Unfug It Up: Robin Wright Penn

It's like she took a 20-something dress and tried to make it "age appropriate" by adding the sheer fabric...maybe just extend the under-dress to her knees and rock her hot-momma body?

It is kind of cute as it is, but I thknk you are on the money with the knee-length suggestion. If all of it were knee-length, I think it'd be top notch.

Is it possible that this is ugly and slutty and boring?

Yes to it being way too long and sheer and everything, but then again she is SO gorgeous that she almost carries it off. Yes to the knee length suggestion. And yes to the shoes and jewelry --- gorgeous!

What's messing with me is the fact that the bottom of the dress is only partially see-thru. If the the second layer of fabric wasn't so opaque black, the whole thing would be a lot more coherent.

i actually think the whole thing would work just as it is if the sleeves were long sleeve sheer to match the bottom half

I think if the underskirt were a few inches longer and the overskirt to her knee it would be very nice - I would want to see a bit of thigh through the overskirt but maybe not as much.

Make it knee length, lose the illusion netting, add a wicked necklace and some fancier hair.

It would look better if:
1. It was knee length, including under skirt, like you said.
2. The under skirt was floor length, too.
3. The see thorugh part was done away with on the bottom. But, it would ned to be 4 inches longer to even be a mini!

Her body is great, and there is no denying that - but doesn't this seem like something that Sharon Stone would have worn...in 1991? A little dated, a little "Look at me, see how hot I am, don't focus on my co-dependant relationship with my husband". And the hair is very very bad from the back. No offense Buttercup

Knee-length for both layers.

And Satan, if you're reading this, I'd totally sell my soul to have a body like hers. Where do I sign?

I'd say lengthen the black under bit to hit right above the knees. Keep the sheer part about 1/2 inch below the opaque part so it still has a romantic feel to it.

I'm with Tama Oil: cut the overskirt to her knee, add a little bit of fabric to the underskirt and I think it would be lovely. Because she is stunning.

it looks awful at the back, but i agree it would look a whola lotta more decent had it been knee-long.

I just don't think she took it far enough. If the underskirt was turned into granny panties, and the superfluous sheer skirt were to be bell-bottoms, then it would really be awesome. My best transvestite friend has a jumpsuit just like that in red, only his curves are more womanly.

I think that if it were, perhaps, an entirely different dress, it would be just fine.

I'm against illusion netting in general, so I agree with G. If the netting were going to stay, then make it knee-length and change the neckline - it reminds me of a bodysuit from the 90s.

I don't normally recommend it, but in this case I would have liked to see a mermaid hemline. All black opaque in the front, no sheer, and a tad longer. Then the sheer overlay in the back to the floor. And a skinny rhinestone belt.

I'm also very pro knee-lenght . Even so she would need something to spice it up a little bit.

And I'm pro divorce. Nice legs though!

I agree with G (although I'd maybe go with a bit above the knee as she's got such great legs) - definitely lose all of the netting. It looks really odd, and it's making her right foot look weirdly hoof-like as well because of where it ends.
She looks really uncomfortable, which is a shame, as without the netting it would look SO much better!

Different hair and some form of accessory that isn't jewelry or a man in sneakers would be a good start. I think this is the kind of piece that would be kind of cool on Diane Kruger, but makes Robin Wright Penn look like she's trying way too hard. Perhaps if she had both the under- and over-skirts at knee length and added some volume to it (somewhere between A-line and circle), she would look just as beautiful as she is capable of. But keep the shoes the same. They're stunningly understated.

I would make the under skirt about way longer, and the top layer only an inch longer that the under layer. So the sheerness matches the top part, but the whole dress is only knee-length. Keep everything else as is!

I actually like this quite a bit. From the front, the way the black portion of the dress is quite short and the sheer fabric continues to the floor gives you the illusion that her legs are MILES long. From the back, it looks like the front is opaque all the way to the floor, which is throwing me off.

I say lengthen the underskirt just a hair, and have the sheer shimmery over layer stop at the same place as the underlayer. Don't lenghten it to her knees, those legs need to be shown off!

i love it!

I seriously keep thinking this is Sharon Stone in thumbnails. I can't decide if that's horrible or fantastic.

Compared to the mess that is her companion's outfit, I can't get too worked up about her dress either way, though shorter would probably be better.

What's he wearing, black Keds???

I would normally hate this dress, but for some reason, it works for her. I think she is just so pretty that she can wear pretty much anything, although she is far too classy to be wearing something like this. But fug or not, her pins are fantasitic and this dress just makes them look miles long.

I'm not fond of the short sleeve/crew neck thing. Like Kari, I immediately thought of Sharon Stone. Sharon Stone more than a decade ago, that is. And it's not even flattering on Buttercup here. Which is tragic, since there's so much to flatter...she's gorgeous.

I wouldn't go knee length, because she does have amazing legs. But a bit lower would be good, just so we don't know even more personal information about her than we already do.

I think it looks hot as heck. She has killer legs - this is a good way to show them off without wearing granny hot pants a la Gaga.

what if the sheer top didn't exist? what if it was just a sweetheart-tube dress with a wee longer underskirt? I think I'd be more okay with it then.

the horrifying thing is what i thought it was. i thought that the long underskirt were tights that matched the bodice. that she had the bodice, miniskirt, and matching tights!!!! i would: definitely lose the tights-overskirt, bring the black skirt down down to above her knees and show some naked leg. her face looks great, though.

actually, i like it. it might be a bit too young for her, though.

There was a time when I would have killed to wear this to Homecoming. Unfortunately, that time was in 1993.

The dress is pretty much an awful thing for anyone to wear; it is just a 'look at me' garment. It has no fashion at all really. But her rear view looks smokin hot. So I guess it worked.

hmmm for some reason when I look at that I get weird images of some sort of Baz Luhrman student film...

Robin Wright Penn has a fantastic body though and could certainly pull off a tiny sparkly black mini. I think the underskirt is giving a hint of polterwang in the frontal shot though...

Remember when wearing a white t-shirt under a baby doll was "in?" Well, this is an equally bad idea in much the same ways. It puts two things two things together that don't belong.

This may be because I spent most of my weekend watching old episodes of 90210, but the whole concept of this dress feels a little too 90's retro for me. Like, I'm wondering why she didn't just lop off the long skirt, pull on her Doc's or a pair of 2 inch chunky loafers, and call it a day. I think the short sleeves and the sweetheart neckline are to blame, personally.

Now, if you lost the sleeves entirely, made the cut of the opaque part of the bodice straight across, and maybe hemmed the skirt to knee length, I think you'd have a dress with roughly the same look but that doesn't make me wonder whether I wore the same thing to a school dance in 1994.

Without the sheer fabric it would've been way to short to be age-appropriate; with the sheer fabric, it's like she's saying, "Hey, can you tell I'm playing peek-a-boo with my legs? Am I turning anybody on with this?"

If she had just done away with the sheer thing and lengthened the black dress part by a few inches, it would've been HOT. But alas, it is not.

This would be AWESOME... if it was Halloween & she was dressing up as "desperate mid-90's goth prom queen."

I actually really like the trend of wearing long and sheer over short and opaque. This isn't working for me because the cut of the top part is so DATED. That T-shirt over and heart-shaped-bodice under is SO late-90s-clubber kid that I can't stand it; the cheap ten-year-old versions of this (including the sparkle incorporated into the sheer fabric) can be found at Goodwill this very hour.

I think I'd like it better even if the under part were more geometric and contemporary-looking.

I think she looks great. I'd think twice about divorcing her too.

You know, I love this. She's how old? And she looks fantastic. I'd add about two inches just to make it safe for her to sit down. And I'd fix her hair and lose the ankle strap on the shoes. Doesn't need a necklace. I'd also get her some guy who looks a lot better than the schlub she's with.

Am I the only one who thinks that perhaps this wasn't quite so sheer in person? Because I can't help but think that the camera flashes aren't helping any. Not that I'm excusing her - she should know better at this stage of the game - but I'm thinking she tried it on and liked how it looked in the mirror, and completely forgot about the whole flash effect.

Don't hate me for this but I get this lovely feel from the sheer fabric. I think as a woman who can imagine wearing this dress that the fabric would feel decadent.

That said, I WOULD change the sleeves - maybe sleeveless or longer sleeves - and the two necklines would need some help. Something more plunging for both and, how to say this, as if the two "dresses" were more aware of each other rather than doing their own thing both at the necklines and hemlines. I like the length of the sheer dress, though. Maybe the under dress could give the whole idea a more classic feel if it were longer...

Oh God. The hair. The hair, the hair, the hair. That looks like mine circa seventh grade gym.

What dress? Oh, yeah. Cancel the sweetheart neckline (twee) and lose all the netting.

She looks fabulous, and this looks fabulous on her. She actually makes it look really classy - great shoes, great hair and make-up. Can I please be her, please?

Even with an appropriately evened out skirt the top would be too mid-90s. I actually would prefer to see her lose the illusion fabric cap sleeves, keep the boudoir bed curtain skirt if she must. The buttons down the back are kind of sexy, though.

