This outfit confuses me.
It’s December in London. Obviously it’s cold enough for her to wear a bearskin rug as a coat — seriously, the last time I saw that, I think Blake Carrington was stroking Krystle’s cheek through a lens of Vaseline, before they made elderly love on it in front of a fire — and yet instead of wrapping herself in it, she’s sauntering along, letting it flap around, while she wears a summer dress underneath with no tights. I feel like the outfit ITSELF, sans coat, is probably fine. But it looks so absurd in this context that I just want to send her some jeans and a sweater with a note that says, “Try this. No, really. They don’t bite.”
[Photo: Pacific Coast News]
Comments (19):
I love the dress for a picnic in July. Not so much for Christmas. I like the color of the boots, but if you’re gonna wear your hemline well above the knee, the boots need to be knee-high or ankle-high. This in-between business cuts her in half.
Really? I was going to say that I find the boot height visually appealing here. I think they’re the perfect height for that dress. I love the dress and I love, love, love the boots.
I love this look too. It looks like she just threw on whatever coat was handy for the walk from the car to the bar, but I really like all the underneath bits. I wish my calves were slender enough to get away with boots that height and I covet that dress.
I think it looks fine on her! But while I could probably wear it myself (being tall gives you lots of freedom with proportions), I would second-guess it into oblivion and never actually buy those boots. Instead I would wear them around the store for a half hour before regretfully taking them off.
Everything you said.
The dress would be adorable for spring/summer – on a five-year-old. This is not an adult pattern or cut.
And the coat, while seasonally appropriate, really does look like a rug! Or a sofa throw. Something… furniture-y. It’s also a terrible color for her. Not attractive at all.
I like the boots!
Thanks, Heather, for another LOL post. This look is actually typical in the Bay Area, although Uggs would probably be worn. The dress is cute (but definitely not for winter), but the coat… I HOPE IT’S NOT REAL FUR!
I’m pretty sure the only fur that coat was made of came from FAO Schwartz.
Yeah, if that’s teddy bear fur, I actually kind of love the whole thing. If it’s real fur, then I’m repulsed.
FWIW, we’re having a bit of a mild rainy snap here in Blighty at the moment. Not that this helps from a fashion perspective, but I can see the outfit is at least weather appropriate for getting from dinner/a house to a car.
The more I look at this, the more I fear… I would wear this out of my house. I’ll slink away to my corner now.
I kind of like it. Now I’m contemplating pairing a summer dress with gum boots for the west coast rainy season.
It seems that celebrities have completely lost the ability to dress seasonally appropriate. Remember Rosamund Pike at the Reache premiere? But, it’s not just celebrities. The number of women running around in sleeveless dresses amazes me. And, don’t get me started on the bare wing leg…..ugh!
Love that dress and boots. The coat, maybe not so much, but not entirely fug-worthy.
LOVE the dress (the pattern is adorable) and boots. I even like the coat (if faux), but perhaps not with this.
I love all of it, but I have no idea who this person is. Whoever this is, I think she has great taste, a funky style and probably very cold legs!
As a proud Idahoan Westerner, I am appalled by those things on her feet. If they are supposed to be normal boots, why the square toe and thick sole? If cowboy boots, why are the tops so darn snug to her calves?
I like all of this for fall, maybe? Or just with some tights. It’s all cute, but the bare legs in London in December just add a touch of ridiculousness that I can’t get past.
The coat is so tacky that it has to be faux fur.