My friend Marissa and I have had the same discussion several times over the last few months, and it is this: Is it possible to wear over-the-knee boots without looking like Julia Roberts in Pretty Woman?
She says yes; I am more doubtful. Let's use Audrina here as a handy visual aid to illustrate both sides of that argument. From the front, to my way of thinking, she does not look as though she's practicing the world's oldest profession. She might be considering it, sure, but she hasn't pulled that trigger. And who hasn't been there, am I right, ladies? Ladies? Hey, you guys? Fine. But you hear me: it's saucy, but not SAUCY. It's sexy, but not SEX-Y. It's SEXY, but not... full-on PROSTITUTION-Y.
Let's look at it from the back:
She says yes; I am more doubtful. Let's use Audrina here as a handy visual aid to illustrate both sides of that argument. From the front, to my way of thinking, she does not look as though she's practicing the world's oldest profession. She might be considering it, sure, but she hasn't pulled that trigger. And who hasn't been there, am I right, ladies? Ladies? Hey, you guys? Fine. But you hear me: it's saucy, but not SAUCY. It's sexy, but not SEX-Y. It's SEXY, but not... full-on PROSTITUTION-Y.
Let's look at it from the back:
ALWAYS LOOK AT YOURSELF FROM THE BACK.
If this dress -- which I actually kind of like, theoretically -- had a full back, I feel like we'd be in business. But the low back, plus those boots, plus the fact that my hair looks just like this right now and I've barely had my coffee and haven't gone anywhere near it with a comb, makes me feel a tiny bit as though this whole look is what we at GFY HQ call A MISTAKE.
What do you think? How would you fix it? Does it need fixing to begin with? Hit up the comments, dear readers.
Get rid of the tattoo! That would be a great start to not looking like you're practicing the worlds oldest profession!
Why do these no name starlets trollop around so? tacky
It could be worse, she could have worn the dress the other way around.
You know... it's that trashy tattoo... if you're going to get a tattoo, at least get one that doesn't scream biker girl? The boots aren't exactly Julia Roberts... they are actually channeling a bit of Posh for me.
The dress needs a back and the heels shouldn't be red. Than it might work instead of looking like it's 'working'.
Definitely get rid of the tattoo, one that large in that really bright color combo screams TRASH TRASH TRASH. As for the outfit, the boots need slightly lower heels and they would be less slutty looking. The dress could be cute with a higher back and now back cowl neck and the skirt should be about a half inch to an inch longer.
The girl needs to eat a sandwhich
Add a full back and we're in business. The reason it works from the front is because of her modest neckline. The red heels don't bother me too much, but she could only improve them with black.
Good dress, even with the missing fabric in the back. LOSE THE BOOTS! Besides looking hooker-y, the fabric on the boots doesn't go with a dress like that. In the immortal words of Carrie Bradshaw "Girlfriend's got company!" Run a comb through your hair, girl!
I'm actually fine with the dress and the tattoo -- just ditch the boots. I'd also stay away from the infernal platforms that are making willowy and petite starlets clomp around like horses. Just go for a normal strappy sandal and we're fine.
The big baggy bottom of the back of the dress looks like a hood of some sort. Perhaps she should pull that up over her head and she could work this look as a "Sexy Jawa" thing.
The thing is, the boots and the dress don't match. The dress is glittery evening wear. The boots are matte and funky. The dress needs strappy sandals. It's not that either piece is bad but they do not match.
From the front, love it. Back, not so much. Her back just looks gross.
The fact that the boots are tight enough to be squeezing her tiny little thighs doesn't help the whole look. Make the boots significantly looser, add tights, lose the earrings that are competing with the sparkly dress, do something more inspired with the hair. Better.
Okay, firstly, I agree with everyone else-- that dress needs a back. And not necessarily because it looks trashy-- but because her bony, withered back looks GROSS. Look at the small! It should be supple and womanly, not look like a withered prune!
Secondly, I HATE shoes with contrasting heels. If those boots had a black heel, she'd be in business! (er, you know I mean...)
If (1) the dress had a back, even with a slight scoop in it, (2) the heels were slightly lower (nothing says Near-Stripper like teetering on heels that are juuuust a bit too high.... well, nothing except a huge nasty technicolor nape tatoo, that is. But I digress...), and (3) the hair was either down or half-up, half-down, rather looking alarmingly like Bob Costas's hair helmet (oh, and also: BACK TO BROWN, not this ridiculous highlighted mess she's been sporting), I think the Pointless Miss Patridge would be just fine.
Definitely lose the boots! Would look cute with some silver strappy sandals instead. Then I would be all for it. The dress is tasteful at least it's not this low cut in the front like others.
I actually like the dress and think it is indeed sexy without being whorewear/prostitogs. I guess it could be about 4 inches longer. Also with a simple, not-too-high pump in black or silver she would be in business and no longer "in business".
The boots are not boot-like enough to suit me. They look like thigh-high tights more than boots. If you're going to dress like a bucaneer go all the way; then you'll have a "naughty pirate" Hallowe'en costume.
The hair? I'm not sure what to do with the hair. Down would obscure the point of the dress, but the up choice is confirming why I am deeply committed to the belief that there is no such thing as a "formal ponytail".
I don't think Pretty Woman ruined the look for everyone;it was already a pretty specific look.
The tattoo is unfortunate, but it is her body.
Yeah, I think it's the boots + dress that's killing it. If someone classier to begin with were wearing that dress w/sandals, we probably wouldn't even be having this conversation.
I have never seen over the knee boots work.
I agree that the texture of the boots does not match the dress. The back of that dress isn't doing her any favors either.
Her hair looks slovenly, and shows off her tattoo which could use being covered up with a dress like this. I like tattoos, but do not like that one.
This whole outfit doesn't work for me, not a single piece of it.