I hate to be unconstructive, but I think this is boring, dated, cheap-looking and awful, and I'm just not sure that it can be saved at all. I can't really think of any minor tweaks that would make it any better to me. She may look great, but that doesn't make the dress okay. Ewww.

Knee length on both layers, and maybe lose the sweetheart neckline in favor of one that's more straight-across.

Dear Robin,

You are forty. FOUR-TEE. You can't do a skirt that short anymore without looking desperate, which you are not, right? Or are we totally misinterpreting your reconciliation?

At the very least, cut the netting off to within an inch of the under skirt, your spider veins be damned.

Whatever she's wearing, she's just gorgeous.

The dress is a mess. The sweetheart neckline is too '80's. I think I had that bodysuit. I wore it with nipple high jeans. What offends me more is the back of her hair. Is that a ponytail? Seriously, who is doing her hair?

If all the horrendous netting were just opaque black fabric, she would look 'eat crap and die, Penn' fabulous.

The under-layer smacks of Julia Roberts, circa "Pretty Woman." And the dress was pretty, in 1990 when that movie was released. However, Julia was also playing a hooker. Albeit, one with a heart of gold, but perhaps still not the style icon RoRiPe should be emmulating.

I actually think I would have liked it better if the solid fabric portion of the outfit went all the way down to the floor –– or just stopped at the knees. Continuing the sheer fabric is just goofy. It wouldn't have been a very exciting dress -- but it would have made more sense.

The opaque under dress looks more like a full body 'smoothing' under garment. I had to look a long time to be convinced it was a skirt. Too short.

The overdress -- sleeves kind of ruined it for me, as they are just not balanced to the rest of the dress. In general I like sparkly stuff that doesn't blind me, and I like this in principle.

I come up with "meh".

I love the shoes (no not his--they are yucky, but her's a beautiful.

You know, the big problem with this dress for me is the neckline on the opaque part. It just seems cheesy and inappropriately young. Maybe the opaque part could have had straps? Or been straight across on the top? I just think the look where each boob has its own little boob cup undercuts what could have been a very lovely look. Cuz I love the shimmery overskirt. Love it.

This was a scroll-down YIKES for me. The dress would be gorgeous if the underskirt was also floor length. Everything else works for me: the train, the sleeve length, the buttons down the back especially. Though maybe a nice pendant to jazz up the front would be good, and a less messy updo.

I don't hate it. It has a little bit of a late 80s/early 90s feel to it; I seem to remember Sharon Stone appearing on the red carpet in something similar circa Basic Instinct. I owned a few sheer blouses and dresses around the same time, and thought they were oh-so-sexy-and-daring. I wore them with cleverly coordinated camisoles or slips underneath. What can I say? it was the era of Heathers, and I was all about the accessories.

So this dress looks a bit dated, to my eye. But at least it's not showing us any of her lady bits, it's not too fussy, and it's figure-flattering, like the similar dress Halle Berry wore a while back.

But what's up with girlfriend's face? Is it overly harsh contour makeup, or overly harsh cheek implants, or does she look just look really jaded and old her?

I actually like it, though I hate that sweetheart neckline. Mini-dress a bit longer, change the neckline, and I would totally wear it to my next red carpet gala.

This might be unfixable for me. I hate all the sheer parts, and the bodice, and the length of the non-sheer part. I think whoever said "if it was an entirely different dress" had it right.

From the front, it looks unfortunately like a formal romper.

There's something I like about the way the netting at the bottom shows her legs, but the main mini-dress part doesn't work with it at all. The parts don't flow into each other.

Also, the netting at the top - if it must be there - would've been better in halter form. The seams where netting meets are never pretty.

Still, all things considered, it's a far better picture of her than the last one that got posted where she looked about ready to keel over.

I concur with knee-length. Otherwise, not bad. A little bit of a snooze-fest, but could be worse.

Forget the dress. Her hair is TERRIBLE. She looks like she just came from spin class or something equally mundane. What is with the sloppy little pony tail? Fug city, baby.

Is it just me or is she sort of reminiscent of Sharon Stone if Sharon Stone were worried about hiding her lady bits? Just with the sheer fabric, and the hair, and the rockin' body, that's all I can think about.

Molly's assessment: "ugly and slutty and boring."

hm, letsee...

Ugly: neck lines - both of 'em.
Boring: hair, sleeves.
Slutty: shoes, translucence.

Mrs. Penn is nonetheless a stellar beauty, but I think Molly is right...

From the back, she needs a longer- mid-thigh, at least, good gracious!- underlayer, but the detail of the buttons is fantastic.

From the front all I can see is that dope she's with, who looks ten seconds from having his fly spontaneously unzip from the strain, and who is wearing freaking SNEAKERS.

She looks so much prettier compared to the most recent post of her that i almost feel like we should just go with it. Otherwise, i'm not really feeling the whole idea of the overskirt. Having it be shorter and the underskirt be longer is fine, but that only takes it so far for me. A different dress altogether might be the ticket.

I kind of don't hate it...I see that it has mildly alarming qualities, but I think that the fact she has a good body sort of allows it to work.

She certainly has looked worse, but she's also looked a lot better too.

Reminds me of something Sienna Miller would wear.

This looks like something she got from Mary-Kate Olsen's dress-up box. The hair too. You're a rockin' hot chick, Buttercup No need for the tragically hip vibe. Think Grace Kelly instead. And color is your friend.

Does anyone here think that this dress makes an otherwise very lovely lady look... mannish? Even drag-queenish. It's like she covered up all the parts that would let you know she really is a woman, instead of a tall, slender man with broad shoulders.

1. Kevin Costner looks like crap.
2. She's wearing a basic Spanx and a sheer slip. Tacky and weird as is; but length is not the only problem with this-- if it stopped at the knee it would be boring and dated instead of boring and dated and too-long. NEXT.

Get rid of the illusion netting at the shoulders (make it a strapless dress) and make the underskirt floor length. It wouldn't be spectacular, but at least it'd be decent. Also, hair that doesn't look like you're in the middle of a cleaning spree would help. It's in this no man's land of not quite up, not quite down. Pick one!

The only thing that really bugs me is the shoe with the ankle strap. And yah Blah Blah Knee Length Blah Blah, but she still looks good. And I'm also gonna' WTF the back of the hair. Goddess-bangs/Pubescent-4th-inning-baseball-half-pony does not a red carpet 'do make.

If she wasn't in the middle of some heavy personal issues involving keeping a man interested and could wear anything she wanted, is this what she'd wear? I'd imagine she'd wear something soft, pastel, flowy with great shoes. Not this "see, I'm still hot Sean!" outfit. The sweetheart top reminds me of one of Lucy's night out with Ricky dresses and sheer to the floor stuff ... overkill. The shoes? Admittedly she rocks the shoes.

wow, is there any saving this? I am with Kari above. Very Sharon Stone circa 1991.

She looks seriously great and event-appropriate (Cannes?). Feminine, glamorous and daring which pays off.

That said, seeing great women with not-so-great partners flaunting their beauty in public while you know at home the fun is mostly erratic makes me sad. Well.

Tish, tosh, fug girls! I really liked the back of this.

The front doesn't work as well because it's bland. If the underskirt had a more interesting cut, I think this would be cool.

It reminds me of something Frederic's Of Hollywood might sell in the early 90's. If the dresses back was the only sheer part I would be totally on board. As it stands...not so much.

1. make it all above the knee
2. rig a time capsule set to 1995

voila.

That is Kevin COSTNER?!!!! Holy cow.

O.M.G. She looks awesome. I would have taken off the overskirt and lengthened the underskirt just a wee bit. It looks like she is in danger of tripping over the overskirt. Otherwise, spot on, even the shoes (although she could have rocked some bright ones if the fussiness of the lace skirt were gone.)

In total agreement that it would work if the shear material didn't pass below the opaque material.

But what is with her hair? It's lacks being styled at all. With the shot from behind, it's just a sloppily half-falling-out pony tail that takes NO EFFORT and is not special in any way possible. It's like what I do with my hair when I get home from work, get in sweats, and sit on the couch. Glad others in the comments have also seen this!

I actually kind of like it the way it is, and on this one I somehow feel it's almost a fact that all the same people currently saying it would be just fine at knee length would still be complaining about it if they had seen it that way first. The back of the hair is a problem, but girlfriend is bangin' in this dress, and besides: I'm pretty sure I saw this at prom in 1998 and it's just about time for the 90s to come around again anyway. Viva sheer over-layers.

How about a slit? Not a disgustingly high one, but maybe through the sheer fabric up to the opaque mini?

Also could the sheer skirt just be a little shorter, like not hang down so far over her feet?

I know I'm pretty much alone in this but I think the dress is hot. It just looks like she might die in it if she trips.

I think she should go all out and just lose the under-dress already. All sheer, tiny thong, loads of flashes going off, and we're in Cannes, darling!

