Future Classics lumpy-leg trousers: presumably they look better on…

Future_classics To be fair, judging by the picture of these jodhpur-style trousers on the mannequin (see it here), they actually do look better on than they do in this picture, which, quite frankly, makes them look deformed.

Now, we have a few easy rules when it comes to buying clothes, and one of them is that if the item looks like it has some seriously saggy hips and knees even when it’s not being worn, it’s probably not going to flatter us. Let’s face it, we need all the help we can get here, after all: we’re looking for clothes that’ll help hide our lumps and bumps, not create new ones, and while we understand that may be an "edgy" and "uber cool" look according to the Matches Fashion, we think we can probably learn to live without being "edgy" and "cool" if it means we get to escape the hip bags.

What do you think, readers? Could you make these trousers work for you? If you could, you’ll find them over at Matches, where they’re £218.

6 Comments

  • September 18, 2008

    Arielle

    I think they look pretty stupid on the mannequin, too. That’s just my opinion of course.

    View Comment
  • September 18, 2008

    Mousy

    “Wear with attitude”. Yes, you’d NEED to wear them with attitude: ‘you laughin’ at my trousers? I’ll kick YOUR more fashionably-clad behind. In these trousers! Just see if I don’t!’

    View Comment
  • September 18, 2008

    Northmoon

    those don’t even look jodpur like to me. they’re just skinny pants with bags added to the thighs and knees. Ugly, lumpy and not even edgy IMHO.

    View Comment
  • September 18, 2008

    Alex D

    Those are so wrong. Why anyone would think they’re a good idea befuddles me.

    View Comment
  • September 20, 2008

    Theresa

    Would you believe I saw my neighbour wearing these yesterday????

    View Comment
  • September 22, 2008

    Celeste

    Ah, yes. All the bulk of cargo pants with none of the storage. Just what I was looking for.

    View Comment