I like the dress, and even the hair. I think those boots would be best worn over black tights (but then i guess that defeats the purpose...) so I would replace them altogether with a black platform pump, maybe with a peep-toe.
I don't mind the low dipping back, but it needs to rest about 1 inch higher, and the dress needs to be a few inches longer. The heels aren't red - they're actually metallic. They just reflect the red carpet. I don't believe you can wear over the knee boots and not look trashy. It's just not possible.
Also, I hate the tattoo.
I personally really like the dress just as it is. It's the BOOTS that need to go!!!
she can't pull those boots off. she thinks she is, but she's not.
the back could stay a cowl, it should just be higher. way too low. im actually surprised that shes willing to cover up her arms. and boobs for that matter.
her tattoos are laughable.
Ugh, agreed that those boots are awful. Over the thigh is just bad. Why add more volume to the LAST PLACE you would want it? Anyway, if she ditched the boots for some classy pumps and covered the tat the dress would be less scandalous. However, I still like demure and the dress would be best with a higher back altogether.
I actually like the hair. It's obviously clean, and I like the way it's casually twisted into a pony tail - if I tried that, it'd be falling down in two minutes. The tattoo is okay, but I think the dress is too low in the back, the tops of the boots are too tight, and the red heels look jarring.
And the whole effect does look like "Pretty Woman" which is to say she looks like the character in the movie, not like a real ho.
Less open back + no tattoo + combing the hair + big sandwich = successful outfit.
I don't think those are boots at all, but more of a pleather leg warmer stretched up over her knee. (Or maybe something from Adam Lambert's closet?)
The dress is cute, minus the ridiculous tattoo and protruding spine.
tattoo - ugh!
dress looks far better from the back if you ask me - the front looks shapeless - maybe it's a bad pic
lose the red heel
maybe if the boots were more structured - but they give her sausage legs - so lose the boots altogether
It doesn't say "Pretty Woman" to me. Nor Posh.
It does say...STAR TREK! C'mon! Give her some pointy ears and she totally looks like an alien vixen from the original show!
Who's with me?
the open back with some really hot strappy shoes would be fine, the tat's not great, but tolerable. But it's her posture that is giving her phantom cougar back fat at the bottom of the vee that I'm quite sure she doesn't have. cougar back fat + tattoo + red heeled thigh highs = prostitute-y.
I really like it from the front. Cute dress. I love the long sleeves on it since it's so short.
If it had a back and she had a cute updo, I think this would be really cute.
I also hate the tattoo....what was she thinking getting something that big and colorful there?
There's way too much anatomy going on in the back. Shame because the front half of this outfit is such a win.
As for the original question - When Anne Hathaway wears the "Chanel boots" the The Devil Wears Prada, she does not look like a hooker. A very high end call girl, maybe, but not a hooker. So....
First of all, is Audrina actually looking at the camera?!?!?!
Anyhoo, I think her best bet is getting boots that hit the knee, not above them. Also I think the back should have some sort of scoop, but not as drastic as it it now. And finally if she neatens up the ponytail the outfit would be totally charming
She's not helping the backlessness, and it is not helping her.
Are the boot heels really red? Or are they some metallic something reflecting the carpet color? I can't tell for sure on my screen, but heels and carpet look very matchy-matchy. Either way, the whole second-wrinkly-skin thing going on with those boots requires very specific clothes to keep it on this side of the "working girl" street.
If those ARE metallic heels, then she should have just gone all steampunk. A great bustle skirt with no underskirt or a very short one to show off the legs and boots, a ruffly Victorian blouse with tailored vest, and some GOGGLES! Yeah! And a Jules Verne Ray Gun! Woot! The boots would totally rock some great metal rivet goggles.
I obviously am reading all the wrong literature here...
It all comes down to the math:
* dress + 4 inches
* heel - 1 inch
* boot - 1.5 FEET of trampy-ness on the top (what's wroung with an adorable bootie)
* body + 15 pounds
There, better now.
For who she is, I think its fine actually. She's a young reality star not someone serious.
If she wanted to me classy, she could lose the tat and/or not have it be backless and/or go with lower boots. Any one of those changes would make a huge difference.
I actually love over the knee boots, but feel that they are best in suede grey, brown, or tan. The straight on black leather begs the comparison
Please, Audrina, EAT SOMETHING. I don't want to see you ruin a pretty frock like this because I can see your back bone. It is just gross. Loose the boots, put on some heels, and we're in busines.
Am I the only one who immediately thought of Lt. Uhura?
The over-top-boots are almost fine but just need to be modestly offset somehow... and that is NOT accomplished with the low back, bed-head ponytail and -- as so many have already astutely pointed out -- that AWFUL tattoo.
Also, it might just be my eyes playing tricks on me, but do those boots not need to be a teeny bit less tight at the top? I feel like her circulation's going to be struggling by the end of the event.
All I know is that tatoo is heinous.
What is wrong with her skin? The texture and hue is making me want to vomit-- that or scratch my eyeballs out
I am in total agreement with the front looking good, the back drop-thing makes it look a little hookeresk. But more importantly, I can see her spine. That's not good. Eat a sandwich.
It would be 1000 times better if she weren't so skinny you could see her spine. Gross!!!
I kind of love it...minus the terrible tattoo.
With her spine sticking out like that her back looks like something from Aliens. I don't know why we embrace the near-emaciated but it's just gross. I'm so tired of skinny blondes. Putting that aside, I agree that the boots and the dress just don't go together. If you're going to wear those boots, then a black leather miniskirt and a fun (silvery?) strappy tank top would be a better choice. A little hookery, perhaps, but this IS Hollywood, land of fame whores.
I hate the dress, but if she wants to wear it the shoes should be equally flimsy: I'd go with silver strappy heels to compliment the silver flecks in the fabric. If the back was less loose I might like the dress better, on someone with a prettier back. I'm not saying I'm perfect, either, but my feeling is, go with your strengths. She has nice legs and I guess she's pretty but her back is fugly. Hide it, girlfriend, or EAT something and we'll talk.
