Greetings, Fashion Crime Fighters! With just one week left before we start winding down for the holiday season, we’re running out of time to clear the streets of fashion failures before hanging up our hats for the holidays. Let’s get right to business, then, and ask you what on EARTH is going on with these pants:
Now, we don’t expect much from Just Cavalli, it’s true. Or many of the high-end designers, actually. We DO expect, however – and think everyone has the right to expect – that when we buy a pair of $300 jeans, our underwear won’t be on show at all times in them:
To be fair, that MIGHT not be the model’s underwear we can see here. It COULD just be the pockets of the jeans. That… doesn’t really make it much better, does it? Mind you, what do you really expect from a product which can be described using the words “fishnet” and “jeans” in the same sentence? Not much, is the answer.
From an outfit that exposes whatever’s underneath it, we move on to an outfit which exposes absolutely nothing at all:
Well. We say it exposes “nothing”. We guess you could argue that it kind of exposes your inner child, and the fact that you secretly wanted to dress as a jellyfish for Halloween, but your mum wouldn’t let you. Oh, and that’s eye print, just in case you’re wondering. Well, it would’ve been totally boring if they’d just left it plain, wouldn’t it?
While we appreciate the attempt to be interesting, however, our next suspect is possibly trying just a little bit TOO hard on that score:
Just when we thought harem pants couldn’t get any worse, too. We’re going to have to bring in some of our best detectives on this one: we don’t think we’ll ever understand how it can be comfortable or desirable to walk around with one leg longer than the other, but there has to be a reason for it, right? RIGHT?
Speaking of harem pants:
This has to be one of the saddest, saggiest pairs of shorts we’ve ever seen. We just want to take them home, give them a good wash… and then a decent burial. Only we’d maybe skip the “good wash” bit…