The words 'fashion' and 'illusion netting' are a bit antithetical, no?
that said, she would look better in skivvies and a ponytail than in that thing.

i'm saying knee length, too. especially since the shoes look like they might be killer and she's covering them up.

I agree that it should have ended up knee-length, but even then it would still look a little blah. Maybe add some fun shoes, too?

I'm kind of at a loss. It's not terrible, but it's hard to think of how to make it good.

Weird - like she grafted the lower half of Barb Streisand's sheer black Oscar pantsuit to a 1920's bathing costume. Lengthen the dark underbit and lose the lower drapery and it would work. Good-looking people her age and economic status have no business not being able to dress properly. Then again, you'd gals might be out of business otherwise!

hmmm....I think if we cut the underskirt to above the knees and shortened the overskirt to just below it, it would need something else to make it dressy enough for Cannes - maybe loosing the sleeves? I also agree with the hair comments: if you are going to have a flashy back to your dress, you need a wicked hairstyle to go with it. But otherwise, she is seriously hot.

I agree- make the whole thing knee-length and I think it would look kinda nice. It looks itchy though, so I don't know.

I didn't read all the comments, but I don't think anyone has noticed that the dress is rather translucent around her torso. I can almost positively see her abs and navel! That is some weird material, girl. It's like the part on her chest is a bra with the over and underskirt semi opaque/semi transparent. How do you even do that?

The overskirt looks wrong wrong. Needs to be crazier or more tame. The underskirt needs 3 inches. The hair does not go with the outfit. Change the hair.

But whoa, she is beautiful!

I kind of like the dress but the shoes really rock. It's great to see a towering high heel without the chunky platform

scroll down fug all the way

and that's so not Kevin Costner

I find myself agreeing with many of the comments so far, but I'd like to know one additional thing I can't see in the pictures. Was it in the daytime or in the evening that she wore this thing? If it was day, I'd say get rid of the little T-shirt sleeves in the overdress and lengthen both skirts at least to the knee -- and just *below* the kneecap would be better. Most people have ugly kneecaps. If it was evening, I'd say lengthen the sleeves of the overdress to wrist-length and both skirts to ankle-length. In fact, I'd say get two dresses made -- one for day, one for evening -- and wear them accordingly, and they would both look good.

I think SHE looks great, but I think a mid-thigh (extend that skirt a couple inches, honey, you're not 23 anymore!) length skirt would be just fine. Maybe not knee-length.

Too young, would be better on one of those 90210 girls. And shorter, duh.

Who's the lady in the beautiful blue in front of her in the first pic? that looks like the makings of a beautiful dress.

Wow, her legs are great. I don't love the dress, but the make the net and the underneath part just above the knee, brush her hair and keep the shoes, and she'd pass.I wish I looked as good as she does.

Lose the sheer covering on the shoulders and make the under dress to the knees. That's what I would do.

I thought it was really flattering from the back, a little ice-skatey really, but sometimes you just have to go for what makes you look good. And her legs look amazing there, those shoes make it killer. The front though, made me a little squeemish. The neckline on the underdress kills me, sooo dated and 80s. I think if it had been straight across, or something more interesting like the buttons on the back that would salvage the whole thing.

Is anyone else completely distracted by how incredibly, painfully pretty her face is?! Bad hair. Bad dress. Hot legs. AMAZING face. Like an angel. Deal with the devil, indeed.

I couldn't form any opinions on the dress becuase of the hair. Seriously? I've seen better ponytails roll out of bed...

I had this EXACT dress for my senior dance in college, which was in the 80s. She looks a zillion times better, of course, but that is a zillion times better of bad, boring, and wrong. (Almost wrote bong)
Her hair is better, my shoes were better, which makes us even, except she is a famous actress who can hire a stylist and I was a clueless 21 year old with a degree that was only going to get me nowhere fast!

Y'all forget Sharon Stone, she's totally channeling Demi Moore at the 1989 Oscars, she just didn't part the drapes to show off her bike shorts.

Just shoot me, but I love this. I think it is fabulous in every conceivable way including her body, which I would actually die for except that that would entirely defeat the purpose.

I don't like this dress at all, but I think she still looks amazing!!

It doesn't look that bad from the front, certainly better than the back would lead you to expect. Also is that Hanif Kureishi with her in the second picture and if so why?

Lose the short sleeves, extend the under part to just above the knee, and then shorten the sheer fabric to an inch from the hem or right at the hem. Then it would be really nice. This just seems sort of late 90's done Hollywood? Either way, she does look great for her age.

I really just think the hem should have been longer, to make the outer layer more luxurious. As it is, I think it looks like some horrid attempt to "young-up" an otherwise matronly sort of concept.

She is and has always been stunning. I agree with you, if it was knee length the skirt would be in proportion with the sleeves. Anything that long and sheer is going to look odd. She is so beautiful she doesn't need to try so hard.

I would lose the netting past the opaque layer completely (though obviously lengthening the opaque layer by a good number of inches - number being debatable). Additionally, I am of the opinion that if the opaque neckline were straight across or at least less foam-cup-underwire-fitted it would lose a little of that 90s body suit thing.

I actually don't mind it being mini, if it was a couple inches longer than the underskirt currently is. Keep the sheer fabric the same length as the skirt. Also not feeling the sweetheart neckline on the under-dress - if it was straight across it would feel more modern instead of like a prom dress mistake. The flippy hair is fine in front, but she should wear it down if she's going that route.

Those shoes are killer. The front isn't as awful as the back, but the back is pretty darned awful.

I just don't get how a dress that was so obviously intended to be interesting has turned out so boring. I would even say frumpy. How can translucence be frumpy? Only way I can see it could work is if she loses the transparent thingee and, you know, puts an actual skirt on. Even then, I suspect it'd be a yawn-fest.

Seriously, the dress is so circa 1992. I would accept the sheer on top if, and only if, something happened with the bottom. Shorten the sheer or lengthen the skirt. Either way, match lengths. Kudos to those who noticed the hair! Is that supposed to be an "updo" of some sort? She's so pretty and is in such great shape. Come on, Robin girl, let's get it together.

I completely agree with the fug girls. I mean, she looks GORG from the neck up. But then it all goes funny around the knees. I like the sheer up top, and if it was just solid black to right above the knee, it would beautiful.

Since I dislike everything about it, from both lengths to both fabrics to that ugly bodice shape on the front, to those terrible little demi-sleeves, I'm going to say the best thing she could do is catch up with whoever that is in the pretty blue dress in the first pic and hit them over the head with the nearest telephoto lens and steal that dress instead.

This dress is totally confusing to me. It looks like Robin hired two stylists, one being a 15 year old girl and the other being my grandma. The teenage girl advised her to wear the little black dress. Then my grandma walked into the room and was horrified and told Robin the outfit was way too short and slutty. My grandma suggested she wear a dress inspired by her nightgown with a neckline that bordered on turtle. Robin's dress is the result of their compromise.

Um, I like it. But maybe I'm overly positive. I guess I have a soft spot for sparkly things and also the transparent/'90s thing is totally trendy now. (And of course she looks a million times better than I ever will.)

This dress would lend the perfect shroud of mystery to Bai Ling's cryptic band aids.

Oy! Make up yer mind, dearie. A cute mini dress to show off the gams, or a long dress with a boring high collar to hide any backne/boobne that likes to surprise ladies every so often.

Ya can't have both, I say. Fug! And eat some pastries. You're looking ever-so skeletonish.

Knee length is predictable. I rather like her dress. She has the legs for it.

i went all dyslexia and thought SHE was wearing HIS shoes. so at least that's not the case. ...frick, now that is ALL I CAN SEE. that and, as someone right up there just said, she looks a million times better than i ever will. also, i think that the dark underneath fabric should go all the way down. then i'd like it. without the black keds, of course.

Hair? Horrible.
Dress? Tragic.
She is incredibly beautiful with a rockin' bod, but this is all wrong. Just wrong.

"Also is that Hanif Kureishi with her in the second picture and if so why?"

It is, but I don't know why. I think maybe he wrote the book on which the movie premiering is based? (Yikes, sentence structure. You know what I mean.)

She looks stunning... if it weren't for the dress. (Although, pretty hot shoes!)

I have loved her since her days on Santa Barbara (so pretty! such shiny hair!), so I cannot judge. I am also too distracted by the guy with her who couldn't be bothered to put on dress shoes or iron his pants. And is that a gelato sploch on his tie?

Meh. It's rather...prom 1991, no? Certainly it would be better if you changed something about it...but you'd have to change it so much you might as well just give the woman a new dress. She is gorgeous.

Her body is unreal, which is why this ensemble works. Legs. And it does work. I love it. I would perhaps change the shoes, which are a bit too typical with such an innovative dress.

Also, the vertebrae-mirroring zippery buttony snake down her back needs to be shortened or lengthened, because right now it looks like it attaches to her thong. Because I'm dramatic I'd be inclined to lengthen it.

