Comparison of Kate and Meghan’s wedding dresses

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No one is better looking or more elegant than Kate.

She is like a doll brought to life. I can’t imagine a more perfect existence.

She’s like my platonic ideal of rich women.

You must have a very limited understanding of the beauty golden ratio.

DP. You must have a very limited understanding of subjective standards for beauty.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh my! Here is a comparison of the evening gowns. Meghan's wins that one hands down. Kate really doesn't look very "young and modern" next to her at all!

http://people.com/royals/meghan-markle-kate-middleton-second-reception-wedding-dresses/

Kate's wedding was nearly 10 years ago.

Her dress was very fashion forward and stylish then.

Of course it no longer looks modern compared to Meghan's dress.

It shouldn't. It is almost a decade past.

Kate's dress is absolutely timeless, as is Meghan's. Any bride could wear Kate's exact dress today and look classic, perfectly sophisticated, and beautiful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think Kate's was perfect for a first wedding and that Meghan's dress right for a more mature, second wedding.

Diana's dress was gorgeous at the time and absolutely perfect on her but looking at it now, it is really quite dated.

I think both Kate's and Meghan's dresses are more classic looks that will stand up to the test of time.

I always thought that Diana's dress needed a good ironing.

The designers have talked about that.

The dress was perfectly pressed when she put it on but they forgot to account for loading all of that fabric into the carriage. It was a lesson learned for royal wedding dresses.

How was Markle's dress unwrinkled when she emerged from the car? It looked perfect to me.

It is a different kind of silk.

[Anonymous]

Wow. I think Meghan is a stunning woman and a great choice for Harry. That said (and I'm just catching up now since I was unable to see even a minute of the wedding this weekend), I am shocked at how bad the wedding dress is. I seriously didn't think it was physically possible to make her look that large. I don't mind the style, but the fit was laughable, and the fabric way to stiff to do a more flowing, Cali look if that was what she was going for.

[Anonymous]

Welp

[Anonymous]

She looked cute and pretty. Is that what she was going for?

[Anonymous]

I really liked both dresses.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:She looked cute and pretty. Is that what she was going for?

Probably. Her style appears to be simple and clean lines. She is 36, not the future queen or consort, but marrying 6th in line to the throne and on her second wedding. She wasn't going to bust out a Cinderella meets Gone With the Wind gown. It was what she wanted and suited her. Even more important, Harry liked it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Meghan is a naturally stunning woman. How is she 36?? She looks 26!

You mean 46

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wow. I think Meghan is a stunning woman and a great choice for Harry. That said (and I'm just catching up now since I was unable to see even a minute of the wedding this weekend), I am shocked at how bad the wedding dress is. I seriously didn't think it was physically possible to make her look that large. I don't mind the style, but the fit was laughable, and the fabric way to stiff to do a more flowing, Cali look if that was what she was going for.

This! Whoever was responsible for the finally fitting screwed up

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Meghan is a naturally stunning woman. How is she 36?? She looks 26!

You mean 46

She is gorgeous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I liked Meghan’s dress much better.

I guess I expected more from Kate’s dress, then was disappointed when I saw it because it didn’t live up to all the hype that surrounded it.
While a pretty enough dress, it seemed a little too simple.

Meghan’s dress is more modern + stylish in my personal opinion.
Plus I think she is more attractive than Kate, so that makes a difference too in comparison.

She doesn’t look a day over twenty-six.

No. She looks her age.
Check out pictures of her smiling in the daylight. You can see all the little lines. I don’t know what you guys are thinking. She doesn’t have great skin. It’s fine, but she looks her age.

Agree. She looks her age.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Meghan is a naturally stunning woman. How is she 36?? She looks 26!

You mean 46

She is gorgeous.

Yes, a gorgeous woman in her late 30s.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Meghan is a naturally stunning woman. How is she 36?? She looks 26!

Wow, she is 36? She looks older.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Meghan is a naturally stunning woman. How is she 36?? She looks 26!

You mean 46

She is gorgeous.

Yes, a gorgeous woman in her late 30s.

Her eyes are too close together and her nose job is odd from the side. Her eyes are tiny and beady. You can't see any white in her eyes they are like black holes. She is going to age horribly if and after she carries children.