George Clooney and Stacy Keibler at the Golden Globes after parties

Oh, I don't think I'd mind if it meant earning those sorts of pennies, and that lifestyle.

A few things stand in my way tho. Like height, bone structure, face, age.....need I say more?

Oh, I don't think I'd mind if it meant earning those sorts of pennies, and that lifestyle.

A few things stand in my way tho. Like height, bone structure, face, age.....need I say more?

Don't mean to be bitchy but I think the model wore it better. I like the way it fit her boobs.

party animal - not! wrote:Oh, I don't think I'd mind if it meant earning those sorts of pennies, and that lifestyle.

A few things stand in my way tho. Like height, bone structure, face, age.....need I say more?

Ugh, not me. The money would be nice, definitely, but as Oof Oof said in the Vegas thread, I could never do the party-every-night thing. Small talk with a revolving door of entertainment journalists and various strangers seems like the most tedious way to spend time, and as a bonus, you get to live on an elliptical machine and never, ever indulge. Sounds like a dream!

blubelle wrote:Don't mean to be bitchy but I think the model wore it better. I like the way it fit her boobs.

I'm with you blubelle. I don't mean to be a debbie downer but Stacy looked rather poured into the dress in the bust area. And it gave her fat rolls in the armpits which is a feat since she has no fat on her anywhere. But alas, to live the life she is right now.....good for her I guess if you can keep up the pace. I get tired just reading about it.

Take a break and take a look online at the Runway Armani Prive collection 2013. Lots of classy things and all featuring black velvet..........

I just really, really don't like the dress, either on the model or Stacy. And I agree, that it didn't seem to fit her well.

The next mrs clooney wrote:

Missa wrote:That makes sense; my guess is that sample sizes aren't designed for women as tall as Stacy. But still, the flying in overnight and tailoring the day of the event seems awfully last minute to me.

It was actually a runway piece for Armani Prive so it was worn by a model before Stacy wore it. Usually models these days are around Stacy's height.

Catwalk models are usually tall 5ft10 to 6ft, but LITHE, without being as broad as a gridiron player with shoulder pads. They've been distinctly like that since the 1980s, with the exception of Kate Moss & Devon Aoki, who are petite. Photographic models vary in stature. Elle MacPherson was tall, athletic & well-proportioned so, became a fitness model.

I guess Stacey Keibler didn't have what it takes to become a model. Apart from being big & broad, she's not well proportioned to be a model, if you see bikini photos. And the legs are just too bulky.

party animal - not! wrote:Oh, I don't think I'd mind if it meant earning those sorts of pennies, and that lifestyle.

A few things stand in my way tho. Like height, bone structure, face, age.....need I say more?

"Bone structure...face...." Yes, probably stood in Stacey's way too.
As well as proportions....

Depends whether you're five feet nothing, have a long body and short legs, I guess

Missa wrote:That makes sense; my guess is that sample sizes aren't designed for women as tall as Stacy. But still, the flying in overnight and tailoring the day of the event seems awfully last minute to me.

That's true. Like the backless Azzadine Alaia vintage cocktail dress Stacey wore at Ben Affleck's Argo premiere was designed to be a maxi, not stop just above the ankles.

Obviously it couldn't be lenghthened but Stacey was keen on wearing it to generate as much attention possible for its design alone, and detract the focus away from the film's cast. I think it would have looked better on Jennifer Garner as she's not so tall & then the dress could have been exhibited to its full effect.

party animal - not! wrote:Depends whether you're five feet nothing, have a long body and short legs, I guess

Oh, don't fret if that's how you look. Inner beauty & kindness matters just as much. His previous gf had a long torso & short legs too. And the present one was also never a model.
Besides, without GC, they wouldn't have had these opportunities you mention.

Missa wrote:But still, the flying in overnight and tailoring the day of the event seems awfully last minute to me.

What I didn't realise is that there's often only 1 version of a dress made. If it's liked on the catwalk, it gets shipped around the world for fashion magazine photoshoots etc.

I only learned about this from a conversation with an editor from Russian Vogue who was moaning that she was too far down the pecking order to get something she needed in time for a shoot (the fashion PRs apparently send a highly demanded item out in order of importance to them, which I guess makes sense).