No. Just...no. There is no saving this dress, and as a woman who suffers from chunky upper arm syndrome I'm theoretically a fan of that whole see-thru yet covered look. But even I don't wear it, because is 2009 and that look? Played. Everything about it is dated, even on someone as gorgeous and toned as RWP.

There is no unfugging, only a do-over. Except for the shoes, which are hot to death.

Also, I LOVE unfugging! Can we do it more often?

I love this. She looks amazing, which I'm happy to see because I think she's been looking a bit rough lately. It's great to see her looking as hot as ever.

Perusing the comments has pushed me out of the "meh" and into "full metal jacket" hatred territory. EVERYTHING about this is awful: the lame half-up hair, sparkly illusion netting (ugh that almost hurts to type), cheesy sweetheart neckline, and those odd layers that are so holding-back-Donna Martin's-hair-at-prom. It feels inexpensive and desperate, which is maddening because RWP is crazy gorgeous--I mean, her face looks like the missing link between Helen Mirren and Blake Lively. But I will not be distracted by her natural beauty! This dress is uberfug and beyond salvation. Throw it back to the tweenybopper strip mall store it came from (Mandee or Rainbow, I guess) and start over! And as payment for my advice, I'll take those shoes.

For some reason, it's the weird line down her back that disturbs me the most. (But not as much as the car lights in today's post on Misha Barton that look like she has a red halo.) And of course I'd shorten it.

All I can think when I look at this is 'itchy'. It really looks like something that would exfoliate your skin off all day.

I can't figure out why this looks just totally skank to me from the back and just completely boring from the front. Huh. I say lose that sheer overlayer crap, lengthen to the knee and then I guess add some interest with something else--a snazzier color and a sexy shoe, perhaps?

It's always a problem when the outfit takes all the attention. She's not supposed to be a rack to display the dress, the dress is supposed to accentuate HER.

The dress smells of 1990 and yes, ice dancing.

The peekaboo hemline thing doesn't work for me - though she has the legs to carry it off, it still cuts the visual line. Plus I'll have to take your word that it's a miniskirt under that. I thought we were looking at teeny bicycle shorts.

The hair - sigh. I do it like that at yoga class when I'm tired of it falling into my face in downward-facing-dog.

And LIPSTICK! Girl! A bit of color will be your friend. You want to glow, not look wan. Again, that makeup is a look for the gym or the beach, not the red carpet.

So actually my theory is that she is wearing a tight black bicycle racing outfit and was doing a 50 mile ride to keep her legs toned and just arrived back at the hotel when the limo driver insisted on dragging her to this shindig. And she grabbed this lacy outfit off a streetwalker (who was wearing it with more exciting undies) en route & tossed it on in the back of the limo. If you look close, you'll see the remnants of helmet hair, which was frantically tousled out with a bit of mousse and a loose ponytail.

Is she trying to be Sharon Stone? even on her i feel this would look like a train wreck.
Its a shame because she looks so good on divorce at least its not as bad as her turkey foil effect dress last week!

RWP is so pretty.

So pretty she can wear whatever she damn well pleases, even if it is odd and somehow the front panel looks opaque when seen from the back, but transparent when seen from the front. Sigh.

I am totally hijacking this thread to say, unrelated at all to this rather yawn-worthy fug, THANK YOU Fug Girls for the fug on that chick in Cannes with the cape-blouse-jumpsuit-thong revealing outfit! I have never laughed so hard in my life!

Vera Wang on Mourning

I love it as is!

she's come a long way since that wretched santa barbara soap on nbc.

just sayin'

Longer or shorter than her marriage to Sean Penn?

I really hate sporty shapes for evening wear, or t-shirt shapes for ANYTHING other than a t-shirt. so frumpy and 90s.

So maybe if the overlay was cut more interestingly and flatteringly, and the whole thing was knee-length, I could condone this.

But frankly, I'd be tempted to chuck it and start from scratch.

And she tops this off with a gym-rat ponytail? Something is not adding up here. Girl has a rockin' bod, and this is one bad judgement call.

I think she was lounging by the pool in a classic Esther Williams designed swimming costume, and suddenly remembered she was supposed to be at this event. So she threw on a long negligee and ran.
It's the only explanation that I find acceptable, because that mini dress would be a super cute retro bathing suit and it also makes the half pony less incongruous.

To save it, I think would take a heavier top fabric, but just an inch or so shorter, with a more structured skirt with a slit. That may sound tackier, but I think it could work with the right fabric and tailoring.

On the other hand, OHMIGOD, she has such a beautiful face, that I could almost overlook her fug faux pas.

Whats your opinion of this

http://www.bollywoodbuzz.in/snapshots-aishwarya-raicannes-2009-day-2/

At least it looks like the shoes rock.

Mutton dressed as a glittery pig.

I feel like I'm designing a totally different dress, but here goes:

1. Change the upper half completely. I hate the sleeve seems. Twist the entire thing into more of a halter shape - no sweetheart neckline - but leave the sheer back with the buttons alone!

2. Lengthen the opaque layer to a couple inches above the knees and give it volume so that it's romantic and flirty like the buttons.

3. Shorten the sheer layer to just above the knee with appropriate volume and flirtatiousness.

4. Also - a little lippy, please. A soft pink gloss would do wonders.

5. Finish whatever hairstyle the stylist was working on before being rushed off to the hospital and/or mortuary. Seriously, something major must have happened.

This can be fixed in 5 easy steps.
1. I like the top part from the back, but I am not crazy about the front. I feel like anything but a sweetheart neckline would work. It just clashes with the edgier back of the dress.
2. Make the opaque skirt (wayyy) longer and chop off the crazy see-through mess. Do not get rid of the sparkles. Sparkles are fun.
3. Shorten the zipper on the back.
4. Sexier hair.
5. Better jewelry. (Is it me or does that bracelet not work at all?) Hotter shoes would not hurt either.

Voila! So. Much. Better.

Hmm. Where to begin? Is her hair in a 1/2 up 1/2 down do with a rubber band? It's almost a mullet of sorts really, with the curled business up front and the tussled 'party' in the back. Either way, it doesn't work. Neither does the dresss, nor the sheeth over it that looks like a Head & Shoulder commercial, because it seemd to be covered in dandruff or dog hair. And to top it off, the shoes are hidieous. I love her, but frankly, she looks like a drag wqueen.

her legs are absolutely rocking, her shoes, to die for, the general approach to the dress is sort of chic and understated elegance. the long see through thingy is the only thing distracting me. i don't know, i think she got about 85% there. if it was indeed shorter, to the knee or just past, perhaps it would not detract from the rest so much. though, i gotta give her props for this in the midst of all the (possibly self-inflicted) personal life drama.

I like it. I think she looks great.

its just revolting - skanky, cheap looking and inappropriate. Why do beautiful women wear such hideous look-at-me clothing?

That body is amazing.
I kind of agree to disagree - i think the cut of the under-dress could be lower in the bust region and yes, the whole thing needs to be the same length, but not knee length. hike it up a bit and show off those pins!

Knee-length... but the black part should be that long, too. Amazing body, yes, but perhaps a tad more color on her face?

RWP is totally hot. But she'll never be as lovely as Buttercup, original flavor.

Cut the spangle stuff to just below (or above) the knee (straight hem - we don't need to go confusin' it up with diagonals).ADD (i know, crazy, but bear with me) another layer of some sheer black lacy stuff between the spangle and the mini. This third layer could provide the necessary transition between the two. It could end maybe four inches above spangle layer 1? then again, this could all make RRP look like a librarian covered in glitter glue. with a petticoat hanging out.

That is not Kevin Costner, unless he's shrinking very rapidly with age. Costner is simply taller than Sneaker Dude here (and, yes, some movie stars are actually tall). Anyway, it doesn't look at all like him.

It could, however, be Anthony LaPaglia.

I actually kind of like it, although I think the short sleeves are odd. I can't decide if it should be sleeveless, or long sleeved. The skirt should be a tad longer, and the neckline could be more interesting.
I am disturbed by the fact that it looks like she forgot to brush the back of her hair.
If I'm going to be completely honest, I covet the shoes, and the gams.

I think if the skirt was knee-length, it'd be perfect

Up until the end, I was convinced I was the only one that thought that the short sleeves looked odd. And I was totally ready to chalk it up to my general dislike of short sleeves, but Deb vindicated me:

I hate the short sleeves.

This dress could have been done better in so many ways. Take the sheer off the top and make it strapless, and lengthen the hem of the underskirt. Or Make the underskirt the same length as everything. Making the whole thing knee-length just reminds me of the dress I wore to my eigth grade dance.

But most of all, the short sleeves have to go.

I actually really like this dress, but I have to agree with the hair, did she put it up in the car??

I don't get why everyone is hating on the sweetheart neckline??? Believe it or not, cast the whole thing in modest white satin with long sleeves and you have my BBF's wedding dress (really her mom's) My fix:

1) Sleek, killer updo (why be messy?)
2) Long sheer sleeves
3) Opaque to the floor, or as one poster said, mermaid hemline - sheer sparkly stuff just a little longer than opaque
4) Everything else the same (back buttons, shoes)
= Total Old School Hollywood glamour, my friend, worthy of gorgeous Buttercup

People...it looks like bike shorts...with a bustiere...no......

