|
|
Archive for December, 2009
Wednesday, December 30th, 2009
With New Year fast approaching, we’re going to call time on 2009, and head off to prepare for a fabulously fashionable 2010! We’ll be back policing the world of fashion early in the New Year – for now we’d like to thank all of our readers for supporting us throughout 2009, and wish you all a wonderful new year, however you’re spending it.
See you on the other side!
Wednesday, December 30th, 2009
 New Year: for some, it’s one of the best nights of the year, while for others it’s …not.
Whatever you’re doing this New Year, though, we want to know what you’ll be wearing while you’re doing it. Where will you be as 2009 gives way to 2010? More importantly: what will you be wearing? Tell us in the comments, and you may pass through the Checkpoint unhindered!
Wednesday, December 30th, 2009
For the past two years now, we’ve been running an end-of-year poll to find out what you thought was the biggest fashion crime of the year just gone – and both times, Crocs have been the clear winner.
Will they run (or rather, “waddle”) away with the title in 2009? Well, we actually think Crocs have been on the decline this year: they’re still high on our list of “fashion hates”, and always will be, but they seem to be less popular than they once were, which makes us wonder if it’s time to crown a new King of the Fashion Crimes?
What do you think? What was the biggest fashion crime in 2009? Vote in the poll below to let us know what you think. You’ll find a short description of each of the options under the jump.
(NOTE: You are NOT voting for the specific items shown in the image above – they’re there for illustration only!)
(more…)
Tuesday, December 29th, 2009
 Sock Horror! Well, folks, it’s official: it’s no longer enough for all of your other clothes to be ripped to shreds this season, now even your socks have to look like they’ve spent 20 years lurking at the back of a drawer, before being chewed vigorously by the dog.
Rather than just wear an ACTUAL old, tattered pair of socks, it’s also necessary to buy a brand, spanking new pair, that have been made to LOOK old and tattered. Because that makes sense, totally.
In the defence of Free People, who are selling these socks, they are only charging $10.86 for these (Comme des Garcons would probably charge ten times that), but even so, would you pay to look like your socks are in need of a good darning/ditching? If so, you can buy them here.
Tuesday, December 29th, 2009
These, readers, are “onion heels”, apparently – although some of the readers at Shoeperwoman suggested “goiter heels” may be a more appropriate term for them.
We’ll let you be the judge of that, but tell us: what do you think of them? We think the disproportionate heel on a boring black court shoe looks like some kind of strange experiment gone badly wrong, but if you disagree and think these are the best thing since… onions… they’re £220 from Far Fetch.
Tuesday, December 29th, 2009
Every so often, a “fashion crime” comes along that makes us think, “Wow! We really hope this catches on, purely for the humour value in seeing everyone walk around wearing it!”
Topshop’s pointy hood hat is one of those items. Just imagine the sight of a street full of people, all wearing tall, pointed bishop’s hats, and perhaps looking a little bit like they might have tall, pointy heads underneath. Awesome.
If you want to join in the fun, these are £16 from Topshop.
Monday, December 28th, 2009
 We apologise for any burning caused to your retinas during viewing of this dress. We were still seeing the pattern a few hours after we looked away from it, so we feel your pain.
Nevertheless, we feel the existence of this dress teaches us all an important lesson about colour mixing and how not to do it. It could be summed up as “Orange and green should not be seen, without a….” Actually, no: they just shouldn’t be seen. Ever. Especially when they’re fluorescent orange and lime green.
If you disagree, however, this dress is $500 and you can buy it here.
Monday, December 28th, 2009
At first we thought it was just an ugly jacket. Then we took a closer look:
Ah. Well, on the plus side, at least you won’t need a handbag. On account of how there are two of them attached to your jacket. It also goes some way towards explaining the £475 price tag. Value for money, you see!
Available at Yoox.com, but only if you’re a UK size 8.
Monday, December 28th, 2009
This item was apprehended at Zappos by Style Bargain Hunter, who points out that it’s not a shirt, not even a NIGHTshirt. Nope, it’s a dress, and is designed to be worn “as is”, for that “Look, I just threw on my boyfriend’s shirt and I still look fabulous!” look. It’s a hard look to pull off – most people who try just end up looking like the fire alarm went off while they were in the middle of getting dressed – but do you think you could do it? If so, it’s £265 here. Or, of course, an ACTUAL nightshirt will give you a similar look, only much cheaper…
Wednesday, December 23rd, 2009
There’s just two sleeps left to go until Christmas Day, which means it’s time for us to down tools and take a few days off to enjoy the holiday. We just wanted to take this opportunity to wish all of our readers a happy holiday – and don’t worry, we’ll be back to police the world of fashion in a few days time!
The Fashion Police x
|
|
|