Oh, and the hair, yikes. Put it up, dress it up, or leave it down, but a plain old ponytail on the red carpet is just sloppy.
Lose the open back, lose the boots, add a pair of nice pumps, lower the hemline two inches, add a pot pie.
I can totally see this in a Star Trek episode.
I can't seem to get past her really bony back to comment on the clothes or boots.
OK, I'm fine now.
The boots...why not just wear pants at this point? The dress def needs a back.
The dress is lovely and not whorish on its own, although I'd prefer the back to be a few inches higher. If she'd worn some sweet peep-toe pumps with it, we wouldn't be having this conversation. It's the combination of revealing dress + over-the-knee boots that turn Audrina from looking like just a fame whore to looking like a regular whore. I even like the boots, just not with this outfit. I've always considered ultra-high boots to be casual footwear, i.e., to be worn with jeans or a cute skirt; not with a glittering cocktail dress. The tattoo is obviously god-awful, but it's there now and no amount of cover-up will disguise it. I agree with other commenters who suggested she have a sandwich or two. Also, didn't she used to have really pretty dark hair? Yeah, she should go back to it as her hair currently looks bleach-fried.
To Jessica and anyone who is interested, the Project Rungay guys had a great post on over-the-knee boots. They had some beautiful ones that helped diminish my distaste for them:
http://projectrungay.blogspot.com/2009/10/yay-or-nay-thigh-high-boots.html
RE: Unfugging this--I like her dress, just not with those boots, so keep that and wear an interesting pair of heels. I don't mind the hair being unfussy. She could age herself if she had some kind of updo. But, it could be less messy, I guess. Even though I like the dress, i don't think she has a nice back for backless stuff at all.
I'm on the fence about over-the-knee boots. I really don't care for these sausage-casing ones she has on. If you go too evening with them, you do end up with the Pretty Woman look.
Yes, her tat is extremely lame.
I know I'm gonna sound like a broken record here, but GET RID OF THE TRASHY TATTOO.
*shudders*
Other than that, the get-up isn't so bad... but in my mind, there's nothing Audrina can work. Sorry (but not really).
the look COULD work except: (1) that hideous tattoo; (2) her back looks terrible (perhaps it doesn't always look like that, but upon first glance my impression was, "she has an ugly back!"); and (3) eechh meh.
from the front it looks kind of cute.. I just can't get past that trashy-looking tattoo and her ugly back. and, of course, the unkempt hair.
I'm more concerned with the shape of her spine - that's quite the curve she's got going. I don't think that's going to win over any customers for her...unless it's Quasimodo!
When you're in your twenties, and your dress makes it look like you have a wrinkly back, that dress is indeed A MISTAKE.
Also, thigh-highs in L.A. (eye roll).
you are 100% correct. from the front: stylish and beautiful. from the back: WHORE.
I'd start by putting someone else in the dress.
And then putting some tights on them perhaps, instead of the hooker boots.
I like the dress, maybe a smidge longer. Boots are not good with that dress and the neck tattoo... never a good idea. Oh, and throw in a sandwich, and this girl might be OK.
I love that dress. Really, love. So gorgeous, and the modest front/sleeves balance out the back perfectly. Dermablend for the tattoo honey, that belongs on a beach, not the red carpet. And the boots? ...I feel like there must be some way to pull them off, but I've yet to see anyone do it so perhaps I'm just overly optimistic. So, different shoe. And am I crazy to like her hair? Alright, maybe neaten it up a little in the back, but it looks so nice and soft and generally really good on her.
My friend and I had this exact same discussion last week! She likes thigh-high boots, I say no one could wear them in real life without being mistaken for a prostitute. After seeing this picture, I'm standing my ground.
Also, aren't you kind of obligated to wear a tiny dress with thigh-high boots? To show them off? Maybe that's part of the reason they seem to hookerish; they're always paired with something revealing.
I like the dress+shoes. The problem is her back; she hasn't got the most beautiful spine and that tattoo is simply ugly.
If the back were a few inches higher, I'd wear that dress. I don't like over-the-knee boots as a rule and they especially don't work here - as someone said, the material clashes with the dress. Hike up the back two or three inches, swap the boots for a pair of black pumps (closed or peep-toe) or strappy sandals in black or silver, and we'd be good. Except stop tanning; her skin looks leathery.
She's so irrelevant, I really don't care what she wears. But that's not the question.
How to fix this? Raise the scoop in the back to just under her shoulder blades. I wouldn't go with a full back; the dress needs something to keep it "young." Ditch the boots. There is no saving them. She looks like a hooker. Strappy, sparkling heels would be appropriate. Unfortunately, nothing will make this seemingly talentless celebrity appropriate.
Aaron, thanks for "sexy Jawa!!!" Whory Jawa is more accurate in this case, but still freaking hilarious.
the problem is that the dress on its own does follow the rules: if you show the legs, cover the arms/chest. and the boots are subtle enough that the outfit is workable. but the back just totally ruins it. so if this were a poll, i'd say: great in the front/terrible from the back... and the tattoo is not helping. and neither is the illusion of back fat although i can't imagine that ms. partridge actually has any... so, all the more of a disaster from behind.
I think the "lady" in this photo settles the argument once and for all!
http://www.peopleofwalmart.com/?p=5366
I like the boots, and if anyone hasn't mentioned it already, they are metallic heels reflecting the red carpet. I LOVE the material of her dress. And I like that her nails are not painted black like everyone's nails are painted black. The backlessness isn't really an issue for me, since Audrina's body type does not sport offensive back rolls. I'd say she's pulling this off without looking OBVIOUSLY like a hooker. If she were serving drinks in some high rolling back room casino poker game, she'd probably get propositioned. But I reckon any chick would.