Love it, though would have loved it more with a closed toe shoe. I think Kelly Capwell wore a version to Eden + Cruz's wedding.

I kind of like it, at least from the back -- shows off her killer legs without being bare. But can I also comment on her hair? Is that a half-ponytail? Yikes.

I have to say...I think it's hot.

I actually really like it, Ice-capades esque or no.

Oh. Oh, dear.

Look guys, I think I know what happened. She and Sean were having hot make up sex (or, at least, as hot as it can be when he's your husband and is all "now watch me go all method on YOU" for the thousandth time while she sighs and rolls her eyes) and she had been wearing one of those nightgowns. You know the ones. Comfy for her-- 'cause it's just a big long t-shirt, guys! -- and oh so sexy for him -- ooooh baby it's so sheer and sparkly -- and designed for the couple trying to rekindle their marriage after a few kids.

When suddenly they realize that they have to leave, like, NOW, the sitter's waiting downstairs, Sean can't even just ACT like a NORMAL PERSON for once, dammit, and she grabs the nightgown and the nearest bodystocking, pulls her hair up with the rubber band lying around from when she was at the gym, and she's out the door.

Totally agree.

If the underskirt had been about knee length and the mesh maybe a couple of inches longer than the underskirt, then I would have really liked it.

But, man! What a set of legs on her. I'm jealous!

On someone else, it might be fug, but she rocks it. Or maybe I have just always admired her, so I am willing to let it go.

Dude, RWP, get it together. Slap on some lipstick, hack that sack off at the knees, and GET YOUR SEXY BACK.

I find Robin and her dress puzzling.

Keep the top part as is, nix the underskirt entirely, and extend the opaque black part of the dress to just above the knee. A slightly flashier pair of earrings would be nice too. Altogether, this is just feh, not totally fug.

In theory I agree with many of the above critiques, but in practice she's pulling it off for me. Her hotness prevails. (I also agree that the camera flash is maybe making this look more contrast-y than it did in person.)

With a body like that, I'd take it all as short as the short underskirt, and rock it all the way down the red carpet.

With a body like that, I'd wear just about anything I darn well pleased and not give a hoot what anyone thought about it.

But that's just me.

But, yeah, the long over the short just isn't working.

Is that Sean or Dustin?

Knee length. Do straight neckline on the underdress and overdress. Do away with the sleeves.

How many kids has she had? Those legs! And I do love her shoes. Those are not mom shoes. But it does look oddly cheap, while fitting her perfectly (not too tight, not too much flesh). And I love her natural make-up.

The short/long combo skirt thing lost me at hello. Her face looks good, the hair is that casual up-style that either looks great or a mess. On her I think it looks great. But the long, sheer skirt over the mini - no no no.

However, since she's gorgeous despite whatever she wears AND she's been married to Sean (not the world's greatest husband) Penn for twelve years, I cannot muster up much hateration for Robin Wright.

Better luck next time, RWP.

yuk! She does have a fantastic body though...

Stage 1: Can't concentrate on the dress because I'm disturbed by her face - as victoria @ 1:46 PM said "Is it overly harsh contour makeup, or overly harsh cheek implants, or does she look just look really jaded and old?" Can't bear thought she has cut into her face in order to hold on to vile man-unit, which brought me to...

Stage 2: Can't concentrate on dress because can't stop having unwelcome minds-eye flashes concerning conjugal situation and smelly husband...

Stage 3: Can't concentrate on dress because hot damn, just look at that body. Front and back, lovely poise too, she's working her bod subtly but in a non-trashy way. She SMOKIN.

Stage 4: Decide dress is like Wittgenstein's ladder you throw away once you get to the top. RWP wants us to look at her body, not dress. Wants body to fill mind up so as to crowd out all other possible thoughts, whether on dress or husband smell. Done and done! And can't hold it against her.

Scrap the illusion netting in general, I never like it... but her hair and makeup are fantastic!

Frankly, I am loving the length from the front, it just doesn't work from the back AT ALL. I also think the entire neckline ought to be altered. Maybe take the netting off the front neckline and sleeves, and lower it in the back (So it looks less like a sheer tee-shirt under a strapless dress!)- and lengthen the underlayer to mid thigh, with the netting coming down to her knees.

With a knee length under-dress the gown would be ok - not great, but ok.
However, with a full length under-dress, this would be an insanely rocking look!

Ugh. Just no. Start over with an all-new dress.
Or, I suppose, if you are going to salvage it (because she does have a rockin' bod), then: no sheer fabric at all, much longer (well, I agree that knee-length would be cute), and sleeves out of the same fabric as the dress of some kind. Keep the shoes though. Hot.

This is such a pagaent look. Ugh. Reminds me of a talent competition dress.

I dunno. While I do not think I will dash out to purchase one of my very own, I think it's kind of hot.

She's lovely. The dress? I think everybody's hit it; the whole look is just...off. Combined with the very short underskirt and the bustier-style bodice, the sloppy hair makes her look rather skank-ish, and she's _not_. She is so pretty, and the casual up-do might have worked with a better dress. The see-through fabric even drapes weird in the back! There's nothing about this I don't hate. Wait. I like the color.
I have to say, I think those shoes are smokin' hot, of what we can see of them. There are the only thing here I don't hate.

What is it with the peekaboo undermini thing? Either do the mini, which she certainly could, or do a full-length. This just looks skeezy.

The whole thing is a bit 'Elizabeth Hurley in her relatively unknown phase' for me. The buttons down her back are promising, so is the sweet-heart line of that stupidly short underthingo, but the whole thing has a distinct whiff of unfinished about it, like a half arse uni assessment.
What makes it worse is that she, her body, face, hair looks amazing. It's enough to make you puke.

Guys, I know it's weird, but I like it. It's kind of neat. I would like it better if the sheer layer were knee length, but I can live with this.

Ditto to the hair looking hideous from the back, though.

do her a solid - dealing with sean penn for as long as she has would wreck a lesser woman. she looks great!

I'm really not crazy about the T-shirt quality the top has, especially with the neckline and short sleeves. And I am completely over the whole sheer thing.

Make it a cute short black dress and we'll call it a day. And a little lipstick in an actual color wouldn't hurt, either.

It would have been cute if it didn't have the long sheer bit. It would have been even cuter if there were no sheer bit anywhere, and it was just a classic black mini. Especially with the whole backless thing, it could have been stunning!

P.S. I am SO STOKED that comments are open at the mo :D

Her make-up looks absolutely beautiful, but other than that I just can't find anything about this I like. Her hair looks great from the front, but then it looks very weird and disheveled in the back. I think the short dress under the sheer fabric has been tried too many times by ladies in Hollywood and I can't think of anyone who has ever worn it fabulously. (Maybe I'm just not a fan of the look). I honestly think she would have looked great in the short mini dress (sans the sheer!) She's a beautiful woman with great legs, so why not show it!

NO. Just NO.

She is Buttercup, and thus the most beautiful woman in the world, and thus can do no wrong. If I was going to wear it though, I would want the sheer fabric to extend a little beyond the underskirt, but not to that extent.

Robin Wright Penn is one of the most magnificent looking woman on the planet and so, it is hard for me to look upon her with a critical eye. however, this look could definitely be improved upon with two simple adjustments:

1: ditch the sweatheart neckline for a straight one. bam. no need to distract from her perfect face. FACE! awesome.

2: no, do NOT shorten it! she is a statuesque creature and the drape of the skirt is beautiful! lengthen the underskirt to floor-length as well!

ahhh....my Buttercup!

Well her make-up and hair look so pretty. It makes me feel better about the outfit than I probably should.

Okay. Let's start at the top.

#1) The hair. From the back it looks like she came home from the gym and went back to bed. From the front it sort of looks like a piece. I feel like she's perilously close to the Way-Too-Realistic side of the bedhead spectrum. I think a sexily messy updo would be good but I'm not feeling this.

#2) Smoky eyes and a LEETLE more color on the lips.

#3) A little racier neckline . . . either low and wide, like a boatneck, or maybe just a deeper scoop.

#4) Cap sleeves OR sleeveless.

#5) Keep the underskirt where it is.

#6) Shorten the overskirt to the knee so we can see the fab legs and the badass shoes.

#7) Oooh, maybe the shoes should be a color . . .

Okay, I'm done.

Is it wrong that I actually like this a lot? Maybe it's that I'm sick of all the mini-dresses with long train skirts in back, so I at least appreciate that this is the same length all the way around, despite the differences in sheerness. But even that--at least it's totally decent and we're not seeing more of Robin than we need to. Loves it.

she is too old to wear a short skirt( that short, anyway) and putting your grammas tulle petticoat over it is not a fix. she also needs a new and more classy accessorie than sean pean.

sean penn, too

For some reason, I think this works. It's got a mysterious belly dancer vibe around it, with hints of a bird in paradise. You know, with the long tail feathers and such. And I think the hair and makeup really work with it. Normally, I don't think I'd like it, but my 55 year old friend is a stoner and had me trapped in a smoke box today, so my opinion may not be valid. Carry on!

