Best Royal Brides & Wedding Dresses

[Mia_mae]

I thought Charlene looked beautiful, simple and elegant, as did Catherine.
Charlene's was a, let's say, modern bride. Her shoulders can be hard when dressing up for, so ,I guess, the half bare shoulders was necessary. The only thing I didn't like was the color, or maybe I haven't seen enough pictures of it, (because I remembering seeing pictures of Kate's dress after the ceremony and really loving the dress even more). I thought was too white. And that's just personal, I don't like it that white with the silky fabric.




But.. If I was to chose, and I really mean that, not just because I'm more of a fan of the British I would say the Duchess's choice would be mine as well. I'm a lacy kind of gal

 

[XeniaCasaraghi]

I hated Charlene's shoulder design. I hate when people try to tell royalty what to wear, but I really think the gown would have been better if the dress was either spaghetti strapped, or long sleeves. As for the color, that is one thing I absolutely loved. Also the bottom and the lower train were really fantastic.

 

[CrownPrincess5]

I agree Xenia. I love her dress but the top was disappointing. It reminded me of Victoria's wedding dress actually. Charlene is almost always wearing something that shows off her shoulders, so I'm not surprised by the design, but after all is said and done, she looked fab.

 

[COUNTESS]

I hated Charlene's shoulder design. I hate when people try to tell royalty what to wear, but I really think the gown would have been better if the dress was either spaghetti strapped, or long sleeves. As for the color, that is one thing I absolutely loved. Also the bottom and the lower train were really fantastic.

It is July and hot, long sleeves is ridiculous. I have, recently, seen a number of bridal gown designers explain that if you have broad shoulders, straps, are not good. She, actually, would have been better off strapless, but dictates of the church.....

 

[XeniaCasaraghi]

So long sleeves in July is crazy, but a long gown with not one but 2 trains is just dandy? I don't think so; besides that is how "I think" the gown would have looked better. As it was, without the train, it looks like something I would see at the Oscars.

 

[Rosapru]

the problem with Charlene's dress is that she wore that dress ... before. Many times in fact. Slightly the dress for the Red Cross Ball, and others gala in Monaco.

Again and again the same dress.

What's the point to do the same dress again and again?

Your wedding dress has to be very special. We were waiting for something magical. It was not. She could'nt walk properly because of the train.

As for Kate: I dont think her dress could be worn in a wedding village. But Charlene's one can. The proof. But try to put Charlene in Westminster abbaye with her dress? Out of place. It's a gala or ball dress for me. Not a royal wedding dress.

Charlene miss the point event if she was truly stunning.

 

[NotHRH]

So long sleeves in July is crazy, but a long gown with not one but 2 trains is just dandy? I don't think so; besides that is how "I think" the gown would have looked better. As it was, without the train, it looks like something I would see at the Oscars.

XeniaCasarhagi,
The point to not wear long sleeves on a very hot, sunny July day in Monaco has absolutely nothing to do with fashion, everything to do with practicality. The new princess only did herself a favor by choosing to keep herself as cool as possible during her outdoor wedding. The long train of her wedding dress would never be a contributing factor conducive to profuse perspiration during her big day.

 

[Moonmaiden23]

the problem with Charlene's dress is that she wore that dress ... before. Many times in fact. Slightly the dress for the Red Cross Ball, and others gala in Monaco.

Again and again the same dress.

What's the point to do the same dress again and again?

Your wedding dress has to be very special. We were waiting for something magical. It was not. She could'nt walk properly because of the train.

As for Kate: I dont think her dress could be worn in a wedding village. But Charlene's one can. The proof. But try to put Charlene in Westminster abbaye with her dress? Out of place. It's a gala or ball dress for me. Not a royal wedding dress.

Charlene miss the point event if she was truly stunning.

You will never see anything like what Charlene wore at some small village wedding, I guarantee. Neither the train nor the long, gauzy veil would fit inside a village church.