If you see a dress (or whatever) in a fashion photoshoot in two different magazines, then it's possible it really is the exact same dress. Perhaps not even washed between shoots . . . . ick!

The dress Stacy wore could have been the exact same one on the catwalk which then could have been in Paris for a shoot or whatever then flown over to her and is on its way elsewhere.

Katiedot wrote:

Missa wrote:But still, the flying in overnight and tailoring the day of the event seems awfully last minute to me.

What I didn't realise is that there's often only 1 version of a dress made. If it's liked on the catwalk, it gets shipped around the world for fashion magazine photoshoots etc.

I only learned about this from a conversation with an editor from Russian Vogue who was moaning that she was too far down the pecking order to get something she needed in time for a shoot (the fashion PRs apparently send a highly demanded item out in order of importance to them, which I guess makes sense).

If you see a dress (or whatever) in a fashion photoshoot in two different magazines, then it's possible it really is the exact same dress. Perhaps not even washed between shoots . . . . ick!

The dress Stacy wore could have been the exact same one on the catwalk which then could have been in Paris for a shoot or whatever then flown over to her and is on its way elsewhere.

Katie, Armani Private works on measuring, you choose the dress from the collection send your measurements and you get a perfect outfit. Used clothing for the fashion show are sold off at cheap prices because they have already been used. Stacy does not have walked the red carpet in a dress found used on ebay?

Yes, you're talking about clients who are buying the clothes. I'm talking about the dresses being borrowed or used by models.

Katiedot wrote:

Missa wrote:But still, the flying in overnight and tailoring the day of the event seems awfully last minute to me.

What I didn't realise is that there's often only 1 version of a dress made. If it's liked on the catwalk, it gets shipped around the world for fashion magazine photoshoots etc.

I only learned about this from a conversation with an editor from Russian Vogue who was moaning that she was too far down the pecking order to get something she needed in time for a shoot (the fashion PRs apparently send a highly demanded item out in order of importance to them, which I guess makes sense).

If you see a dress (or whatever) in a fashion photoshoot in two different magazines, then it's possible it really is the exact same dress. Perhaps not even washed between shoots . . . . ick!

The dress Stacy wore could have been the exact same one on the catwalk which then could have been in Paris for a shoot or whatever then flown over to her and is on its way elsewhere.

Wow I had no idea about that either, and there is a bit of an ick factor to that. I did wonder about how many dresses were made for the runway as some of them seem so ridiculous to wear more art statement than fashion.

Do you think with the dress just flew in from Paris comment, Stacy was saying look I'm the same size as the runway models? (although her boobs didn't really fit) or was it just something to say, I think the latter but who knows. It sort of cracks me up how calculated a lot of people think she is. I just don't see that, but to each his own.

I don't think it was a calculated statement of any kind, although I always find it a little tin-eared when any celebrity talks about something like having a designer dress flown in at the last minute as though it's stressful.

The idea that other people have worn the dress before you have is kind of icky, and takes some of the fun out of it, for me anyway. It does make me believe even more strongly that this is why George's girlfriends have to stay stick thin. If they're expected to fit into runway model sized clothing, they'd have to watch every spoonful.

Missa wrote:I don't think it was a calculated statement of any kind, although I always find it a little tin-eared when any celebrity talks about something like having a designer dress flown in at the last minute as though it's stressful.

The idea that other people have worn the dress before you have is kind of icky, and takes some of the fun out of it, for me anyway. It does make me believe even more strongly that this is why George's girlfriends have to stay stick thin. If they're expected to fit into runway model sized clothing, they'd have to watch every spoonful.

I do not think this is the reason! Elizabetta(I'm sure) was made to measure suits and not just by Cavalli

m4rose wrote:

blubelle wrote:Don't mean to be bitchy but I think the model wore it better. I like the way it fit her boobs.

I'm with you blubelle. I don't mean to be a debbie downer but Stacy looked rather poured into the dress in the bust area. And it gave her fat rolls in the armpits which is a feat since she has no fat on her anywhere. But alas, to live the life she is right now.....good for her I guess if you can keep up the pace. I get tired just reading about it.

Debbie is NOT always a downer !!

I agree with Bluebell and M4rose about Stacy's boobs and I did mention in an earlier commet that Stacy's boobs were going to come out and join the party, the dress was way too small for her. some people just don't know how to dress themselves.