I like it. I think the dress is designed to look like two different dresses in bright light (sexy and emphasizing the short-cut) and in low light (a bit more opaque, and emphasizing the length of the floor-length sheer portion) in the evening or in less light. Does this make sense? Maybe not. Wish there were a picture of the dress as it would appear in a lower-light setting.

it may have worked on her 20 years ago, but not now.

This dress somehow manages to be prudish and slutty at the same time.

I think it needs very little tweaking, though - just lengthen the black miniskirt a couple of inches, enough to avoid the world-is-my-gynecologist effect while still keeping it squarely in miniskirt territory, and chop off the sheer part to match. Let her rock her hot legs. The makeup and accessories are fine as they are.

I think it'd be classy and interesting and understated - the focus is on her being sexy in a mature sort of way (which is the sexiest of all, in my 23 year old opinion!), while the line of buttons down the back and the sweetheart neckline combined with the glittery finish is enough to save it from boring.

Now I'm in love with the altered version of this dress... if only I can get some of her DNA to go along with it!

What would send this ensemble into full out AWESOMENESS would be to add the runners of the fella next door. It would say "freaky" yet "ready for light jog".

I sort of think the knee length option would be way boring. I quite like the flowing drapiness of the glittery overdress, but I don't know how to reconcile it with a minidress that looks like it could practically be a perfectly reasonable outfit all on its own, if it were a tad longer and not actually skintight.

A little bit of tweaking would go a long way. So long as the black mini dress and overskirt were the same length--long or knee length--I think she'd look stunning. She has the perfect raw materials. *Harumph*

I think it's great exCEPT for the sweetheart cut, which is what really ages the dress (although not the Robin Wright Penn, she looks amazing). But really, it's kind of avant garde-y everywhere except the neckline, which reeks of 1993.

As usual, your own feelings match mine exactly. Spot on commentary. God, I sound so English. Tea?

Ditto for everybody almost for the knee length or just above for both skirts 'cause she's got great legs. I just want Buttercup to be happy, you know? I can't he'p it, I can't stay silent any longer.... Girlfriend, run far far away and take a deep cleansing breath. Then call some of the hot guys you undoubtedly know that AIN'T him. Your happiness is my thanks. Love ya!

BTW Kevin Costner? Seriously not really. Maybe Anthony LaPaglia....

WTF is it?

I think maybe I like the back better than I like the front... how odd! It could use a better neckline, and I expecially don't like how it sculpts around her boobs. But you are totally right. It would have looked so much better if everything ended at the knees. When you ignore the dress situation, she does look kinda hot!

Definitely both the sheer over-thingie and underskirt should have been the same (conservative mini or knee) length. But even then, there's something about sheer top bits in an outfit like this that have sleeves that can look weird or top heavy.

No, honey. This is trashy. This is what trashy girls wore to high school dances, sans the weird sheer skirt attachment. It is all very reminiscent of early 1990s juniors dept. dresses at Macy's--just give it a few more inches toward the knee or a little A-line; I can almost hear "November Rain" or Prince's "Diamonds and Pearls" playing. This dress is a disaster. Perhaps all the talk of divorce has stirred up feelings of nostalgia for poor RWP. But she should get back into her washed-out, oft-frumpy grown-up-lady clothes that at least look as if they were not stitched together in under two minutes in a sweatshop.

i think she looks HAWT!

Is it too off topic if I say that every time I see her lately I imagine her playing an unhappy 70's housewife, not until Carol Tippie, our unhappy next door neighbor in the 70's in Cleveland who could be seen with cig and curlers and sometimes had screaming matches with her husband which ended with her loading the kids in the car and roaring off.

I could be just projecting the Sean drama, but she's looking very Carol Tippie in oo la la black here.

Knee-length would be a total snore. She looks fabulous and she's got great legs.

I'd love it (well, ok, I'd tolerate it better) if it were just above the knee (underskirt as well). I love the shoes.

From the front it has too much of a 'support garment' feel. I'd agree with going 4" longer on the opaque skirt and cutting the overlay at the knee to get a more updated look.

Good God she has an amazing figure!!

I wish the slip underneath were full length, just like the dress itself. I also wish the the sweetheart neckline on the bust had more detail. Also, her shoes: they're kinda boring. I would have gone for a pair of platform shoes that are not strappy.

Trashy, cheap ass looking Formal attire that is completely unremarkable in every way. I'm not even sure I'm down with the shoes, as the rest of it is so skankified. It really doesn't have much going for it - although she does have lovely legs and nice skin - but I reckon it just looks like someone got the shorts pattern mixed up with the Long Skirt and thought "Bugger it, I'm Fashion Forward. This was always meant to be. Bring on the honour and handmaidens".

Totally agree that knee length would have been the way to go...but DAMN, girlfriend has great pins!! I like to imagine it was originally all full-length, but RWP just lopped it up a metre or so in order to show those bad boys off.

this is plain hideous , what’s with this whole sheer, see through thing that is boycotting Cannes , who are these designers who trying to be innovative, or is this how American dress.

I'm wondering if this isn't in the vein of Barbra Streisand's Oscar "suit" (for Funny Girl, I think?). It photographed in black and white with almost the same kind of static/sparkle pattern, and Barbra insists that at home, it wasn't see-through. So, I'm thinking, maybe what's happened is that a tinge of transparency became flash-bulb sheer... possibly.

The idea, then, that this sparkly black dress has just a hint of sheerness at the shoulder and a nice, dark glimpse of a shin when she walks... well that seems alright to me.

As it is, she's trying to wear a long dress, very formal and appropiate for a nighttime event, while showing her legs. I understand that she wants to do this, as she clearly has great legs, but it makes the dress look undecided and sort of wrong. I would lengthen the undergarment to make it a full length black dress, and maybe cut a slit up one side to show her lovely, lovely legs.

This dress is confusing to look at. It is not one thing or the other. It is quite 'Project Runway-ish' but not in a good way.

It looks like a recycled wedding dress from the 80's, dyed black.
Eww.

Me likey!

I really don't think anything can save this. It's all so flammable, the shoes are as dated as the illusion netting and the overall effect is cruise ship singer who wants all the cabin boys to know she's still got it. It also kind of reminds me of what everyone was wearing in Whitney's I'm Every Woman video, though perhaps that's the message she's trying to give Sean with this nylon nightmare

I really like the buttons (real or fake) down the back of the dress, but agree that it would have worked better had it ended at knee length. Anywhere around the knee. Above the knee by about 2 inches, I reckon would have really worked.

The whole thing feels dated and tired to me. She's too old and too beautiful to be wearing glittery illusion fabric over a mini-dress.

I agree with you guys completely. Just make it knee length and it would actually be really pretty. Her hair and everything look great and her jewelry is lovely. Just fix the length and we're good to go!

Don't know if I'm in the minority here, but I don't like the sparkly fabric at all. I'd make the top the same material as the under-dress and make the whole thing like mid-thigh length (the shoes are HOT, as are her legs- they should be showed off more). Boring? I prefer "classic".
Then I'd make her hair look more elegant from the back. Is that a half-ponytail?

It would look okay if both the black under thingie and the top layer would be knee length or she can go a bit higher too. I also really hate the sleeves, her shoulders look way too broad, so I'd definitely cut them off..

Well even though it's butt-ugly, she didn't have to shave her legs! Not that she wouldn't, though since she is a rich & famous person and has a team of folks to make her look beautious. :/

i actually love the entire look. sure, most of everyone's suggestions here would undoubtedly look good too, but on its own i think it's already very chic. robin wright penn looks hot in quite a nonchalant way, and although some would condemn the look as slutty and attention-grabbing, i find it isn't at all. and come on, this is so much better than a lot of her BORING looks in the past lol

It might not be age-appropriate, but I really like the idea of the mini. The sheer overlay should end at the mini-skirt though. Also, I would change the neckline of the underdress from sweetheart (so 80s! - particularly when featured under the sheer material) to a more straight-across strapless neckline. As it is the whole thing is very slutty, funereal mother-of-the-bride, and THAT is never a good look.

Um...I kinda like it...yes it's a little '80s throwback but isn't that in style? Also, she has the body to pull it off. And I'm a sucker for anything covered in sparkles.

You are off the mark, J. She rocks it.

I can't get past the moron wearing those shoes with that suit...

My biggest issue is happening above the waist, actually. Those sleeves look more like an attempt to cover up, which doesn't make sense on a dress that is designed to show off more.

I'm less concerned about the length and the sheer, as other people have said, simply because RWP is almost carrying it with her hotness.

What bothers me is the sheer top. It looks like a middle-school dress with the sheer sleeves!

Stick with the sweetheart neckline and lose the top sheer part.

This think would totally work with a pair of Chuck Taylor hi-tops and a baseball cap.

