-1984 were the beginning of a more fashionable wardrobe, and I'd say her first really lovely gown was the February 1984 red gown she wore in Norway, plus a velvet day dress on the same trip which was inspired by the "teddy boy" look but was far more classic and timeless. The last really terrible dress was probably the 1987 Berlin Opera House gown. In between were a lot of hits AND misses.
|by Anonymous||reply 318||21 hours ago|
[quote] It wasn't until she started indulging in bulimia that she really got her weight under control
Oh Datalounge, you never fail to bring out the psychopaths.
|by Anonymous||reply 319||21 hours ago|
Oh dear. Diana went out in her slip.
|by Anonymous||reply 320||20 hours ago|
I don't think the pink dress @320 is hideous but it has that dropped waist which was a thing for a time. The sleeves could fit better too.
|by Anonymous||reply 321||20 hours ago|
"Say what one will, good or bad; that dress was instantly copied and worn by hundreds of brides in months and years after Diana's wedding."
I heard that copies of Diana's wedding gown didn't sell well. I tend to believe that. It's a very unflattering dress.
|by Anonymous||reply 323||19 hours ago|
Di's fashion motto: bigger is better, more is more. That attitude influenced her choice of an engagement ring, too. She was brought a tray of 12 rings by the then crown-jeweler Garrard. The ring she chose was neither custom-made nor unique and was, at the time of her engagement to Charles, featured in Garrard's jewellery collection and available to anyone for purchase. What it WAS was this: big. She later gloated "I picked the biggest one on the tray!" She wanted the biggest train in Royal history. She seemed to think the bigger the better. Typical 80s fashion sense. Or fashion nonsense.
|by Anonymous||reply 324||19 hours ago|
Those early '80s dresses Diana wore were hideous. Joan Rivers once remarked that they were cheaply made.
|by Anonymous||reply 325||19 hours ago|
Many of the copies of Diana's wedding gown were very shoddily made; that likely would have played a role in their sales volume.
You just cannot replicate what was essentially a couture/made to order gown with something off a rack. Something is bound to be lost in a garment design busted down the ranks as such.
N.B. If Daily Fail link doesn't work (when will DL fix this issue?), just Google the story...
|by Anonymous||reply 326||18 hours ago|
[quote] Those early '80s dresses Diana wore were hideous. Joan Rivers once remarked that they were cheaply made.
Joan Rivers made some bad choices, herself, in the '80s.
|by Anonymous||reply 327||18 hours ago|
The full sleeve and sleeveless look just looks weird to me.
|by Anonymous||reply 328||16 hours ago|
Yikes. Too much colour and the pattern is too strong.
|by Anonymous||reply 329||15 hours ago|
[quote]If one has a taste for bad German folk tales ....
Princess Eugenie looks like she's out of a German folk tale.
|by Anonymous||reply 331||15 hours ago|
Uh huh. How many copies of Kate Middleton's wedding dress sold? I doubt it was many unless the copies were modified to look more mainstream.
|by Anonymous||reply 332||13 hours ago|
What's so non-mainstream about the dress?
|by Anonymous||reply 333||13 hours ago|
Alexander McQueen isn't known for being safely middle of the road. The part of the dress above the waist is gimmicky with the pointy boobs. Her veil looked like a limp dish rag.
|by Anonymous||reply 334||13 hours ago|
This "copy" of Middleton's wedding dress from H & M looks more elegant and mainstream than the original.
|by Anonymous||reply 335||13 hours ago|
If I remember correctly, Kate's wedding dress was the most copied one in history, in the UK at least. It was very conservative, obviously not designed by McQueen himself so hardly "gimmicky" and the veil was stunning - easily the most beautiful part of her attire. In my opinion, Kate Middleton was the loveliest royal bride ever.
|by Anonymous||reply 336||12 hours ago|
Left, limp dish rag. Right, proper veil.
|by Anonymous||reply 338||12 hours ago|
Left, a duchess. Right, a triumphant Murican washerwoman, hissing "Hu'z winning now, bitchez??"
And above, a badly paid, angry and unintentionally hilarious intern.
|by Anonymous||reply 339||12 hours ago|
Kate is only a duchess by marriage. Before that, she was a commoner just like Meghan. The only difference was that Kate's parents had much more money. It's not as obvious in stills, but when I watched the wedding, Meghan's dress was more beautiful and elegant in a simple way than Kate's dress. And Meghan didn't resort to dragging big potted trees into the church (how silly was that) like Kate, but maybe that was Charles's idea.
|by Anonymous||reply 340||11 hours ago|
Yes, I know many Brits are xenophobic and racist and classist. Any other prejudices I've forgotten?
|by Anonymous||reply 341||11 hours ago|
Markle’s dress was an ill-fitting sack.
|by Anonymous||reply 342||10 hours ago|
[quote]Left, a duchess. Right, a triumphant Murican washerwoman, hissing "Hu'z winning now, bitchez??"
I'm also very skeptical that Meghan and Harry are clever and talented enough to make enough money in the U.S. so that they can live in the type of style that Harry is used to. I think they'll eventually throw in the towel and return to Britain or divorce.
I just said that I preferred Meghan's wedding dress to Kate's. That doesn't mean I don't like Kate.
|by Anonymous||reply 343||9 hours ago|
[quote]If I remember correctly, Kate's wedding dress was the most copied one in history, in the UK at least.
Link to a reputable newspaper or magazine please, not a tabloid that also carries stories about alien sightings.
|by Anonymous||reply 344||9 hours ago|