Kind of hard to focus when I'm counting her vertebrae . . . and oh sweet pickles, look at that tattoo!
Okay, now that that is over, I think that the dress on it's own is salvageable. Maybe with an extra inch or three it would be better. But the boots and the dress=no go. That dress deserves some sparkly strappy shoes. The boots on their own are okay, but yeah, lose the red heel.
The hair? A ponytail can work, if it is sleek and neat. This is a mess.
The dress is sparkly and pretty, but does not go with those boots. The boots would be fine if she went up a size, folded down the tops, and wore them with an appropriately casual outfit, not a sparkly cocktail dress. I have seen similar spines on sturgeon in the Clearwater River. At least the tat is not down near the bottom of that back-cowl. I like her earrings with the dress. Her hair should be down. That is all, over and out.
I nearly just spit out/choked on a bite of my lunch when I saw the back. That kills it.
Close up that back for starters. The tat makes it veer even more towards the streetwalker-esque, but hey kids--that's what happens when you give yourself a permanent accessory in a highly visible place.
As for the boots, I'm not objected to over-the-knee in theory. But these particular over-the-knee boots a) look stupid with the red heel and b) seem kind of clunky and cheap. There's a much more sleeker way to do all of that.
The tattoo is what makes her look cheap. I know a lot of people swear by them, but IMO they are to a body what graffiti is to a wall.
The dress would work with a sleek updo, no tattoo, and tasteful shoes. Not paired with the boots and bedhead ponytail.
I don't have an issue with over-the-knee boots in general, but these just look cheap quality. Thigh-high boots are meant to raise eyebrows a little, not be easily tossed aside as trashy.
Can't believe I'm gonna reference this, but oh well. Sienna Miller recently wore a completely sequined dress and ROCKED it, because it fit well and was just a simple long-sleeved mini.
This dress does not fit Audrina well (perhaps because she has gotten SO THIN) and it really does need a back. I have no problems with over-the-knee boots, but they need to fit with the rest of the outfit. The combination of this dress and those boots is just made of no.
Last thing, I used to think Audrina was GORGEOUS because she had that dark brown hair and it suited her so well. Her hair is sort of orange now. Not good.
METALLIC HEELS REFLECTING RED CARPET =)
The dress and boots do not go together under any circumstance, but her neck tattoo is the most jarring thing of all.
Make a pretty girl look like a Tranny. This is how you do it.
Trashy tattoo that has no business being on a lady. check.
Boots above the knees coupled with a short skirt to make her look boxy with no curves at all. Check.
Dry, poorly colored,damaged looking hair that is tossed up with little effort. Kinda like it is a wig. Check.
Outfit made entirely out of sequins, sparkle, or leather. Check.
It's been more or less said on her before now, but the best thing could happen to that dress is a damn sandwich, hoagie, or a GUERILLA FAT TRANSPLANT to Audrina's back.
She needs to be checked for scoliosis.
As someone who has a tattoo in a similar spot, I don't have a problem with the placement of the tat (although the tat is UGLY). However, she needs to:
a)eat a sandwich so we can no longer play the xylophone on her vertebrae
b)add some fabric to the back of that dress to look less prostitute-y
c)send me those boots asap, even though I would probably never wear them out of the house (or bedroom.....)
Remeber on Queer Eye when Carson used to say "Only hookers wear red heels?" Same goes for over the knee boots. Undoable. Sorry if.
Dress: Keep
Shoes: Generously donate to a struggling prostitute
Tattoo: Laser that mess right off
I am just not a big fan of seeing people's spinal columns. Call me madcap, call me zany...but it just makes me want to sing "The Head bone is connected to the neck bone..."
Looks like it cost $50 for the entire outfit at Charlotte Russe
The boots are tricky: psychologists say that while the boot is covering much more of the leg than say a shoe would--and thus hinting at a kind of un-bared-flesh modesty--what it leaves open ... is the entryway to the crotch.
Still, the dress is too short to wear with just shoes, I think. So a lower boot would've made me happy.
I like the back of the dress actually, as it keeps the whole ensemble from going all Morticia-Addams-on-DWTH that all that shiny black spangly has going on.
And yet the most remarkable thing? AUDRINA IS LOOKING DIRECTLY AT THE CAMERA. Whoa. Did not recognize her.
Ok... let´s unfug this. First of all, we take her home. She takes away the ugly boots. Then she puts on something that hides the awful tattoo, let´s say, pijamas... Then we give her some fries and a sandwich and a milkshake. She eats. She comes back to her mind and swears she´ll never EVER put the ugly boots on again.
Lose the boots and make the material cover the back (maybe a bit of black beading down the zipper for flair). Add some nice silvery, barely there heels and it's fab.
get rid of the tat and gain 5-10 pounds so her back doesn't look like the back of a 60 year old woman but one of a woman whatever age she is.
Ye gods! Ye olde leather socks! Girlfriend needs a GOOD stylist!
Now I am concerned that Audrina Patridge, besides having a ridiculous name, has scoliosis.
From the front I say:
This outfit - Audrina + Liza Minelli = AWESOME
from the back I say:
This outfit + several sandwitches - boots + tights and heal = cute/sassy
I'd hike up the back a bit, get rid of the tatoo and put a Big Mac in one of her hands and a strawberry shake in the other. That way, she'd have a little padding on her spine next time she wore a dress with a super low cut back.
It doesn't help that the boots 1) are too tight and 2) have that wonky heel.
What also doesn't help? The stupidly large tat.
What also doesn't help? That she put her hair up quickly to scrub the toilet then realized she had to go to an event and completely forgot to style her hair in any way, including running a damned brush through it, before heading out the door.
She needs not to be wearing those boots, which are sad and fug, and to put some kind of concealer over the tat, which is giving a whorish context to that dress, which I'd like but for her complete inability to style/accessorize, and to buy herself a brush and maybe some hair pins.
