| | Category Archives: Style On TrialStyle on Trial: Rooney Mara at the premiere of The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Tweet | 8 |
The Fashion Police have a rule about animal print. Actually, we have a few rules about animal print, but there’s only one we need concern ourselves with here, and it’s this one:
If it’s a colour that isn’t found on the animal, it’s probably a crime of fashion.
Now, as far as we’re aware, there are no purple cheetahs or leopards (although there totally should be), so that would mean that Paula Patton’s Mission Impossible 2 dress is in contravention of the rule, and therefore a Fashion Crime.
All rules were made to be broken, though, (Well, other than ones that are actually the LAW, obviously: stay legal, kids!), and we’re in a good mood today, so we’re going to put this dress up On Trial and let you decide whether it’s innocent or guilty as charged.
What do you think?
| Tweet |
We’re not going to lie to you: we kinda love this. Yes, even although it’s just a tad ridiculous, and wearing it at this time of year would make you look a bit like one of Santa’s little helpers. (Mind you, wearing it at any OTHER time of year would make you look like one of Santa’s little helpers who got lost, so if ever there was a time to wear a dress like this, now would be that time.) Imagine it in red, if you don’t know what we’re talking about here.
What do you think? Cute or costumey? Crime or Damn Fine?
| Tweet |
If you read fashion blogs at all, you’ll know that it’s all about the pattern-mixing these days. Pattern-mixing is edgy and unexpected and doesn’t look at all like you just threw on any old thing and called it FASHUN. Or that’s the theory, anyway. We’re not huge fans of it, but that’s because we’re fat and old, and don’t understand fashion, obviously.
That said, if patterns must be mixed, we think spots and stripes are one of the easiest combinations, and also one of the ones least likely to make you look like you did a Supermarket Sweep through the local Goodwill, and just threw on every thing you could find.
Here’s Swedish actress Noomi Rapace putting that theory to the test at the Sherlock Holmes premiere earlier this month. Her dress combines a polka dot bodice with a stripey skirt, and we need to know what you think of it. We think that either of these patterns on their own might have been a bit much, but are they any better together? Tell us…
Innocent or Guilty?
| Tweet |
Well, there’s a lot going on here, isn’t there? For one thing, this dress looks a bit like it’s on fire. Or at least, it does to us, but that could be because we’re slightly blinded by all of the eyeball bleach we instinctively reached for as soon as we laid eyes on it.
Topshop describe it as a “wallpaper” dress. This, of course, made us wonder what kind of room would have walls like this? And who would live in such a room? You can leave your answers to that one in the comments box. Mostly, though, we just want to know whether it would be a super-stylish someone, or the type of someone The Fashion Police should be thinking about arresting. You see, we thought the answer to this one was obvious… but then we noticed that although this dress has only been online for a day or so, it’s already started to sell out in certain sizes, so we need to know what we’re up against here: will we soon be fighting off entire armies of wallpaper-wearers? And if so, should we fight back, or let them win?
This is £65 at Topshop. But is it innocent or guilty?
| Tweet |
It’s been a bit of a boring week for celebrity fashion. God, we hate it when the suspects behave themselves!
One of the few outfits to jump out at us as we took a look at the rogue’s gallery this morning was this long silver dress, worn by Rachel McAdams to the premiere of Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows. It’s what we think of as a “Statuette” dress, in that wearers of this particular style – metallic colour, shiny fabric, long train – invariably end up looking like an Oscar statuette, or some other award.
Does Rachel DESERVE an award for this dress, though? We think we know what you’re going to say, but we’re going to invite you to say it anyway…
| Tweet |
At a time when only the “edgy” are deemed acceptable in the fashion world, and to be “unexpected” is, like, the most important thing EVER, Taylor Swift often finds herself facing the charge of “always looking the same”. Poor Taylor. We actually feel quite sorry for her, to be honest. Perhaps we’re really unusual in this respect, but we don’t know many people in real life who dramatically “switch up” (Oh, how we hate that expression!) their style, and wear something radically different every day – most people just work out what they like/what suits them, and then go with it – so we’re not really sure why celebrities are expected to be, well, unexpected all the time. But we digress.
This week, Taylor made a token attempt to look a little bit different at the Billboard Women in Music luncheon this week, and rather than turning up in a princessy dress and curls, she turned up in a princessy dress without curls. And with a fringe/bangs too.
Now, we think she looks fabulous here, but we really struggle to care about the whole MUST! BE! EDGY! AT! ALL! COSTS! thing, so you tell us: what do you think of Taylor’s new(ish) look? Do you love it? Hate it? Feel completely and utterly indifferent to it? Tell us in the comments…
| Tweet |
The word “dress” in the title of this post is a little ambitious, because the actual “dress” part – i.e. the bit that isn’t see-through – wouldn’t necessarily get a pass if this was a game of “Dress or Top“.
If it’s not a dress, though, what is it? Is it a bird? Um, well, actually, now you come to mention it, it DOES have its fair share of feathers on the shoulders. Is it a plane? We doubt it. Is it…a crime of fashion? Only you can decide. Place your votes in the comments, folks: tell us if Fergie is innocent or guilty of the charge of committing crimes of fashion!
| Tweet |