Kate's gown was very, very pretty...but it was not suited to the scope and majesty of Westminster Abby, and her hair came close to being a flop...once her veil was off her face it looked boring and average.

She completely dropped the ball with her hair and veil, imo.

Once Charlene lifted her veil it continued to look regal and Royal, imo.

And Charlene's hair and makeup blew Kate's completely out of the water!

Both were exquisitely beautiful brides, but Charlene gets my vote for rising more to the occasion.

 

[Rosapru]

Charlene was stunning but her dress was perfect for an outdoor wedding. Even in Monaco Cathedral (which is not Westminster) the dress would have been out of place.

For the train, I think it was beautiful but too long for a so simple dress. Doesnt match. Of course when I was speaking of wedding village I didnt not include the train. Did you ever seen apart in royal wedding dresses with train? I dont think so. So without the train, this dress is perfect for a summer wedding, because of course it's a stunning dress.

For Kate's hairdo at her wedding, I just can agree with you. No match with Charlene beautiful and perfect hairdo.

No kate's face was not boring and average. Because she was radiant and happy. A bride is never boring and average.

She wears lovely earings and a tiara. Not boring in my point of vue.

Last news: the little girl in Saint-Devote who sing with her mother cries after Charlene leaves the church in her mother arms. She spend a lot of time to improve her singing to be perfect the d day. And she feels she was not aknowledge by Charlene. Not even a "bravo" or "fantastic". Nothing.

For me Charlene is not THE BRIDE because of details like this one.

When she enter the palace, she walks before on her father's arm. Not a word or a smile or a wave for the monaco population. But she ignored this population for a while now because she has not yet learn french.

 

[Mia_mae]

I guess we can agree to disagree.

You gals must be going to some fancy weddings, because I have been to my fare share of them lately (a gift when you reach your 20's) and none looked like Charlene's and Catherine's wedding gowns.

About Catherine's hair, I'm still on the fence about it. Because even with a updo, we would not see much, since her veil was not transparent enough. So If just to see the hair up wouldn't make it better. The makeup, well that was typical Kate, and the thing I would change.
But There was no doubt she was a very REGAL bride. You can see her dress won't fad away. When she and William left the cathedral you could fell the sense of history, the grandness of the moment. The train could be bigger, but once I saw that picture of her and William with the pageboys and bridesmaid I really started to like the length.

About Charlene, now that you put it Rosapru, It makes sense to me. the sillouete is something I have seen her in so many other times, but I guess it's because it suits her broad shoulders. It was beautiful, but a long train doesn't equal a Royal Bride. You could see she was struggling with it, it looked heavy.
I fell it was more Hollywood-ish wedding.

 

[olebabs]

I think Charlenes dress was fantastic even without the train. But she lacked the most important acessory..A SMILE!! A bride can wear the most beautiful dress, but if she doesn't smile, well stay at home.

 

[Empress Merel]

the problem with Charlene's dress is that she wore that dress ... before. Many times in fact. Slightly the dress for the Red Cross Ball, and others gala in Monaco.

Again and again the same dress.

What's the point to do the same dress again and again?

Your wedding dress has to be very special. We were waiting for something magical. It was not. She could'nt walk properly because of the train.

As for Kate: I dont think her dress could be worn in a wedding village. But Charlene's one can. The proof. But try to put Charlene in Westminster abbaye with her dress? Out of place. It's a gala or ball dress for me. Not a royal wedding dress.

Charlene miss the point event if she was truly stunning.

Obviously you have never seen My Big Fat Gypsy Wedding or Say Yes To The Dress. Poofy skirts and preferably strapless have been the trend for too many years now. I doubt Charlène's wedding dress is something you will find often in the stores. Neither will Kate's dress. The craftmanship is too high for that, simple as that.
The work, effort and money that goes into the smallest detail is not what anyone who has a ''village wedding'' (whatever that is....) can afford.