Katiedot wrote:

Missa wrote:But still, the flying in overnight and tailoring the day of the event seems awfully last minute to me.

What I didn't realise is that there's often only 1 version of a dress made. If it's liked on the catwalk, it gets shipped around the world for fashion magazine photoshoots etc.

I only learned about this from a conversation with an editor from Russian Vogue who was moaning that she was too far down the pecking order to get something she needed in time for a shoot (the fashion PRs apparently send a highly demanded item out in order of importance to them, which I guess makes sense).

If you see a dress (or whatever) in a fashion photoshoot in two different magazines, then it's possible it really is the exact same dress. Perhaps not even washed between shoots . . . . ick!

The dress Stacy wore could have been the exact same one on the catwalk which then could have been in Paris for a shoot or whatever then flown over to her and is on its way elsewhere.

Apparently high demand dresses can be on the move for months after they make their debut. From an editor to a stylist back to the designer then out and about again. If you think of the number of fashion publications there are globally, the number of people who want to photograph it could be very high. Not to mention stylists fighting over a dress to try and get it for their client.

Having said that, I don't really buy that the dress was flown in from Paris as a last minute thing. It was shown in Paris last year on the runway so maybe Stacy got confused? Could be what the stylist told her though. It first walked the runway in July 2012. The demand for it by the editorial mags would have been done with by the end of 2012 at the latest. I mean, the fashion season that the dress is in is over by that time. The dress most likely would have been returned to Armani's people by the time that Brad G was requesting it. Why would it be in Paris - fashion mecca - six months after it's showing? I assume Armani's offices are in Italy. I would think for convenience, any gowns that had not yet had a red carpet showing would be in their NY offices in case the dress was soughtfor one of the back to back award shows that are on every other weekend in the States. I assume it was a BS story sold to the client to make her believe the dress was special and exclusive. If there was demand and buzz about the dress, it would have been seen on one of the festival red carpets in Europe by now. I think it was just stock standard Armani gown that was available cause no one else requested it.


Armani Privé /
Fall 2012 Couture

In a season in which pants are making such a strong comeback, it made perfect sense for Giorgio Armani to remind the world what an authority he is on the subject. His couture collection was based around the image of nightfall, the colors of daybreak, sunset, and finally, the starry night skies. But it was the emphasis on trousers that first caught the eye as his models began to walk out, gracefully, on flat, pointed shoes. The cut of the pants, fluid and based in menswear without being mannish, served as a reminder of the revolution in soft tailoring for women that Armani set in motion in the eighties. It’s not that this show had a retrospective feel about it—just that the timing of that reintroduction is serendipitously in sync with the way a new generation happens to be feeling. Mr. Armani might not know it, but young designers are currently lionizing his early collections; this summer’s graduate portfolios have been crammed full of Armani inspirations.

That air of contemporary relevance—the sense of a designer being on his home territory—was threaded throughout the show, and not just because of the pants. Armani’s other claim to membership in the pantheon of greats is the position he’s carved out as a designer of eveningwear, the author of dresses which, when seen in the glare of paparazzi flashbulbs, never fail to lend their wearers self-assurance and dignity. On that level, this collection also delivered in depth. Towards the finale, he sent out graceful dresses in black velvet and midnight-blue sequin, on models whose heads were veiled in crystal-edged face-coverings—a vaguely Arabian Nights counterpoint to the fifties netting seen in other Paris collections this week. It lent a poetic finishing touch to one of Armani’s most convincing couture collections yet.

July 03, 2012 3:57p.m

Link

All this I learnt from the Rachel Zoe reality show (feel free to judge me. I judge myself)

Next on the season's list? Directors Guild Awards and SAGs?

When you consider how 'home-made' she looked at the awards last year, I think she looks so much more stylish. She isn't a model and is being dressed far better for her height and shape. I think it was Lelacorb's sentiment in a post lately that for someone who has been on the party circuit for years, she has no real sense of style, matronly one outing, fashionable and trendy the next even if it is not right for her. She wears it all and it can be very hit and miss. So the Armani was lovely and a hit for me. Hair would have been nicer up and much better put together than all the fussiness of last year. IMO