The biggest bit of WTFery here is that the boots are making her thighs look fat in spite of the fact that the girl has CLEARLY VISIBLE VERTEBRAE. She is NOT fat, hooker boots! Stop trying to undermine poor Miss Patridge's self-esteem!
She looks like her back is withering...
I'm really distracted by her ugly, rainbow tattoo. I had no idea she was branded thus.
Now, the dress itself is cute, but with something that FLASHY, you have to tone down everything else. Thigh high boots don't really scream "subtle." If she wore considerably shorter boots with some black tights, she might even look appropriate for daylight.
And comb that hair.
I think the boots are a little too high and shiny to go with the dress. and I think to properly pull off this kind of look, it requires a bit more meat on the body. Her back looks ... scrawny ... and the only shape seems to comem from the interesting cut of the heel on the boots. For some reason she looks straight as a board in this dress, though it would probably be a different story if we could see her from the side. I'm not sold on this...
Laser that damn tattoo! It is so trashy!
Also, with respect to the boots: They look cheap, like they were $75 on sale at ROSS. She needed to have either: (1) wear more expensive looking boots made of a thick, quality-looking leather (i.e., did not hug her legs/thighs like saran wrap); or (2) worn a nice sandal.
I am fine with the dress, which is otherwise v. sexy
OMG. That post: http://www.peopleofwalmart.com/?p=5366 cracked me up!! I am in agreement with the majority here. Cover the back a little shorten the boots and maybe eat a sandwich or 3.
like the dress AND the boots, but definitely not together. or on ceiling eyes at all, actually. that tattoo screams "trailer park" btw.
I actually really like the boots, and I think they go well with the dress (in the front that is). I think that the back needs to be higher- like maybe a small scoop but lose that hood thing all together. I also think this would give more shape to the dress, and it would fit her better, instead of looking a bit shapeless in the front. I also like the hair up, but would prefer a more severe (in the front) and polished (in the back) ponytail. Any other updo would look too matronly with the dress, and it would look like it doesn't go.
Also, I don't believe she has a red heel, but a metallic heel that is reflecting the red carpet.
You know, in theory I am not opposed to over the knee boots. Obviously they can very easily look trashy, but I am willing to bet it can be pulled off. Black leather I think might be difficult, but what about tan, paired with a sweater dress and a good bag?
Regarding Ms. Patridge here...You just don't do sparkles, SHORT, backless AND knee high black leather boots! That is just TOO much.
ha im only like 15
so my opinion may clash with all yalls
but i LOVE how she looks here!
what would you have her do!? get her horrible thatOnedrunkennightmistake of a tattoo taken off of her on the spot. she has to regret it, and if she doesn't then..i'll pray for her. but getting a tattoo taken off is quite a grueling process.
and we all need to face the fact that audrina really likes to show skin and if you ask me .BETTER IN THE BACK THAN IN THE FRONT!
i think she actually looks almost classy
aside from boots that make her look like she has a pair wooden legs.
She's too too unappealing wonky freak face and buck teefs like Heather Mills for me to care
1) When did LATEX become a legitimate fabric outside the SM world? You could wear those with a full length burlap sack and it would still look whorish.
2) It's been said before but, OMG, too much skin.
3) Someone needs to reintroduce her to solids.
4) When I was in college, that hairdo was referred to as "fu-- hair". Not helping the situation.
5) Who knew a tramp stamp could be placed so high? very classy.
Pretty girl. She should buy herself some self-repsect.
You are so right. The outfit looks ok from the front, but the back is awful. I hate to say it, because I like tattoos usually, but I think it's her ink that really wrecks it.
Overall this whole thing might work better if the boots looked a little less like pleather. They were probably hugely expensive, but they look cheap.
Ditto on the scoliosis comment.
That is one snaky, crooked spine.
The skin art is horrible.
She needs to use her long hair to cover it up.
Hair down.
Ditch the boots for some strappy sandals and add a back to the dress and she's good to go.
As soon as she eats an entire, nutritious meal.
I really like the way she looks from the front. And I feel like the low back wouldn't be quite so bad without those boots! Holy crap. Plus she does look spiny and unhealthy.
Even accounting for the tattoo, her back just isn't pretty enough to pull off backless-to-the-hip. She's too skinny. Her tan lines are weirdly distracting. And I look at her spine and wonder if she has scoliosis. Add the tattoo to that, and blagh. But it's lovely from the front. Re the boots: they're also fine from the front, but from the back scream "slutbomb". It's a problem.
Actually I don't think this is so bad. The dress is largely fine - she's young enough to be able to pull it off. About the only thing I'd change is to bring the back up just an inch or two. It looks like it's supposed to be hitting her about the waist, but it's creating the illusion that it's going lower. Changing the hair style to something other than a ponytail will help immensely.
The boots are sort of okay... I do think the heels are metallic (a shiny silver or steel effect) and are reflecting the carpet. I'd suggest lowering them to maybe mid-calf or at most knee-high.
As for the scoliosis comment, come on... she's half-turned at the waist so the photographers nearest to her can shoot her body in profile and her face straight on.
It could be me, but from this angle A.Pat's eyes are actually looking straight ahead.
#1. Make the dress in red....and then include the thinnest of ties at the top....to make sure that thing doesn't fall off and create one hell of a nip slip. Put some sort of tiny sparkly dingleberry thingee at the end of each tie.
#2. Remove tatoo
#3. Add sparkly ring
#4. Get rid of the boots and put pretty strappy sandals on instead.
#5. The hair needs to be totally reworked...I'm thinking something pretty slick.
#6. Smokey eye, red lipstick, pale nails, pale cheeks.
Done!