Charlène is my favorite now. Followed by Kate's. As much as I loved Kate's dress and adore the House of McQueen, Charlène was more to my own personal taste. Timeless. The veil was nicer aswell.

 

[Duke of Marmalade]

Best wedding dresses of royal women of my generation, in my opinion:
Mette-Marit, Maxima, Charlene, Victoria.
Armani is a true master of his art.

 

[Laura]

I think Kate was a beautiful bride, but there was somthing missing...she would not have looked out of place in a village church wedding.

Charlene? Can anyone see that dress at some regular parish church with it's magnificent diamonds, crystals and 20 foot court train?

That is how a Royal bride should look, imo.

Kate's gown was very, very pretty...but it was not suited to the scope and majesty of Westminster Abby, and her hair came close to being a flop...once her veil was off her face it looked boring and average.

She completely dropped the ball with her hair and veil, imo.

Once Charlene lifted her veil it continued to look regal and Royal, imo.

And Charlene's hair and makeup blew Kate's completely out of the water!

Moonmaiden23, you took the words out of my mouth! Kate's wedding dress still irritates me, I can't really say it's an awful dress because it was a very well-done piece of clothing, with high-quality lace and it fitted her body like a glove, that's very high-quality craftmanship. But it wasn't an oustanding gown, it clearly lacked the wow factor. The first time I saw it, I just thought I had seen this dress before, the top part was absolutely déja vu and I don't think that this V-neck was appropriate (it showed her chest bones, eek). As for the skirt, I found it very boring, those pleats reminded me of the uniforms of the nuns in my mother's convent school back in the 60's... The colour chosen was just bland as well, superposing ivory and white silk gazar didn't do the trick at all for me, unfortunately the lovely lace appliqué didn't show off well against this background. Finally, her hairdo destroyed it all, an updo would have been de rigueur for such occasion. Moreover, the tulle of her veil was quite heavy and thick and kept sticking to her face when she had the blusher... All in all I was quite deceived by the design and overall image the bride conveyed, it was as if the top didn't match with the skirt and neither had anything to do with the veil and hairdo. To me it looked like Kate had designed her gown herself, there seemed to be little input from Sarah Burton in that aspect and even less from McQueen (appart from the nipple touch and padded waist). When there were rumours back in Feb/March that Burton was the designer, I thought there was hope that Kate would be a stunning bride, for her Autumn/Winter 2011-12 Ready-to-Wear collection was a delight to see, with some very nicely textured off-white gowns. Alas, Burton has not yet made a name for herself and wasn't strong enough to guide Kate in the design; such a thing would never have happened with seasoned names such as Galliano or Vivienne Westwood, just to name 2 of the leading British designers.

Regarding Charlene's gown, it was just perfection! Armani had a clear vision of the overall effect that the gown would have: see the flowy airy light and sheer tulle around her face, complementing a classic updo and stunning antique jewelry; the nice silhouette, the high-quality embroidery and lovely fabric texture and colour. Only an experimented and very talented designer could have reached that.

Sorry, but to me the words that best summarise Kate's dress are "glorified - and a tad perverted - nun"... And compared to Charlene on her wedding day, Kate really looked provincial.

Best wedding dresses of royal women of my generation, in my opinion:
Mette-Marit, Maxima, Charlene, Victoria.
Armani is a true master of his art.

Yes, Duke of Marmalade, I agree with you that they're the best royal wedding gowns of the last 10 years.

 

[Skippy]

Best wedding dresses of royal women of my generation, in my opinion:
Mette-Marit, Maxima, Charlene, Victoria.
Armani is a true master of his art.

I hope that you are not referring to Armani as designer of these dresses?

