Does anyone else think that Kate Middleton's wedding dress was a little dull?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Who was the perplexed looking one with the obvious nose job--any know?

Are you talking about the one with the deep-blue hat that looked like a tongue? That's Tara Palmer-Tomkinson. On CNN Piers Morgan was going on and on about how her nose was famously destroyed by doing too much cocaine and she had to have it reconstructed. I couldn't tell if he was pulling his sleep-deprived viewers' legs, but look, Wikipedia says it's true:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tara_Palmer-Tomkinson

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Come on, Kate is just attractive. Not "gorgeous". Even by english standards.

Oh come on, she's absolutely gorgeous. That figure and that bone structure..gorgeous. And, I love that she is not a bottle-blonde...or even a blonde for that matter. Score one for the brunettes!

[Anonymous]

Back to Kate, the dress needed to be bumped up to a more modern level. The veil was nice, her hair could have been straight though. Less embroidery and lace all around. The veil and dress did not go together. The basic shape of the dress was fine, but the bodice should have been smooth satin for a classy look. Full coverage would have been fine.
The little flower girls should have had color, even a simple blue or red sash would have made it wake up.
The bridesmaid looked good, but over all the bridesmaid did not look like she was in the same parade as the bride and same can be said of the flower girls. A miss-matched set.
Over all very anemic looking, dull.
Liked the trees in the abbey.
I would give it a C+.
Diana's was very nice for the time, however, not very classic, it spoke 1980's. But the whole wedding party got along in my eyes (matched), lots of color, so I give that an A-.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who was the perplexed looking one with the obvious nose job--any know?

Are you talking about the one with the deep-blue hat that looked like a tongue? That's Tara Palmer-Tomkinson. On CNN Piers Morgan was going on and on about how her nose was famously destroyed by doing too much cocaine and she had to have it reconstructed. I couldn't tell if he was pulling his sleep-deprived viewers' legs, but look, Wikipedia says it's true:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tara_Palmer-Tomkinson

So I went to the link. Interesting, but what on earth does this odd sentence mean: "This included being gunged in the "Jungle Shower", one of the first bushtucka trials."

[Anonymous]

I also though the dress looked a bit matronly and not very sophisticated and elegant - liked her sister's dress better.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am so glad to see a wedding gown with sleeves. I hope they make a comeback. All these strapless low cut wedding gowns are hugely unflattering.

YES. I would have killed to find a dress like this for my wedding.

[Anonymous]

In 2002, her public profile was revitalised when she made an appearance on the British television series I'm a Celebrity... Get Me Out of Here!, finishing runner up. This included being gunged in the "Jungle Shower", one of the first bushtucka trials.

She was on a reality tv show where she had goop ("gunge") poured all over her in a game that involved eating foraged foods (bush tucker). (I assume that is what it means).

[Anonymous]

It was nice but a little dull.

And I agree that Kate is attractive but not gorgeous. To me, she looks older than her age (in the face). She has a nice figure but it would be so much better if she had some hips.

[Anonymous]

It was elegant, classy and timeless. Perfect for a lady of her stature and for the abbey. She looked beautiful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It was nice but a little dull.

And I agree that Kate is attractive but not gorgeous. To me, she looks older than her age (in the face). She has a nice figure but it would be so much better if she had some hips.

This. She is attractive and obviously well-groomed, but I just couldn't believe she is only 29. In some pictures she looked like she might be pushing forties!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It was nice but a little dull.

And I agree that Kate is attractive but not gorgeous. To me, she looks older than her age (in the face). She has a nice figure but it would be so much better if she had some hips.

She has a funny mouth, like a very Brit-like mouth.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It was nice but a little dull.

And I agree that Kate is attractive but not gorgeous. To me, she looks older than her age (in the face). She has a nice figure but it would be so much better if she had some hips.

This. She is attractive and obviously well-groomed, but I just couldn't believe she is only 29. In some pictures she looked like she might be pushing forties!

Yes, exactly!

[Anonymous]

Ok, the dress was a bit dull.

Now, what do you think about these shoes??

http://photos.toofab.com/galleries/royal_wedding_guest_arrivals#tab=most_recent&id=371674

[Anonymous]

I thought Kate looked pretty, but I have to say that Diana's wedding makeup was flawless.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It was nice but a little dull.

And I agree that Kate is attractive but not gorgeous. To me, she looks older than her age (in the face). She has a nice figure but it would be so much better if she had some hips.

This. She is attractive and obviously well-groomed, but I just couldn't believe she is only 29. In some pictures she looked like she might be pushing forties!

I always think the same thing. I think she's spent too much time in the sun.

I did love when they drove out of the castle in the Astin Martin convertible, however - it was a great moment!