marymary
Courtier
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2005
- Messages
- 545
- City
- ANKARA
- Country
- Turkey
Love the dress and the jewels. She looks great..
I agree. The original dress was elegant and flattering and, if this is the same dress, I would go so far as to say it had been ruined. The front sillohette is completely straight and figure hugging, and not in a flattering way. It needed a little volume at the waist and in the front of the skirt (a la Queen Margarethe) to give it the required gravitas for such an occasion.I am not sure whether this is the same dress with modifications as worn a few years ago. It pretty much looks the same but the modifications are too many I think. So maybe it really is a new dress that reminds us to the one she has worn before. But I am not very sure on it..
IloveCP said:Mary wore a repeated but modified gown at the New Year's reception:
[DNF] Fotoarchief Denieuwsfoto
Even though I do prefer the original version,I thought she looked great! I love the color and the jewels.
Mary wore a repeated but modified gown at the New Year's reception:
[DNF] Fotoarchief Denieuwsfoto
Even though I do prefer the original version,I thought she looked great! I love the color and the jewels.
In some pictures, Mary's gown looks ruby red and in others it looks a deep purple, but the style, color and velvet give her the look of a medieval princess. And I see Joachim is without Marie who is very close to her due date, I understand.
Thank you for the pictures, Daria.
Here is the first time she wore the dress:
[DNF] Fotoarchief Denieuwsfoto
I LOVE everything about this look! I prefer this version better.
it is hard to say if it is the same dress becasue the one from today the cleavege is very high compare with this one and the cut in the weist too i wonder who made this dress? she always use this stunning dressees from new years even if one has the money to buy them no place where to find the i guess are all custom made specially for her???? wish i could have her dressmaker!Here is the first time she wore the dress:
[DNF] Fotoarchief Denieuwsfoto
I LOVE everything about this look! I prefer this version better.
You'll have a hard time convincing med that the hairpiece is fake - no way do I belieive it is not real gems, probably from the reworking of the tiara when it seems that the top piece(s) was taken out and the rest made more dense to accommodate Mary's smaller headsize.I think its the same dress too - here a few close ups
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-r0695F-NwuI/TwDy6ivYuyI/AAAAAAAAmMo/3XDr3VYfeA0/s1600/222222222213.jpg
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-jkQSXlmSpkk/TwDy1YZI5DI/AAAAAAAAmMY/4ad4ScrVUcw/s1600/222222222212.jpg
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-i1KDxAe1ffw/TwDzAz2bNCI/AAAAAAAAmM4/1bk2ZyADDig/s1600/222222222215.jpg
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-OE1lMT3R37U/TwDzVdL7giI/AAAAAAAAmNw/AAk5GBkG0qM/s1600/222222222225.jpg
I have to say I like this version much better than the first one:
http://www.seegerpress-online.de/topixx/data/pre-SEEGER00173119.jpg
where I found the neckline far too low and the dress itself a bit frumpy.
The new version is very clean cut and classic, perfect for me, what I dont like is the overthetop-fake hairpiece the brooch in the belt area - too much.
You'll have a hard time convincing med that the hairpiece is fake - no way do I belieive it is not real gems, probably from the reworking of the tiara when it seems that the top piece(s) was taken out and the rest made more dense to accommodate Mary's smaller headsize.
I tend to believe it's a new dress made by the same person who made the other red velvet dress. I understand when royals recycle, but I do grave for new gala dresses occasionally.
I'll eat my hat if there isnt a fake part in the hair!
http://www.ppe-agency.com/500px/Jan2012/PPE12010133.jpg
Regarding the jewel pieces, I've asked the question in the jewellery thread if the parure was shortened and the "leftovers" were used for the hair.
If so, to me it looks great. I always found the ruby parure close to being over the top, too much, but this combination looks so much better, I love the jewellery hairpieces (loved them at Charlene of Monaco on her wedding day too) and the smaller ruby parure.
I am almost persuaded that they are two totally different dresses. The neckline on the original was designed to carry the ruby necklace and this one wouldn't fit a choker let alone a piece of serious jewellery.I think its the same dress too - here a few close ups
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-r0695F-NwuI/TwDy6ivYuyI/AAAAAAAAmMo/3XDr3VYfeA0/s1600/222222222213.jpg
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-jkQSXlmSpkk/TwDy1YZI5DI/AAAAAAAAmMY/4ad4ScrVUcw/s1600/222222222212.jpg
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-i1KDxAe1ffw/TwDzAz2bNCI/AAAAAAAAmM4/1bk2ZyADDig/s1600/222222222215.jpg
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-OE1lMT3R37U/TwDzVdL7giI/AAAAAAAAmNw/AAk5GBkG0qM/s1600/222222222225.jpg
I have to say I like this version much better than the first one:
http://www.seegerpress-online.de/topixx/data/pre-SEEGER00173119.jpg
where I found the neckline far too low and the dress itself a bit frumpy.
The new version is very clean cut and classic, perfect for me, what I don't like is the overthetop-fake hairpiece the brooch in the belt area - too much.