She is smoking hot for her age and it is whimsical enough for me to overlook a lot of it's flaws, but agreed - it would loook better short

For some reason, I really like this. I would mondo like it if it was short :D

Dress does not bother me nearly as much as her hair. WTF?

i had this in the 90's in a romper version! needless to say, i love it but yeah, pls wear lipstick and brush your hair.

I think if the skirt were opaque to the floor, it might be pretty. Conversely, take the sheer part off the bottom, bring the opaque hem down a few inches, and it'd also be cute. At least, either of those ways I'd PREFER it, but as it is she can pull it off-- it's not a total tragedy on her.

Seriously, I love it. I think she looks long and lean and hot. Go, Princess Buttercup!

I think I just want her to put on some lipstick in an actual color.

"It is, but I don't know why. I think maybe he wrote the book on which the movie premiering is based?"

I'm sure you're right but let's start a rumour that they're having an afair and she's heading for her third almost divorce as a result. Also: grey hair and trainers? Either pretend you're youthful or don't. Sorry, just wanted to try and keep this sort of on topic.

Ahem...any woman with legs that great IS NOT too old to be wearing short skirts. Check in with Tina Turner regarding this subject.
Those shoes are stellar. The long, sheer add-on are taking away from them.

She has the body to carry off the short dress, but it would be too short. Even above the knee would be fine, but the overlay skirt is definitely of the fug.

This is what you get when you wriggle into your Spanx full-body support garment intending to wear it as a dress, then think better of it, and at the last minute toss on a cheesy full-length sheer sparkly beach cover up from the Victoria's Secret EVERYTHING ON CLEARANCE!! catalog that you never thought you'd have an occasion to wear and call it a day.

It would be nice as a miniskirt. If she were a little vampier- if she had dark hair - I might be all over this. It could be very delightfully slutty Morticia Addams if worn but someone else, but she is too blond and, you know, pretty and daytime.

The black miniskirt underneath should be biker shorts instead to achieve a more legitimate 90's look. And the hair... maybe some butterfly clips would have helped?????? Not a fan of this one.

I think she looks gorgeous, head to toe. I love that dress.

She is stunningly beautiful and has great gams. I agree with a length just above the knee with the sheer material a tad longer to flow a bit. I think everything is else great...so not a fug so to speak..

She is stunningly beautiful and has great gams. I agree with a length just above the knee with the sheer material a tad longer to flow a bit. I think everything is else great...so not a fug so to speak..

Seriously....love the dress, but what's up with her hair???

I keep thinking this is Uma Thurman.
I'm so uninspired by the dress, as is or changed.

I hate the neckline!! Hate, hate, hate it!!!

I was terrified from the initial shot that the back of the underskirt was cut away, leaving a long loinclothy thing in front with a peekaboo effect in back. I see now it's just that other lady's dress giving the appearance of frontal opaqueness.

I'm so relieved to see from the "front" shot that that's not the case, I really don't know what else to say! Because that would have been the party dress equivalent of a mullet: normal homecoming dance dress in the front, stripper in the back D:

i get why she did this...she loves the way the shimmer looks over her skin..some sort of evening meets etherial thing...
but i hate it..if its not costuming for some "lord of the rings" sequel in the woodlands of eladriel (yeah...i know i have no clue what an eladriel is, but it sounds good!)then it dont work!
hate the sweetheart line on the bust...
if she wanted to do exposure plus sparkle, go for a slinky nude underdress with sparkle on top....

I dunno, this looks like she swiped it from Sharon Stone's 90's trunk. Truly, I'd like to see it in gold with a cape and shoulder pads attached. On SWINTON. My work here is done.

Glittery beads all over it would have been great. Black beads! And better suited for an evening engagement. Indoors.

I think she's so hot she kind of pulls it off. From, you know, sheer yumminess.

Oh my goodness, that was not intentional, I swear.

Oh my god, we can finally comment on this site! Thank you! Sometimes I wanted to always express my opinion because sometimes I agreed and then I disagreed with you!

Personally, I love this dress. It's risky, but she looks good.

I'm usually quite anti- sheer fabric/illusion netting but I love this dress on her! She has the most beautiful legs imaginable, and this highlights them in an interesting way. Knee-length or shorter would be fine, but probably a bit boring (i.e. her picture wouldn't show up on the interwebs)

She looks amazing. You're nitpicking. I'm sure there are a hundred homelier celebrity outfits you could have gotten worked up about today.

I say lose the sparkly overlay entirely (I hate the tiny sleeves on that thing), make the dress a couple inches longer, and we've got a winner. That way her legs AND the hot shoes are highlighted. Oh, and fix the hair from the back...especially with a nice back to highlight, the hair should be equally impressive.

SANDWICH! Why is no one else screaming for her to eat something already? Five more pounds and I too would agree that she's gorgeous. The dress? Not worth saving... even for those legs.

I love the back on this. I think that if the opaque part ended slightly lower, and the sheer part ended at the same place, it would be a hot hot dress for me to go out in. Now, granted, I'm only 24, so maybe it's not a red carpet look for Ms. Wright, but it is hot. I like the jewelry, but I'd change the shoes. With a short version of the dress, the strappy shoes would be too slutty.

I really like the silhouette; if the underskirt was the same length as the overlay (either knee-length or to the floor), I think it would be fantastic.

No. There is no redeeming this. I was all ready to defend her because her bod is so rockin' in the photo of the back, but I just cannot defend this cheap eighties-style children's dress with the extra on the hemline.

I think she kinda looks like Cate Blanchette in the second photo, and if Cate Blanchette were wearing this dress the post would totally be a Fug or Fab? post. Or maybe an "oh, Cate" post.

I agree, just stop it right above the knee with the underskirt and it would be great.

I think she's too athletically built to carry this off. Speaking as a gal with Shoulders, that neckline is doing her no favors. I personally love the see-through skirt, although I agree that knee-length would have been better; her legs are just ungodly gorgeous. Maybe if I put in for them in my next life, the waiting list won't be purgatorially long.

some of the comments are bordering on douchey, here. :/ can we stick with slamming the outfit, not robin?

that said it is a pretty awful outfit. honestly anything that made it look less like she was wearing two dresses would help. also, either longer sleeves or no sleeves.

Horrifying.

I think she (and the dress) looks fabulous from behind, but I'm not so crazy about the front view.

My $0.02...

Like others said, lose the sparkly bits above the sweetheart neckline.
Then, get out the pinking shears... cut the sparkly overskirt off at the knees, then do some triangular slits up the overskirt.
More pixie like, more interesting..
Ruch the overskirt at the side with a neat clip, to make a diagonal pull to the lower right of her torso.

I can't get past the back view of her hair.

yep. chop it off where the black skirt ends & we might be in business.

Is it just me, or does anyone else think that she trying desperately to look like Cate Blanchett?

This is Cannes right? mostly black-tie affair? I think to be appropriate, and far more stylish the black part should be floor legnth as well. The back and shoulders would have just the sheer, but under that would be a nice sweet-heart boddice and flattering column dress

WHEN have see-through skirts ever worked? Just no. And she's gorgeous but her taste in fashion seems to be as questionable as her taste in husbands/men.

Robin Wright Penn-On-Again-Off-Again is so pretty. And has a great figure. But this doesn't work for me, as there are two distinctly different dresses and looks going on, IMO. The sheer fabric is lovely, but that cut-out dress is too distractingly short and veering into the illusion of a romper-god help us-to be paired with so delicate and sheer a fabric. I do like the idea of knee length, but still feel the two parts of one whole are at war, each trying to be the dress, if you know what I mean. Until there is just a spent pile of fabric on the floor and nobody wins.

Plus, it looks awful from the back.

Take off the outer layer and it would be a nice dress if a tad bit boring. It's what i feel whenever anyone makes the choice for a black dress on the red carpet. Why make yourself instantly forgetable? especially when you could wear such beautiful colours.

I think it would be very interesting and fab if the solid black extended down the back with its original length and the sheer in front- like a peek a boo skirt. Think Audrey Hepburn in Sabrina. It's not so bad from the front, but in the back, the way it is- awful.

No no no no NO. This is a Fug Look on a Fab Woman. What is she trying to say to us? "Throw me in the back of a van, get me a makeover and a long spa weekend with like-minded women and gays, tell me where my life is going"?

My. GOD. Right now, RWP is the first 15 minutes of a really bad Lifetime TV movie.

This is a frustrating dress. The opaque part does not save the sheer part at all -- the length is off, the sweetheart neckline is too 1989, and it dips too low in the back. And the sheer part covers but doesn't. It's like When T-Shirts Go Bad.

Kill the whole thing. She should go (1) off-the-shoulder in a deep jewel tone, (2) more of a 'do' with the hair -- but still soft, (3) a nice dress length that either hints at or shows some leg -- and those shoes, which look pretty fab from here.

Buttercup, I love you. I also love your husband, for what it's worth. But if this is what marriage does to you, maybe you two kids are better off apart.

I just don't think there's any situation wherein illusion netting is an improvement.