She's too skinny to go backless. All the women who look good backless are the ones who are fit and healthy. Audrina, like a lot of girls on red carpets, think skinny equals healthy. The bones in her back beg to differ. And they'd also like a sandwich. And less orange tanning spray.
When I was a sweet young thing, a wise old woman said to me, "Your clothes should NOT say, 'I've got it; here it is,' but "I've got it, let's see if you can find it.'"
Curiously enough, I don't find the tattoo objectionable, but that's because my eyes and my monitor are both bad and I can't see what it IS. So you may be better informed than I am here.
I am older than many of you and have a different set of associations: thus thigh-high boots don't say "prostitute" to me, they say "Three Musketeers." Still, I'll take your word for it that that's what they signal nowadays. And I love the word "prostitogs."
("What's green and hops from bed to bed? A prostitoad." Okay, I'll go away now.)
Lose the boots. I don't do footwear well, but I'm sure someone can give her some knock-out heels to wear.
STAR TREK! C'mon! Give her some pointy ears and she totally looks like an alien vixen from the original show!
Who's with me?
Thigh-high boots OR sequins. BOTH IS WAY TOO MUCH. And the '80sness of the neckline just adds to the uncomfortable Pretty Woman comparison. With a different LBD, I could get behind the boots.
I'm actually neutral on the back--I normally don't like that style, but the inversion of the typical top covered-legs uncovered pattern is kinda interesting.
Ugh, look AT THE CAMERA, you wonk-eyed slag.
The dress would be cute...on someone classier. Charlize Theron could wear the hell out of this one.
The boots would also be cuter if they weren't so tight. They look like leather tights with afterthought heels.
That tattoo looks like a bad mistake after a night of depressed boozing.
If you're going to show off your back, why would you leave your hair to cover it? Put that hair up and in a less messy style. I love a messy ponytail but it doesn't fit with the sparkles and leather boots.
I would like shorter boots. I hate boots that go over the knee. Unnecessary and hard to walk in. If she fixed that I'd be fine with it, but I would love to see the scoop reveal an interesting insert in the back that maybe went up to midway between her shoulder blades and where it is now. Lose the sequins on the dress and do a contrasting sequin insert. Or raw edged layers. Something visually and texturally interesting.
Forget the outfit (though it's vile) it's her dull dull hair colour that really upsets me.
At least her tattoo matches the background!
Skank from the back, slightly better from the front.
Add a full back and that's actually a very pretty outfit
I DO NOT LIKE THE BOOTS. That said, I think boots would work, just regular, below-the-knee ones, not ones that require a safety pin to pull them closed 'cos you just broke the zipper on those cheap-ass fake patent leather ones, Julia. Oh, wait, wrong gal. Any hoodle, not a fan of tats, either, so she ruined the back view automatically. The back is way too low - I'm all for a little bone showing (see my approval of Mini Driver's clavicles from the other day) but it's almost skeletal seeing that much anatomy on the red carpet. The front view of the dress is good, the back view is just porn disguised as "edgy". Not buyin' it, babe.
I have to agree on the comments on the front, although I suspect the lighting toned down the boots a whole bunch compared to the obviously brighter lighting on the rear view.
From the back I was trying to think of what to change. Then it hit me - here's $300 - keep the change. If that is not a f**k-me outfit, I don't know what is. As a guy - I have to appreciate that. I would be jealous as all heck of the guy she was with.
As so many other posters have said, start with lasering off the tattoo and then talk to me.
-More cleavage
-Less back
-Longer hem
-Other shoes
-Better hairstylist
-Better tattoo artist!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
(I love big, colourful tattoos when done well, this one is just an odd blob on her neck. Who is she anyway...?)
I didn't know she had taken on a new job as spokeswoman for "Streetwalkers 'r Us."
Honestly, all I can find myself looking at on the back is her crazy spine. Maybe it's just me, although I can't really see what's attractive about being able to count one's individual vertebrae. It makes me think of dinosaur bones.
Lose the boots and cover the back, or at least eat some sandwiches.
Girlfriend needs a sandwich. I can count every vertebrae on her spinal column. Why does Hollywood insist that skeletons are sexy?
Seems like we're in "Legs or Cleavage, but not both" territory here...Boots or Back, but not both.
That said, even with the back scooped down to...well...there, the dress with different shoes could work (without implying "working").
And with a different dress, I can't help but think the thigh-high boots -- in THEORY -- could be saucily cute. But those darn contrasting, teeteringly high heels (to say nothing of the fact that they're bedecked with PLATFORMS too!) would make just about anyone look clumsy and awkward (instead of the desired affect of confident and smokin' hot).
As for the hair? Well, it kinda works for me -- but maybe that's just the pirate boots talkin'.
But seriously...whether you love or hate this PARTICULAR tattoo, are there still people out there who brand a girl cheap or slutty by the very presence of a neck tattoo?
Dress looks great from the front, tighten up up back and give her some decent shoes. She looks tackyyyyyyyyy
The boats and dress worn separately work. But not together. She is at the music awards so the risk is respected. Enough of the negative tattoo remarks!!!
The boats and dress worn separately work. But not together. She is at the music awards so the risk is respected. Enough of the negative tattoo remarks!!!
love the dress.
like the boots.
now separate.
I can't make any rational choices until she covers up those vertebrae. Too distracting! Put some meat on those bones, THEN we'll talk.
just get rid of the boots. done.
I'm just disappointed you didn't use the phrase "prostitooty".
Glamour trash. Still TRASHY but on a better budget is all. And I feel her feet will stink when they come out of the incubators. I wouldn't want to be downwind.
Looks like she was desperate for a pair of boots, rummaged through the kitchen and found black trash bags and two corks from last night's (now empty) wine bottles.
Love the boots. Would love them better if the heel was the same colour as the rest of the boot.
Love the dress, even if it looks itchy.
Do NOT NOT NOT love them together.
