I knew who she was from her representation of Assange before she ever became involved with Clooney, geokid, but being a well dressed lawyer doesn't necessarily prepare a person for the media attention to clothing she has received. It would be natural to turn to someone like Wintour for advice, especially when Vogue will publish the wedding photos.

I wonder what charity they've selected to receive the money from Vogue?

I can't imagine how many people routinely fall into that water, coming out of bars, etc!

Nanny, yes- I'm glad I look like myself in my wedding pictures.

I was simply trying to draw attention to her professional accomplishments. He has said himself that he is "marrying up".

True, her fashion is now going to be much more scrutinized now that she is involved in the celebrity world.

I think she is a stunning woman, and could wear a paper bag and look good. I have never liked the high-low hem look, though. I love the headline linked below.

Here is a link that might be useful: World Renowned Lawyer Marries Actor

or this one, ha ha

Internationally Renowned Human Rights Lawyer Marries Actor Who Played A Handyman On âÂÂFacts of LifeâÂÂ

I think Geo may have meant she's didn't "come out of no where".
I believe she is a very accomplished international lawyer isn't she? I have seen her because of the Assange case. If you google images of her you will see she seems to be well dressed. Seems to favor black and lots of bright reds/pinks. But yes, we will be hearing much much more about this lady and her clothing. . .

Yes, someone higher up mentioned that she came out of nowhere, but she is a very accomplished international lawyer who is very well-known in Europe. I was just pointing that out and linking to a funny article about it.

The whole wedding seems very anti I'm-never-getting-married-again Clooney, but you can tell from the pictures he knew it was not about him and all about The Bride. It's pretty cute, I think.

When I said "nobody," I meant someone who isn't famous. Sure, she's famous in the British legal world, but most people had never heard of her until George came along.

I'm not demeaning her accomplishments at all.

I do hope people like Kim Kardashian and the likes will take notice of all the press Amal is getting. Finally we see someone with real class, not trash.

This is our first introduction and I think she looks like a complete ding dong. I do like what i can see of the embroidery, lol. And was glad to learn that was not her wedding dress! Why is she being such an exhibitionist was my question. So she's skinny and has great legs. So what.

Something is seriously wrong with our society and its values, imo, and theirs.

She has a large nose and not a good profile, so wearing her hair up may not be the best look for her.

My mom's ears stick out and she has never worn her hair up.

I've never liked the "mullet dress".

I did like the red and black dress when I saw it in motion on the news. I thought it might work well for the boats, though I would otherwise not like that type of hemline.

The bridal gown is beautiful, but I do not like off-the-shoulder style. Very few people can carry that off, though she seems to be able to do it.

Oakleyok, I didn't mean to single you out. I apologize if I offended you. My intent was to light-heartedly point out who she is.

Back to the OP's original post, I think the skirt is silly. The proportions are all wrong for her. The red dress is also a mullet dress (which I don't like), but it falls to the ground and has a nice drape.

I honestly don't think they took into account the photographers' positions and the angle from which the photographs would be taken. All above-the-knee dresses look bad when photographed from below.

She reminds me of Billy Joel's daughter, Alexa Ray, before she got her nose job.

Here is a link that might be useful:

Geo, you didnt offend me, I thought I had offended you! lol.

All I know is I wish I had her money to have clothes specially made for me, and to buy designer clothes whenever I get the urge. :)

"I honestly don't think they took into account the photographers' positions and the angle from which the photographs would be taken."

Agree that the couple probsbly didn't consider this. But anything Vogue supplied in the way of clothing to dress Amal for their photos would have already been considered from every possible angle. **IF** those high low hems were suggested by the Vogue editors it was done purposefully, i.e. provocatively. They may have been suggested to Amal as a safer bet when stepping in and out of the vaporetti, but somebody knew what they would look like from below.

Lucy - she does look kind of like Alexa Ray!

I normally don't like the high/low hem-but love it on her! She is gorgeous! I have never, however, understood the attraction toward George Clooney, especially, in his earlier acting days-he does look better as he's aged though.