LOVE the shoes. If you don't look at anything but her feet, and don't get distracted by the sheer sequins (you're right, I think I saw the one lady from the bacherlorette wearing this dress on DWTS) she looks hot. LOVE LOVE LOVE those shoes.

I think it's rockin'! I would like it if it didn't have the sheer parts at the top, because I think it would look great straight-up backless, but honestly, it's pretty fab the way it is.

I actually like everything about it except the sleeves. They need to be shorter, or longer, or just different. I find the rest of it fun and sexy and interesting. I really like the detailing on buttons up her back.
And though it pains me to disagree with the Ladies Who Fug, I think that if it all ended at the knee it would look like something a friend of mine wore to the 8th grade formal. (And that was a good ling time ago...)

WHY?! Why won't sheer overlays go back to the '80s where they belong? I mean, seriously. No. NOOOOOO.
I hope they were separate pieces, because the dress underneath might be cute, but that top part just needs to be taken out at midnight during the full moon and burned as an offering to the spirits of Gianni Versace and Coco Chanel, in order to induce them to find some new young fashion designers to be spirit guides to. Because just no.

Even just the sheer business shortened to the knee would be an improvement. As is, though, she kind of makes me think about Stevie Nicks. Which is not such a bad thing. But the top part of the back is stunning. But WTF is up with her hair?!

OMG! This is almost an exact copy of a dress I wore to a Mardi Gras ball in 1994. Granted, I bought mine for $89 and everyone thought I was a drag queen...

Something about it is very Sharon Stone circa 1992. I guess not the long shiny part so much as all of the rest of it. I dunno. It's fine with or without it, better without it, but overall just very MEH.

I can't believe she aged so well! Am I the only one who thought she was not especially pretty in The Princess Bride?

Ug! The conflict. Yes the dress is terrible..but is it? She is working it with her amazing body. I cannot help but think that she somehow squeaked by not being a complete fug by being all fit and poised.

If I were to wear said dress I believe I would look like a trashy little Sicilian woman in morning...but kind of still looking...

I'm the above Sicilian lady..

Lose the cap sleeves and do something way more interesting with both the granny overlay neckline and the sheer hem. Otherwise, it's so nicely NOT THE SAME as everything that everyone else wears that it's hard to get too fired up about it.

Fab dress. Fug Hair. Killer body. For any age.

If you made the sheer layer as short as the opaque layer, she wouldn’t benefit from the full wow factor of the sheer fabric and if you made the opaque layer as long as the sheer layer she’d look matronly.

It’s FABULOUS as it is. Surely there are far more heinous outfits than this.

She looks spectacularly glamorous and classy from the front, although I can slightly see the relevance ice-dancing/ballroom-dancing crack from the back view.

I absolutely love reading this blog, but I think they are very close-minded about what’s fashionable and tend to praise bland cocktail dresses and lambaste anyone who tries to experiment. I mean, ugly is ugly, but sometimes a reach is fab.

Dress aside, I hope I look this hot when I’m her age…

...the relevance OF THE ice-dancing...

Oops.

Robin has a gorgeous, face and bod.

But, RUN JENNY RUN, away from this frock!

It's fugging her up. Your not to far off, show those smoking legs, why cover them up?

If it showed up on DWTS isn't that an automatic fug? One does not simply lift a frock from that particular runway, honey.

I love it. It has an eighties vibe that she can totally carry.

hmmmm....I liked it yesterday, but I looked at it closeup today and the fabric kind of looks like the material that window unit air conditioner filters are made out of.

Does anybody else think she looks like Blake Lively from a distance?

I'm more concerned about her date's choice of footwear...

I love it. It looks pretty sexy and her body is just SICK!!

The sleeves either need to go all the way to the wrist, or the entire see through part of the top needs to go, leaving a strapless bodice.

I like the idea of a sparkly layer on top, but the skirt length of the opaque and sheer layers should be the same. I don't care whether it's mid-thigh, above the knee, mid-calf, or ankle length, but pick a length and get both hems there together.

Darryl Hannah as Angel in Night at the Iguana + RWP as Starr from White Oleander + suddenly remembering you had a red carpet event to attend = whatever the toot is going on with that outfit.

She makes the dress.
Imagine the following people in the same outfit
phoebe price
swinton
misha barton
ashley simpson
She is beautiful...in anything. The dress...not so much.

A lot of people had the exact same reaction I did- both layers should be knee length.

Another option is to make keep both layers short, just not that short.

I think the dress should lose the meshy part and have the under non-see-thru part be a little longer. Then it would be great. I do, however, think she looks great for Cannes. What about the sneakers though? THOSE are terrible.

I feel like if Swinton was wearing this, with the prerequisite boots from the future, nude makeup, one of Beyoncé's gauntlet/ring/glove thingys (technical terms I know), and a hat that involved death-star-like construction.... it would be fantastic. Sadly this is not the case and all I can think to say is that her slip and sheath are having irreconcilable differences that with her track record may or may not end in divorce.

Yawn. Age apropriate or not just losing the overdress would have helped it a lot. Finding something that wasn't a grad dress in 1992 would have been better though.

in my tired opinion, the problem is that the silhouette's off.

it looks like color block done badly & sans color.

i ordinarily hate things that have parts of things that are asymmetrical, in the particular way of single sleevenesses & hitched high half-hems, but here something like that would have helped.

the way it is now it's like she was spending a lot of time in a magician's box but the only thing he cut into chunks were parts of here dress--& he only got even them partway.

other than that, she looks nice, it's just the dress[es] itself[themselves] that doesnt[dont].

This would have looked so much classier if the underdress AND overdress were both to the knee.

Totally agreeing with you, it would be cute if it just ended at the skirt. Uh, the underskirt.

Those sneakers on the right suddenly made the dress so much more fabulous.

I've already commented on the dress. (Meh, she's hot, just show more leg!)
I just wanted to point out the Italian stallion/Greek god of a guy to the far right over there, down stage from stupid tennis shoes guy!
Yummy!
She should have grabbed him to follow her on stage to play security guy. It looks like he is dressed more appropriately!

She has great legs to go with the mini skirt, but she is not at the beach and the dress is (or attempts to be) a formal dress. So wear the mini skirt longer to the knee or slightly above. The shiny top should be the same length, or perhaps and inch or so longer to continue the effect on top. Make the front top straight (it looks like the superwoman costume) to look more subtle- there is enough shine in the dress already to draw attention. The shoes are well matched, but there is something not quite working with the sleeves - Oh - there are so many details to fix - the dress is grossly overdone - I give up.
Admire her patience with Sean Penn - will count it as a justification for the faux pas in her dress

I like the dress. I can understand some of the criticisms, but ultimately, I think she looks great. It seems like every time I read comments here, now that they've been turned back on, people are saying that the outfit in question needs to lose all the elements that prevent it from being a simple black minidress or skirt with black pumps. I think the little black dress is a wonderful thing and I agree that it deserves to be monarch of the closet. But chic or not, I wouldn't like to live in a world in which celebrities went around all the time in black minidresses, as if they were all just a bunch of college students ushering at the symphony.

For starts the sleeves really need to go and I think about the upper third of buttons and backing can run along with them. The under slip thingy should really make a crawl down to at least mid thigh and then let the sparkly overnetting end there with it OR have a little ruffle sparkle baby at the bottom of the him just for giggles. Oooo...maybe add a sparkly netty bow to a sleeve. That would be deliciously Fug.

Underdress knee-length, shimmery stuff a bit longer and with a bit of a flounce at the bottom, and more accessories. She's got a silver bracelet, so a longish silver necklace and black or silver dangly earrings, I would think.

The dress is lazy. By which I mean the designer was lazy. The harsh juxtaposition of the severe lines of the black underdress and the very sheer over-business is just not esthetically pleasing.

It's a bathing suit and a "coverup" that were not purchased together.

I hate it.

Mutton dressed as lamb.

Are we doing the 90's thing now ? And does the ol adage "Don't wear again if you wore it the first time around" still apply?

I REALLY hope someone other than me discussed her raunchy hair. It's almost worse - gasp! - than the beyond hideous dress thingy. Shudders.

I think it doesn't matter so much, how long the dress is, as long as the black and the sheer part are equally long and a bit longer than the black part is now. Mini, kneelength or floorlength - they'd all work for me then.

the bottom sheer should go, rest is fine (it is flattering on her and everyone needs to get over the 'it's 80's/90's retro' - everything is retro babes) - and hair, messy/cute - she wears it well!

Loving the fabric, and it shows her off so well, but...

I agree Diane Kruger could pull it off better. Robin is too old for an old look..the details are really bad that way: buttons down the back? really? and red nails, no.

If the underskirt could go gradually from opaque to sheer- (is there a fabric that could do that?) and the neck line was just the sweetheart, THAT would be a beautiful dress. Still not sure if it'd be the dress for her- maybe Reese. Robin could carry something more interesting (since she's at least managing this number as is.)

I love it. Except for the hair, she looks amazing.