Arie Jr & Lauren Luyendyk - Bachelor 22 - Discussion #5

@Jolena I felt exactly the same. The bodice of the dress was awful. IMO I could not understand the point of that shear material at her cleavage. IMO those netted bags of clementines sold at the grocery have more coverage.

Kashathediva wrote:@Jolena I felt exactly the same. The bodice of the dress was awful.  IMO I could not understand the point of that shear material at her cleavageT. IMO those netted bags of clementines sold at the grocery have more coverage.

Love that dress a lot. Those in the industry have raved about the dress, and one designer has now reproduced the dress, just saw it this evening

notarose wrote:

limoncello wrote:I'm not a fan of either of them, however, I am a fan of love and I think these two seem to be made for each other with all their beauty and flaws. Plus I am a sucker for babies. I'm glad there's another couple going against the odds of the show.  

I really like the flow of the bottom half of her dress ... very delicate. I also like the strands of pearls as a way of attaching her veil. 
Did they have attendants?

I thought the bottom half was lovely too but the top half was not flattering.  Modesty mesh never is a good look and does not photograph well.  Even the top designers find it tricky to work with and it needs to be incredibly sheer to pull it off and in a more discreet location on the dress.  No need for deep plunging wedding gowns IMO.

Minney wrote:

notarose wrote:

limoncello wrote:I'm not a fan of either of them, however, I am a fan of love and I think these two seem to be made for each other with all their beauty and flaws. Plus I am a sucker for babies. I'm glad there's another couple going against the odds of the show.  

I really like the flow of the bottom half of her dress ... very delicate. I also like the strands of pearls as a way of attaching her veil. 
Did they have attendants?

I thought the bottom half was lovely too but the top half was not flattering.  Modesty mesh never is a good look and does not photograph well.  Even the top designers find it tricky to work with and it needs to be incredibly sheer to pull it off and in a more discreet location on the dress.  No need for deep plunging wedding gowns IMO.

What is the point of a plunging neckline if you are going to try to cover it up with mesh? Either go for it or choose something not quite so revealing.

Larie wrote:Love that dress a lot. Those in the industry have raved about the dress, and one designer has now reproduced the dress, just saw it this evening

Lauren was stunning IMO, just as I expected. Plunging necklines, side panels and backs have become increasingly popular over the last several years.  It's prevalent in designs of wedding gowns, prom dresses, pageant gowns, etc. 

The "modesty panel" is generally used to add additional stability to the neckline, side panel or back - not to cover up the area or make it less revealing. It's a wise choice to eliminate wardrobe malfunctions or "nip slips". 

I guess I am a bit old fashioned, because I’m definitely not a prude. My point was, I believe a plunging, plunging neckline on any wedding gown is, sorry/ not sorry, trashy. Why have a bodice at all? IMO, it’s a wedding gown and not lingerie.
I don’t care what’s in style. Once upon a time so were harem pants and zoot suits.

Kashathediva wrote: I guess I am a bit old fashioned, because I’m definitely not a prude.  My point was, I believe a plunging, plunging neckline on any wedding gown is, sorry/ not sorry, trashy.  Why have a bodice at all? IMO, it’s a wedding gown and not lingerie.
I don’t care what’s in style. Once upon a time so were harem pants and zoot suits.

Hey, I liked the harem pants. They were comfy and I looked pretty good in them.

@Sprite . So go for it.

Kashathediva wrote:@Sprite . So go for it.

I have always known what is in style, but just because it is, doesn't mean I have to wear it. Sometimes it is because that particular style/colour just doesn't look good on me, but sometimes it is because I think it is too trashy. While I don't mind a bit of decolletage, that was just a bit too much for me. Not to mention, I'm a lot better endowed than Lauren so I would be spilling all out...even with the mesh.

@Sprite agreed. I tend to be a bit bohemian flower child, but I can definitely be unpredictable and then again just go Ivy League. Or comfort slouch.
I always go with less is more no matter what, however. You sell the clothes, IMO, the clothes don’t sell you.

FLChica wrote:

Larie wrote:Love that dress a lot. Those in the industry have raved about the dress, and one designer has now reproduced the dress, just saw it this evening

Lauren was stunning IMO, just as I expected. Plunging necklines, side panels and backs have become increasingly popular over the last several years.  It's prevalent in designs of wedding gowns, prom dresses, pageant gowns, etc. 

The "modesty panel" is generally used to add additional stability to the neckline, side panel or back - not to cover up the area or make it less revealing. It's a wise choice to eliminate wardrobe malfunctions or "nip slips". 

Yep understand what it's for but if a design is done well (sheer side panels ok) it's not needed because it never looks good particularly in the front and if it is added or needed (and I'm guessing Lauren had it added possibly because her waist needed to be looser due to bump) it needs to be super sheer and delicate mesh. This was not super sheer or delicate and distracts from the over all front of the dress design. IMO. The bottom and back of the dress were beautiful!

So far, online review of the dress has been positive, have not yet come across a single negative comment about the dress.  The dress has received high marks. The pics are stunning. the one Lauren just posted is so beautiful and romantic with that old world charm