I think she's gorgeous and cannot understand a sniping comment about her profile - seriously? Beauty comes in all different packages and as our world becomes smaller I would hope we learn to appreciate facial characteristics that are not all 'bunny nose all American'. As for the hemline...... maybe not the best choice but she could certainly have done worse - many people in the spotlight do.

Something odd I notice about them - well maybe not odd but, whatever! They both have really attractive (to me) slight overbites and it gives a somewhat childlike look to them when they smile - and she seems to always smile. I'm probably not explaining that well at all. It's something I notice ever since Alan Alda as Hawkeye pointed it out about Gene Tierney. I sound like a total nut job - nevermind!

Anyone notice the cake? Very unusual design on it! I might have to buy that magazine.

The dress is beautiful! I wonder what was done to make sure the veil stayed on. It looks a bit precarious.

Olliesmom, he's not the best looking guy I've ever seen, but I find him very smart, charming, and funny when interviewed, which makes him very attractive to me- plus he loves dogs.

The one I've never found attractive is Brad Pitt!

I liked the flapper style "post-wedding" dress!

dlm said:

"I think she's gorgeous and cannot understand a sniping comment about her profile - seriously? Beauty comes in all different packages and as our world becomes smaller I would hope we learn to appreciate facial characteristics that are not all 'bunny nose all American'. As for the hemline...... maybe not the best choice but she could certainly have done worse - many people in the spotlight do."

Standing up and applauding you, dlm!

She is very clever and beautiful -- but still not keen on these styles ....

Tough crowd!

As Amal is multi-cultural and in her 30's, the Giambattista Valli (a fav designer of Lupita Nyong) couture dress may have been deemed reserved.

It is reported that Amal is/was an advisor to Kofi Annon, Secretary to the UN. An Esquire article notes Annon has been a prior houseguest at Clooney's Lake Como home. This marriage may be sustainable.
~bgj

I noticed their mouths are similar too, as was his first wife ( who resembles her a little). Also think the couple looks a bit alike. Apparently not an uncommon thing.

I find it interesting he is marrying so quickly. Time will tell there but unusual for him.

He looked like a goofball young! I think he's handsome now but not aware he is royalty for so much attention over his wedding.

She does look a bit like Alexa Joel! She was so pretty and cute as a button before she modified her face. I think she might have changed her nose a little before which looked great. Too bad the pressure to be beautiful and all look alike.

I have a feeling the majority of her clothing may be 'chosen' by designers wanting to 'dress ' her as well as using a stylist.

If what I've seen is her choice in clothing, the only outfit I found reasonably 'ok' was the white pants/ top she wore to the civil ceremony. Plain, but nothing anyone with a sense of style couldn't put together themself.

As to her beauty, it's in the eye of the beholder, and that would be George. Her imperfections are clearly not noticed by him, but I suspect it's her brains where the attraction lies.

KSWL, has it been said that Vogue dressed her? I haven't heard that.

I know from pictures of her before the wedding her style is fantastic, Vogue or not, I think she can pull it off on her own.

Although I have to admit, I will hate to hear that Vogue chose her clothes.

It wasn't a sniping comment about her profile, just to offer an explanation about why she may not have worn her hair up, which would be a more severe look.

This post was edited by LucyStar1 on Wed, Oct 1, 14 at 15:18

No, Vogue did not dress her. Vogue was invited for an exclusive behind the scenes during a fitting for her wedding dress.

I'm sure she uses a stylist, but from what I can find, she chose each of her outfits. She's known for kind of off-beat looks so none of these choices really surprises me.

Not sure that Vogue (or anyone else) is dressing her. Vogue does have express rights to wedding pix, I read.

Found an interesting article. I do remember some of her lawyer outfits, but of course she would dress differently to appear in court, etc. The article talks about how (since her engagement) she has taken more care of how she dresses. She seems to favor Alexander McQueen. She chose Oscar de le Renta because of his romantic look (for her wedding gown).

Interesting!

