|
Sewing Discussions - A group that is not as it seams.
|
|
|
|
If you were Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
|
Posted by BEI Design on September 24, 2009, 4:20 am
"Sharon Hays" wrote
show/hide quoted text
> BEI Design wrote:
<snip>
>> Ok, *now* have at it.
> Heh heh heh Thanks Beverly. I love these discussions.
I do as well, I remember fondly the summer of the
Swedish(?) and Spanish(?) royal weddings. One was
spectacular, the other...not so much.
show/hide quoted text
> And it's funny how
> often we are all in agreement. How 'bout that red dress
> with the ruching
> and the *ahem* bust accentuation. That was just awful.
One wonders of the poor girl ever tried it on before
appearing in public. I could easily understand being
convinced by an artist's rendition, but to actually put that
hideous thing on and strut out in public? Makes on wonder
about the sanity or intelligence of the starlet.
--
Beverly
http://ickes.us/default.aspx
|
|
Posted by Lizzy Taylor on September 24, 2009, 4:32 am
BEI Design wrote:
show/hide quoted text
> "Sharon Hays" wrote
>
>> And it's funny how
>> often we are all in agreement. How 'bout that red dress
>> with the ruching
>> and the *ahem* bust accentuation. That was just awful.
>
> One wonders of the poor girl ever tried it on before
> appearing in public. I could easily understand being
> convinced by an artist's rendition, but to actually put that
> hideous thing on and strut out in public? Makes on wonder
> about the sanity or intelligence of the starlet.
I like the classic, classy get-ups myself, but it seems to me that the
critics/reviewers/scorers quite often seem to be more taken with how
much of a feature can we make the bust and/or how likely is there to be
a "wardrobe malfunction".
Then again you wonder if the designers create some of the garments
purposely to see if somebody is dumb enough to wear them in public.
Lizzy
|
|
Posted by Kate XXXXXX on September 22, 2009, 3:49 am
BEI Design wrote:
show/hide quoted text
> Time once more to sharpen your claws and evaluate the Emmy's
> 2009 Red Carpet gowns and designers:
>
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/21/emmys-best-dressed-2009-s_n_292910.html?slidenumber=0#slide_image
show/hide quoted text
>
> and
>
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/21/emmys-worst-dressed-2009_n_292924.html?slidenumber=0#slide_image
show/hide quoted text
>
> Hee hee hee...
>
Some were so-so, some not so bad. No real stunners, and no serious faux
pas either. Not so much to argue about as in previous years. I did
wonder at some of their grading. What was so stunning about the A
grades, and so different about the C's and D's? The odd frock too long,
or crumpled, but nothing we couldn't fix... ;)
--
Kate XXXXXX R.C.T.Q Madame Chef des Trolls
Lady Catherine, Wardrobe Mistress of the Chocolate Buttons
http://www.katedicey.co.uk
Click on Kate's Pages and explore!
|
|
Posted by Sharon Hays on September 23, 2009, 8:07 am
robb wrote:
show/hide quoted text
<snip>
> The guys all got the right grades even Cryer's D.
I'm so glad you reminded me of John Cryer's outfit. Raise your hand and
wave it madly in the air if you remember the movie "Pretty in Pink."
show/hide quoted text
<waving madly> I thought the outfit was an homage to Duckie from Pretty in
Pink. That was his first major role, wasn't it? Possibly because John
Hughes passed recently?
When I saw that outfit, all I could think was "It's Duckie!" And I really
wanted them to pan down so I could see if he had on those awful white
shoes. LOL
Sharon
--
Never try to teach a pig to sing. It's a waste of time and just annoys the
pig.
|
|
Posted by Emily Bengston on September 23, 2009, 7:25 pm
show/hide quoted text
Sharon, I can't wave, :>( because I never saw that movie and am not familiar
with John Cryer. I must look it up and see what it was all about.
Emily
|
Page 3 of 4 < 1 2 3 > last >>
|
|
|
Yahoo! 
Google 
Windows Live 
del.icio.us 
digg 
Netscape 
XML Sitemap
<snip>
>> Ok, *now* have at it.
> Heh heh heh Thanks Beverly. I love these discussions.