 

[Skippy]

Moonmaiden23, you took the words out of my mouth! Kate's wedding dress still irritates me, I can't really say it's an awful dress because it was a very well-done piece of clothing, with high-quality lace and it fitted her body like a glove, that's very high-quality craftmanship. But it wasn't an oustanding gown, it clearly lacked the wow factor. The first time I saw it, I just thought I had seen this dress before, the top part was absolutely déja vu

The same I had with Charlene's dress - absolutely déja vu.

and I don't think that this V-neck was appropriate (it showed her chest bones, eek). As for the skirt, I found it very boring, those pleats reminded me of the uniforms of the nuns in my mother's convent school back in the 60's... The colour chosen was just bland as well, superposing ivory and white silk gazar didn't do the trick at all for me, unfortunately the lovely lace appliqué didn't show off well against this background. Finally, her hairdo destroyed it all, an updo would have been de rigueur for such occasion. Moreover, the tulle of her veil was quite heavy and thick and kept sticking to her face when she had the blusher... All in all I was quite deceived by the design and overall image the bride conveyed, it was as if the top didn't match with the skirt and neither had anything to do with the veil and hairdo. To me it looked like Kate had designed her gown herself, there seemed to be little input from Sarah Burton in that aspect and even less from McQueen (appart from the nipple touch and padded waist). When there were rumours back in Feb/March that Burton was the designer, I thought there was hope that Kate would be a stunning bride, for her Autumn/Winter 2011-12 Ready-to-Wear collection was a delight to see, with some very nicely textured off-white gowns.

She wore her hair like she usually wears it - we have rarely seen her with an updo and suddenly wearing one because it's your wedding day is not necessary. It is likely to make you feel uncomfortable because you are not used to it.

Alas, Burton has not yet made a name for herself and wasn't strong enough to guide Kate in the design; such a thing would never have happened with seasoned names such as Galliano or Vivienne Westwood, just to name 2 of the leading British designers.

I doubt that Sarah Burton was not strong enough simply because her name is not so big yet. She is not a rookie.

Regarding Charlene's gown, it was just perfection! Armani had a clear vision of the overall effect that the gown would have: see the flowy airy light and sheer tulle around her face, complementing a classic updo and stunning antique jewelry; the nice silhouette, the high-quality embroidery and lovely fabric texture and colour. Only an experimented and very talented designer could have reached that.

We obviously disagree on that. The only thing I like about Charlene's gown is the embroidery on the front.

Sorry, but to me the words that best summarise Kate's dress are "glorified - and a tad perverted - nun"... And compared to Charlene on her wedding day, Kate really looked provincial.
Yes, Duke of Marmalade, I agree with you that they're the best royal wedding gowns of the last 10 years.

No, Kate did not look provincial on her wedding day. She looked stunning, Charlene looked too simple - for my taste.

Furthermore, I feel that this is becoming a competition I don't want to participate in. So I'll refrain from posting here.

 

[roseroyal]

Charlene takes my # 2 spot.

 

[Empress Merel]

In defense of Sarah Burton, she has been the right hand of Alexander McQueen for over ten years and in the last years, did a lot of the heavy-lifting for him (as Alexander was headed downwards)
Alexander McQueen's hand was and is unique that created so many masterpieces and with his right hand being Sarah and now she is doing a fine job at creating her own legacy. You cannot be Alexander McQueen's right hand and not be a complete mastermind on your own.

That said, Giorgio Armani has been in the bussiness for a long time and is one of the most recognizable houses in the world. His couture collections are outstanding and he did a fine job at designing the Princess's dress.

When it comes to the argument Kate vs. Charlène, it's simply a matter of taste and preference.

 

[Duke of Marmalade]

I hope that you are not referring to Armani as designer of these dresses?

Only Charlene. Valentino has similar class, he designed Maximas dress.
MM and Victoria chose designers originating from their home countries.

 

[sm1939]

I really like charlene veil when she came into the church , but because she didnt seem happy , it took all the shine of the dress and eveything , Im not a big fan of her dress but think it would of been so much better if she had been happy ... the other veil attached to the dress was way to heavy looking ............ I like kates truely classic .