Here is a link that might be useful: amal's clothing

She's 36. Love the picture of Clooney with the mullet. He is one guy that has aged really well.

Yes, either someone told me Vogue was involved with the trousseau or I read it somewhere (one of the UK papers, maybe) as virtually everything she has worn hasn't been seen before and there are many pre wedding photos of her wearing a recognizable outfit several times. I also haven't seen pictures of her in anything like these dresses, although she does favor pink and red. But you're right, it may have been sheer speculation and not be the case at all!

After the Stella McCartney pantsuit I like the striped Dolce and Gabbana dress best.

I would have liked to see her hair a little more formal....just don't like long, straight or semi curly hair on brides....I think it looks better in an up-do, bun, etc or at least pulled back off the face.

I have never understood brides wearing a completely different hairstyle than they normally wear just because they are brides.

I think she is just stunning, a true beauty. I liked the whacky high/low dress.

Kudos to George, about whom I know almost nothing, for going against type. He chose a 36 yo accomplished intellectual with exotic looks; not what I would expect from Hollywood.

Lol, Terriks, I think it goes with the territory of wearing a very fancy and expensive gown, having professional makeup, dancing, having a catered dinner, and doing/having a host of other things they don't normally do or have, just because they are brides! Not for this one (Amal) obviously, but for many, if not most, brides, their wedding is one occasion in their lives when they will look, smell, sound, eat and drink like completely different people than themselves.

It's an interesting concept, whether or not one's wedding should represent a complete departure and contrast to one's regular life. I have always thought that an occasion like that should be something nicer but not **completely** different from the way one normally eats, drinks, and entertains. Of course the wedding industry would disagree vociferously! But the reality gap between real life and The Wedding is really sort of embarrassing, isn't it?

"...the reality gap between real life and The Wedding is really sort of embarrassing, isn't it?"

That conversation is a completely different discussion but I could not agree more!!! And you're right, the wedding industry probably has a hit out on us right now! I've been to many 'affairs' that set the family(s) back significantly, create a boat load of debt or take a sizable chunk out of a retirement fund and for what? Yes, the venues are stunning the band/mini orchestra/dj are entertaining, the hot and cold running hors d'oeuvre delish and on and on...... but. But. I don't really have the words for the 'but'. In the end, it's none of my business and whether I think they've over spent or whether it's a blip on their financial radar doesn't matter. But I still don't get it.

Providing food and drink to large groups of people costs money, and I understand why people want to celebrate their marriages with a big party. The wealthier the couple, or their families, the nicer the venue and the trappings. The part that I find appalling is what people pay for wedding gowns. 4, 5, 6 even 7? figures for a dress you wear for a couple hours. Same goes for the Oscar gowns, etc. Yeah, of course celebs can well afford it but it just seems obscene.

I saw a show the other night where they were at a bridal salon showing " affordable" gowns similar to Amal's. Ok, so $3700 is a bargain...for a dress you wear for a couple hours.

I don't think it should be a question of how much you can afford, but rather just a really nice version of a party you would already have, just with more flowers ðÂÂÂ

Did any of you see the weddings in Downton Abbey? The house was filled with beautiful flowers and extra good things to eat for the reception, but the event was very low key, ceremony at the village church and a nice reception after. Imo that is the best possible way to get married if you go the traditional route.

I think the difference between D/A and the average person is that they had the space and the staff in their home to hold a reception. For most people, the venue is one of the larger expenses.

Our son and DIL, who live in a very expensive city) spent $20k on their wedding (excluding dress and honeymoon) which, according to them, was a steal. In contrast, DH and I had 12 people at the church when we got married and our big expense was taking them all out to a nice dinner (no honeymoon, no fancy dress)! There is no way I would ever spend $20k, even at this point in our lives when that amount is inconsequential. Just. No. Way. But, for them, it was important, so whatever. To each his/her own:)

I think if people have the funds and want to spend it extravagantly on an elaborate function, that's fine, but I do think it's foolish for people to go into debt or spend their savings on a one-time event. It's not only weddings that can get out of hand, but funerals, too.