Pretty Woman's trashy little sister. She needs, in no particular order: less boot, more dress, less tattoo, more hairbrushing, less visible vertebrae.
The boots are bad, bad, bad...they look as if they are made of neoprene, like a wetsuit. And they give her teeny little thighs muffin top - nobody needs that. And she needs to eat something.
I feel like this would be a cute little number with some ANKLE boots, but definately not thigh-highs.
I'm not opposed to thigh-high boots in general--Blake Lively was rocking a pair recently--but I'm opposed to these thigh-high boots. They don't look like boots. They just look like leather thigh-highs from the front. So if she got a better pair of boots, I'd be willing to consider it.
And, yes, the dress should have a solid back.
I don't mind the tattoo, even though her clothing has added to the trashiness of the whole ensemble. The boots are great, but not with that dress. If that fug dress needs to be worn, it needs to be worn with a pair of normal, "big girl" heels. The dress also needs a back, but I can forgive the backlessness of it if the boots go.
There was a style guide on TV here saying - NEVER combine overknees with something that has a plunging neckline (I think that also goes for plunging necklines on the back..) if you don't want to look like a prostitute. That's the trick. Try something like a knitted dress and it looks fab. Oh and yes, the boots are definitely too tight.
HEY!! Is she...actually....making....EYE CONTACT with the camera????
Those boots were clearly made for someone with no thighs.
OME! Since when can u comment. Haha. She has an ugly back. If they were jus stilletos and the dress had a back and her hair was better this outfit would so work.
she needs to put on some weight!
Well, the dress is obviously too large, the fabric is ugh, the open back makes is even more tacky, adding the boots and a huge tattoo just pulls everything down the drain. The whole concept is beyond rescue because it sends the wrong (or right??) message.
Oh mon Dieu. It's such a NO GO area! I mean girls, u have a lot, a lot of choices when we talked about shoes. WHY this lovely girl put on the most ugly (pattern - very prostituteeee!) boots. Over-knee Boots are HELL on earth outfit.
But I like the dress, not the coloured tatoos it's look like a Maui Hotel logo... But the dress yeah!
I love all of it! The shoes, the dress, the back-cleavage-thingy, the tattoo. Even the sorta-lame earrings.
If only the dress were a little bit shorter...
I never knew (of) someone prettier from the side than the front. Wow. That's weird. Front, her face is so average - typical hollywood surgery - nothing too big or too small, but nothing actually attractive. From the side view of her face, she's very pretty.
Oh wait, that wasn't the question. Yes, the pieces don't go together. Hence part of the line of work question, I don't always think the "pros" match either. She needs to be either glitzy evening or matte funk but well, not both.
What is going on with her BACK?!? I am freaked out!
I realize it's an eternal struggle with clothes, but do we really need to tell starlets to go up a size in SHOES? Really?
Unless she has the problem like I do, where she can kind of wear either a 10 or an 11 in most cases, and the manufacturers only go up to a 10. But in this case she's not pulling it off. Those look mondo uncomfortable.
Also, yeah, the dress needs a back. I think when the back below the waist is visible--where the spine starts curving back out towards the butt--then that's trashy.
Unlike most of the commenters, though, I am a fan of good, meaningful ink, so I would like to A) see a better picture of her tat and B) hear her articulate what it means to her and why she got it. If she says "I wanted a tattoo and I looked through their book of work and liked this one!" then yes, the tattoo is trashy. But there might be an amazing story.
those boots are just hideous. and OF COURSE she has a dolphin tattoo. it just makes sense.
I get the feeling the entire point of the outfit is to show off her tattoo. I don't think that's a good point, but whatever. Do you think they'll be so popular still in, like 30 years?
Apart from that, what everyone else has already said.
I am reminded of the leather turtleneck dress Moss wore recently. If you kept the fabric of this dress but adopted the cut of the Moss dress, the boots would have totally worked.
I don't actually mind the tat. I have one, leftover from my 20s. What are you going to do? However...
I think this dress would be darling, darling, darling if it had short sleeves and a normal back and were just a wooooncy bit longer.
But then there are the God-forsaken boots. If your boots are so fracking heinous that they make somebody THIS skinny look bad, it's time to give up designing in favor of parking cars for a living. Or get a law degree. OR SOMETHING. Because those are some sort of special terrible, right there. Eck.
She looks like an alien. Or like an alien may be starving inside her and is trying to burrow its way out to the nearest McDonalds via her stegosaurus-like spine. Icky.
And those boots do nothing to help her. They probably just make her alien crabby(ier).
Get rid of the thigh-high boots (protitution style has been out for the past decade...)
Her posture would also greatly improve how the dress falls off her back (stand staight, for Godssake! And don't lean or shift your balance on one foot - it gives the impression of being bored and not caring). If you look at her right foot in the back shot you can notice how she leans on the left foot.
And she should've left her hair open and played with it.
SHE LOOKS LIKE A HOOKER!! Ahhhh so little taste, it's hurting my soul
The tatoo doesn't help her at all, and not a big fan of these boots.
Love the dress, love the boots, hate them together. I must admit, I have a love affair with low-backs, and a secret crush on thigh-high boots. (You forget, we all want to be Julia Roberts in Pretty Women because "She rescues him right back" and I have to believe she is able to do this because of her fierce footwear.) However, if years of day time television have taught us nothing else, it's that our lovers and crushes should never be left alone in the same room together!
If she wore this dress with some sexy little silver heels I could get behind this dress- though admittedly, I might suggest she wear something slightly longer so she could actually sit in it! Or if this dress were as high in the back as it is in the front then the conservative nature of the dress paired with the sexy look of the boot would create a very understated and alluring look.
Though I am suspicious that this whole look is equally ruined by that godawful tattoo on her neck and her leathery orange skin. It's like a frightening view of her future as a cougar. Can't wait till season 30 of the hills!