 

[Tyger]

My tops is the Princess Charlene. That dress could only have been carried off by her body - it was her, modern and classy. I finally saw a picture that clearly showed the front embroidery - and it was superb. Her hair with the 'clasp', seen through the veiling, was beautiful - and lastly, her make-up worked.

There's no getting around comparing to Kate - since the weddings are 2 months apart. Kate had a lovely dress - and she is a beautiful young woman - but her veil, hair and especially her make-up were a flop. If she wanted her hair down there is so much more she could have done with it even down. The make-up was awful - especially through the veil - and, in fact, her eye make-up continues to be a problem. Its really overdone. (I keep getting flashes of Elvis Presley and his odd preference regarding how his wife Priscilla did her make-up, particularly her eye make-up). Someone who saw her close-up commented about the eye make-up being overdone (in their opinion anyway).

Charlene, however, was all class. She clearly was able to consult with professionals and was able to work with others' opinions on what would be best to achieve a sophisticated and elegant impact suitable to a royal wedding. Catherine is just a very different personality - and it was clear in her gown/hair/make-up choices.

I will always have a fondness for the Duchess of York's dress - her overall impact felt very comfortable and classy at the same time. It was 'her'.

I agree about Mette-Marits wedding dress - interesting that she had a similar veil arrangement as Charlene - but Charlene's veil was inspired. As mentioned, the sense of light and airiness was what made it great.

To me the best dresses really take into account the bride's body type and height and this includes incorporating the hair in 'the line'. It takes an architect.

 

[Mia_mae]

Princess Victoria's dress would be my last choice,among this ladies, of a wedding dress. The wedding was beautiful, the bride looked happy, the groom too, but if I was to chose I would just pass it by.However with that tiara there's not much you could do, so the best was to keep it simple.
Maxima's is one of my favorites, but it had a more matronly look, besides it was during a more cold weather so that the fabric made it look more heavy. This is one that I had to see the details to really appreciate, otherwise I would only pay attention to the veil.
Mette-Marit was one that grow on me, I wouldn't pick it for myself, but can see that it fit's her personality, and we all agree this is very important.

One thing that some people here keep saying and that I completly disagree is the feeling I've seen that before.Hello! If you are a girl girl like me you have come a cross a biziliion different wedding dresses styles and I can honestly say none of the before mentioned brides have totally new designs. The ladies themselves made the difference (and those fabulous tiaras, of course)

Olebabs & sm1939 Charlene looked aestheticly beautiful, but as you have also noticed she missed one very important thing Genuine happynes!
But we can't blame her for that one. I'm surprise she show up at all!

 

[XeniaCasaraghi]

As I've said before, I've seen Charlene's dress before and I'm not even counting it being on Victoria. I've seen women wear similar dresses to the Oscars; it looked like something a guest would wear to an expensive wedding reception or even a prom. The beading at the bottom was beautiful, but they should have done more at the top. Overall it was very boring and standard and appeared to be off the rack. The way the shoulders were covered was very unattractive and I restate it should have been long sleeved, short sleeved, mid length sleeved, or spaghetti strapped.
Charlene and Kate both had that crazy bump in the middle of their hair like they were wearing a bump it. Kate's veil was better, but Charlene's hair was better, despite the bump. As for Char's trains, I agree it was too much for a simple wedding gown, but at least it didn't have the roll of toilet paper feel like Diana's and Victoria's. Overall she looked beautiful in a pretty gown which just so happened to be unoriginal and a little boring.
Mette-Marit's gown was simple but completely original, I've never seen that kind of dress before.

