Thanks all- at 5’5” with longer legs, less torso, I think it looks good - as long as I wear a heel and don’t tuck in to minimize squared off torso. Appreciate the feedback!

I'm 50 and usually a 2 or 4 in jeans. I wouldn't wear them because they make me look short, flat, and wide, not because I'm too old.

I'm 5'4 - too "tall" for petites, too short for regular length, too cheap to get jeans altered. I have a straight/rectangular shape.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With wide-legged pants of any sort, you really need to be thin. If you are not thin, then really it just adds dimension/width to the body.

I agree that you really need to be thin. Otherwise, you'll look wide.

This choice of jeans is just a miss for this person. The line of the jeans emphasizes her thighs. The pleated waist as well. There are wide legged jeans that will flatter her, however.

I disagree that you “have to be thin” for wide legged trouser jean. My sister is 55, size 14, and dresses well. She wears wide legged trousers jeans and looks amazing; she’s only 5’5” but has legs for days (“Apple” shape) and a small butt. I think it helps that she gets everything tailored and wears higher end brands, gorgeous shoes, bags, etc.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With wide-legged pants of any sort, you really need to be thin. If you are not thin, then really it just adds dimension/width to the body.

I agree that you really need to be thin. Otherwise, you'll look wide.

There are at least 10 sizes between thin and this. You don't need to be that thin to wear wide legged pants, especially if your legs are long.

The stying of this outfit is wrong. The proportions are off and those shoes are bad. Not sure why the jeans have pleats either.

To answer you question OP, if they look good than wear them. The style isn’t too junior.

It's never the age, unless you're baring crepey, sun-mottled skin all over the place - and then more power to YOU! - it's always about your figure. If you're reasonably slim, you will look better in anything, even a garbage bag, than a fat 20 year old.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With wide-legged pants of any sort, you really need to be thin. If you are not thin, then really it just adds dimension/width to the body.

I agree that you really need to be thin. Otherwise, you'll look wide.

There are at least 10 sizes between thin and this. You don't need to be that thin to wear wide legged pants, especially if your legs are long.

Anonymous wrote:With wide-legged pants of any sort, you really need to be thin. If you are not thin, then really it just adds dimension/width to the body.

I disagree actually, I think you just really need long legs. The girl above actually looks good to me. It’s not making her look smaller obviously but I like the look.

Anonymous wrote:With wide-legged pants of any sort, you really need to be thin. If you are not thin, then really it just adds dimension/width to the body.

I agree that you really need to be thin. Otherwise, you'll look wide.

With wide-legged pants of any sort, you really need to be thin. If you are not thin, then really it just adds dimension/width to the body.

I think they look ok, butt looks good and all, but wonder if that ship has sailed for me? Opinions?