I recommend that the dress have a full back, and lose the ridiculous boots for some normal heels. Oh, and get rid of the trashy tattoo.
Audrina's thought process:
Faith Hill looks sexy in the Monday Night Football intro. Maybe I should copy that look exactly? Oh wait, Faith Hill is old. Let me add sequins and a nasty back swoop. Yeah. That's hot.
+ 5 lbs
- the boots
+ a hairstyle
= fab
and i find myself saying, for the second time this week, "pardon me, Miss? yes, boots are not pants."
I really quite like this outfit from the front, but then she turned round and the back view is not good. The dress's neckline needs to be the same in back as in front. Also, I know these things are a matter of personal taste, but that's not a tattoo I'd get. Nor would I get any tat in a location that's so hard to cover up at job interviews...
uh, pretty woman from the back.. should definately have to toned it down from the back. from the front, much different, classier story :-)
I think you could unfug it two ways:
1) Put a regular back on it, sleek the hair a bit, keep the boots....or
2) Keep the back of the dress, put her hair up, cover up the tattoo if possible, get some strappy high heels
I think with the back and the boots there's too much going on here (and it lands her definitively in the land of working girl fug). With either option the end result might not be everyone's idea of fab, but it keeps her out of the danger zone.
Eat something. I'm pretty sure I shouldn't be able to count your vertebrae so easily.
lazer the tat OFF.
Black satin loub peep toes. get rid of the drop earrings and replace with studds. keep the cocktail ring. keep the low back. side swept bangs loose pony tail for the hair.
Not tooooooooooooo bad from the front, except for the ghastly camera angle which makes her legs look too short, but from the back? Ugh! The combination of red heels, leather that looks like rubber, the tatt, and the low back (mercifully without bra-strap but somehow that worsens the tack) add up to pole-dancer. At least. At first I thought the text on the backdrop said Los Prositutos. But that's probably bad Spanish anyway.
Wow, I think I've heard enough about the tattoo. That doesn't bother me at all. The heels on those boots are oddly cone shaped and I hate them. They don't even look like boots as much as thick plastic socks. The dress needs to be fully backed and she needs to darken her hair.
Her boots are way too tight and in the first photo it looks like the boots ARE her feet? So she could loosen those up a bit. Kim K is some one who knows how to rock the over the knee boots.
Cover up the tattoo.
The dress just looks really uncomfortable and heavy (?). I agree - close the back of it. However, I think if there is a back to the dress, the sleeves could be shorter.
The front was so cute, what a shame. I don't think it's saveable, toss the whole thing (but send the boots to me, Hallowe'en is coming after all...)
I think it would be cuter if it were sleevless with a full back.
A few points:
-The dress itself is cute. I like the open back. The boots are ok with it from the front, but with the open back, not from that angle.
-Agreed that SHE should not be wearing an open back until she manages to put some weight on.
-The hair is fine for daytime or a more laid back 'romantic' outfit. But it seems she is going for some type of edgy, rocker, alien, futuristic look here. She needs the hair to be slicker or straighter.
-The tattoo is horrible. I hate tattoos in general, though. I don't know if anyone else remembers a time in the not-so-distant past when all tattoos were considered trashy.
-And finally the BOOTS - I love over the knee boots. These are not exactly my first choice. But in theory, the style is great, and can be done appropriately. I have seen flat ones, as well as a heeled pair worn over dark jeans with somewhat casual outfits, and it looked great - they gave it just a bit of edge and sexiness. I have also seen it with a modest, not too short, black dress and semi-sheer black tights and it looked GREAT. I am currently on the hunt for the perfect pair. But, I do realize that once they are found, they will not spend as much time out of the closet as a pair of below-the-knee boots since they can easily look trashy.
Love, love, love the dress. Her shape is fine. Yes - she is very thin, but she has curves - she still looks healthy.
The boots have GOT to go. A nice pair of Christian Louboutin pumps, or even ankle boots would have been better.
As for the tattoo, at least it is not on her lower back.
So much body snarking on this thread. I thought we were trying to avoid that on GFY...
Actually, I kind of like this. The only thing I might change is to not make the back so very low. She's young. She should have fun with these kinds of looks while people will still dismiss it as "experimentation." I'm also willing to cut her some slack ever since that hilarious quote about tasering both Brody Jenner and Joe Francis.
I think this would look ok if it were a different sort of low back. Not a cowel, just maybe a deep v. And if the dress was a tinge longer. From the front though, I agree, I love it. Hooker boots though, I'm never much of a fan of. Plus, I imagine you need to have the tiniest legs ever to fit into them, and shoes are supposed to be the one thing that you can buy even if you've gained a few pounds. So it could just be that the trend as a whole depresses me. But, I'd really just go with a kickass pair of heels. Any sort would do the trick.
she looks like a bobble head, and the boots add to that whole "stalk on the bottom" look. she needs to do some resistance training and get a room with a three way mirror.
She has had the tat ages, I remember seeing it on the first season of The Hills... she just seems to not draw much attention to it (maybe she regrets it a bit?)
I like the look... it is bordering on prostitution-y but she IS at some Mtv awards (I feel cheated when people wear boring things to those red carpets, bring back the days of McGowan wearing a dress made of chains and Prince in assless pants, but I digress). I think the tall boots are her way of covering more skin than she would have with regular shoes.
good god, if you're going to go with a dramatic back reveal you might want to pick a lane and have the focus remain there and not wear rubber leg hose to distract. an elegant pair of stilettos would have knocked this right out of the park.
Am I the only one that gagged seeing her spine?
Are those heels actually red? Or are they (godforbid) silver and reflecting the carpet?
Are those heels actually red? Or are they (godforbid) silver and reflecting the carpet?
I also think its possible to look like a pirate, not just a prostitute.
hey - lay off. the boots are so hot that i've been jerking off to the picture for days now.