 

[COUNTESS]

Sorry, Charlene's gown was stunning. I am sure sleeves were out, because of the heat and shoulder covering was in, because of relgious restrictions. Strapless would have been better. Everyone in my family has always had a "train". It depends on the formality of your family and the venue. Kate's gown was lovely, but too "I have to cover up" look. Too much lace, also. Charlene's veil; was spectacular, Kate's looked like they threw something over her head. I was disappointed. No one knows if Charlene did not have genuine happiness. Even with the rumours. Who cares. He didn't marry them, he married her. Victoria's gown was a carbon copy of her mother's. Very unimpressive.

 

[XeniaCasaraghi]

I actually thought Charlene's veil looked like it was thrown over her head. Then again, I don't like that kind of veil that starts at the back of the head.

 

[Moonmaiden23]

Charlene was stunning but her dress was perfect for an outdoor wedding. Even in Monaco Cathedral (which is not Westminster) the dress would have been out of place.

For the train, I think it was beautiful but too long for a so simple dress. Doesnt match. Of course when I was speaking of wedding village I didnt not include the train. Did you ever seen apart in royal wedding dresses with train? I dont think so. So without the train, this dress is perfect for a summer wedding, because of course it's a stunning dress.

For Kate's hairdo at her wedding, I just can agree with you. No match with Charlene beautiful and perfect hairdo.

No kate's face was not boring and average. Because she was radiant and happy. A bride is never boring and average.

She wears lovely earings and a tiara. Not boring in my point of vue.

Last news: the little girl in Saint-Devote who sing with her mother cries after Charlene leaves the church in her mother arms. She spend a lot of time to improve her singing to be perfect the d day. And she feels she was not aknowledge by Charlene. Not even a "bravo" or "fantastic". Nothing.

For me Charlene is not THE BRIDE because of details like this one.

When she enter the palace, she walks before on her father's arm. Not a word or a smile or a wave for the monaco population. But she ignored this population for a while now because she has not yet learn french.

Charlene was overcome inside St Devote and was really crying...I feel badly if it is true the child felt overlooked but in that case Albert should have spoken to her, especially since his wife was crying, probably distracted and last but not least is not fluent in French.

 

[Queen Angelique]

I agree with you COUNTESS.

I think Kate was a beautiful bride, but there was somthing missing...she would not have looked out of place in a village church wedding.

Charlene? Can anyone see that dress at some regular parish church with it's magnificent diamonds, crystals and 20 foot court train?

That is how a Royal bride should look, imo.

I agree entirely, dear Moonmaiden. Catherine looked beautiful and very elegant, but to My taste Her train should have been at least twice as long and attended on by a bevy of maids, to be truly Royal. I also would have preferred a much more Majestic Tiara.
Charlene looked very Regal and beautiful, and I loved the embroidery detail. But the dress was too slinky to be really Royal. However, Her train was nearly right. She should have worn a gorgeous Royal Tiara though.
And you are all right, as naturally we have our different tastes and opinions about what Royalty should idealy look like.
Angelique.

 

[stephanievl]

My new top 10

1 princess Marie
2 Duchess of Cambridge
3 Princess Claire
4 Princess Mathilde
5 Princess Letizia
6 princess Tessy
7 Princess Victoria
8 Isabella Orsini
9 Marie Christine of Austria
10 Princess Charlene

 

[Moonmaiden23]

I agree entirely, dear Moonmaiden. Catherine looked beautiful and very elegant, but to My taste Her train should have been at least twice as long and attended on by a bevy of maids, to be truly Royal. I also would have preferred a much more Majestic Tiara.
Charlene looked very Regal and beautiful, and I loved the embroidery detail. But the dress was too slinky to be really Royal. However, Her train was nearly right. She should have worn a gorgeous Royal Tiara though.
And you are all right, as naturally we have our different tastes and opinions about what Royalty should idealy look like.
Angelique.

Hey Angelique...where have you been...it's great to see you back!

 

[XeniaCasaraghi]

Stephanievl my list hasn't changed aoni won't post it again. The only comparison I could do is Victoria vs Charlene. They both had similar dresses with long trains. I think they also had similar boquets.