But that's sort of my point, funnygirl. When have people who invite 150 people to a wedding ever entertained even half that many people before the wedding? I know people who have invited relatives they've met one time. That just doesn't make any sense at all to me. And IMO it seems a lot more authentic when you do what is already a part of your lifestyle, not something completely different. People are completely out of their comfort zone and have no experience with the scope of the event they are hosting----of course that's going to be stressful.

Terriks.....about bridal hair....just my opinion.....but you are in a very formal dress in a very formal(usually) setting. Suppose a bride wears her hair in a ponytail everyday.....I don't think a regular ponytail would look good with a bridal gown. Even if long hair starts out pretty and curly, usually within a few hours it goes straight, separates and can look stringy. I've seen wedding pictures where this has happened and IMO it looks awful. A more formal do doesn't necessarily mean you won't look like yourself.

As far as wedding costs.....we have set aside a certain amount of $ for each of the kids....they can use it on a house, a fancy wedding, a trip around the world, a car....whatever they want. But we've made it clear that's all they're getting until we die....save b'days, Christmas, or should some catastrophe strike we would of course help out. DS 1 got 2/3 of his 3 years ago when he wanted to buy a condo and the remainder was spent on the rehearsal dinner for his wedding last year. I said you can have it at a fancy restaurant and spend the rest of the $ or you can bank the $ and we'll do something informal at home. They chose the fancy restaurant. We are happy we did this...they know the budget they have to work with and we can't get hit with "wedding cost creep."

There were plenty of guests at my wedding that my husband and I did not know well. They were close friend's of our parents. I feel like my wedding was as much for our parents as it was for us. I did not grow up dreaming of my wedding day and the big poofy dress. I put the whole thing off for as long as possible. I would have been happy with a courthouse service and dinner with our families. But that would have made THEM unhappy. We had about 110 guests and I did whatever I could to eliminate some of the traditional reception stuff that was not me. I think everyone was happy in the end.

As far as not knowing people, many weddings have close friends of the parents or friends of the bride/groom whom they have not met. I did not know many of the people at my wedding, they were on dh's side and extended relatives.
So, his mothers good friends, my mothers good friends....

It's hard to have a wedding that is semi small that doesn't deeply offend people. It's either very small (immediate family and 1-2 bff's) or all out- otherwise so many people get offended.

Mama's invited and so is Aunt Sue! But I'm not? I don't understand ????

I understand that the bride may not know the grooms relatives, and vice versa, but I don't understand why the bride or groom wouldn't know their own relatives who are invited. If you are not close enough to people to ever make a single effort to see or meet them, why would you invite them to the most intimate day of your life? One of the many reasons I will never, ever understand weddings, except as a modern day potlatch ceremony!

I have a large family, lots of aunts, uncles and cousins. And i consider it a close extended family, But my dad was in the army so I was not raised in close proximity to my cousins. Of course I know them, but its not like they are my best buds. All my cousins were invited to my wedding. Not all of them came, but most did. I was invited to all of their weddings, and attended some. Like Bumblebeez said, its all or none when it comes to anything beyond your immediate family. The parental friends..those are the ones you probably know the least. Again, that's where the wedding becomes something other than is just being for the bride and groom. If my parents wanted their close friends to celebrate with us, I don't have a problem with that. If I did, I would have done the courthouse thing, that would be intimate.

Also by the lines of the previous posts, Chelsea Clinton had a no stranger rule for guest invited to her wedding. If she hadn't met them, then they weren't on the list. I assume this also included the same for her husband.

When my son got married last year I invited my 5 oldest friends who live far and wide and my kids have met them all maybe only once or twice.....as they were growing up we just didn't have the $ to go see them but kept in touch through letters, calls and later email. I didn't expect any of them to go to the expense to come and was absolutely thrilled when they all came. The only downside was not enough time to visit with them since you're pulled in 3,000 directions with the wedding festivities.

When I got married there were old friends of my parents there that I didn't really known but I was happy to have them there because it meant a lot to my parents.