Least Favourite Royal Wedding Dress


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Ok! ;) You're the boss!


I must add in defense that the dress, the veil and the bouquet are absolutely stunning. And the shoes... well they are original, don't you think?!


Forget the expression of relieve that Victoria must have below while enters the church hiding :D ....

Regards.
 
hania said:
shame but the last pics did nothing in her defense!!!

I didn't mind the dress (I actually thought it was pretty and different), but combine the dress with the veil and you have another burka. Maybe it would have worked with a more opaque veil, one that gives less of an impression of a sack hung over the bride.
 
I think so too, the dress was nice but the veil gave a tent effect.shame, is there any pics of her more recent dress!!!!
 
I rather liked Sarah's dress. It's not so Cinderella-frills and puffs. It suited her age at the time of her wedding. Actually, I was quite surprised by her choice. Her wardrobe had lots of frilly collars and fringes before and even after her marriage. Her dress was considerably simpler and she looked great in it.
 
I too was suprised about her wedding dress, it was much nicer than what I thought it would be , because she really didnt have the best taste in the world at that time .
 
Last edited:
iowabelle said:
Isabel, I agree. I wonder why they didn't do a "mock up" and put the dress in the coach and see how it would travel. (Maybe they just weren't thinking about that.)
They once admitted to not taking into account how small the coach was and how large Earl Spencer was. Between the size of the dress, the size of Diana, and the size of Johnnie, it's no wonder the poor thing got wrinkled. Of course, a different fabric, one resistant to wrinkling, would have been a better idea, but hindsight's 20/20.
 
I dont think at the time, they knew about other fabrics and things!!!
 
Countess Spencers dress imo was beautiful. What I hate most about royal weddings is that the dresses are dull, dull, dull. At least Victoria's was unique. Her dress was gold, not yellow or brown. Her hair was up, but it fell down in the carriage and there was not time to put it up again. It is one of my most favorite wedding gowns. :eek: :eek:
 
Princess Elena's dress is not that bad. just kind of old-fashioned. not nearly as bad as some of what we've seen in this thread.
 
i also think the same, it is just a bit boring for the time and era!!!!
 
Countess Spencer looks like a very stylish ghost at Halloween!
 
Countess Spencer looks like a very stylish ghost at Halloween!

I hate to say this but I guess you are right..She didnt look good on her wedding day.She was very thin and the dress seemed bigger and the Spencer tiara didnt look good on her.The Spencer tiara looked better when it was worn by Lady Diana on her wedding day.
 
This veil style reamined me with the one queen Beatrix wore in her wedding but she has the short one. Just quite simmilar but Betrix's veil looked much better.
 
did anyonme see camilla daughter in law's dress????what did u think??
 
two wedding dresses

A lot of brides have two wedding gowns for their weddings. That is if they can afford it britney and star could because they had the money.But event brides who aren't rich sometimes have two especially if the first one is too heavy to dance and will get in the way.
 
It is very common that a bride in Asian wedding has more than one wedding dress...some has one goan in western style and traditional style, when the others have the both gown in different traditional style each other. As I know Princess Masako, for example, at least she has two kind wedding-gowns the western style one and the traditional one. Princess Sarah of Brunei also has more than one.
 
Camilla of Britain had two dresses, one for the ceremony and one for the celebration.
 
Last edited:
In the Netherlands, some royal brides had two outfits (like Princess Anita recently): one for the civil wedding (often coloured, as I recall), one for the religious ceremony(the white gown), but generally the two events are not on the same day.
 
There are 2 ceremonies because in Netherlands (and in France also), you must have a civil ceremony, with a governement officer(a mayor, etc.) before you could have a religoius wedding (in the religion of your choice.) And I don't know for Netherlands' laws, but in France if there is no civil ceremony first , the marriage is not considered as legal.
 
Is this the same in Denmark, Germany, Sweden and Norway?
 
In South Africa the pastor or church official usually take an exam to become a licensed marriage officer as well. You can choose to just have a civil ceremony but you don't have to have two ceremonies if you marry in church.
 
In Sweden one either chooses a civil OR a religious church wedding. Religious weddings are the most common still I think. I haven't heard of anyone having both, I don't know if one can do that in Sweden, since both kinds of wedding ceremonies are valid.
 
the jacket spoiled the effect of the dress, she looked so lovely without it!!!!
 
Back
Top Bottom