I’ll be the first to admit it: I really, really like those shoes.
I love me some Dicey! Also known as “Diane looks great, and Joshua makes an awesome accessory.”
I too love the shoes! And the Pacey!
Confession: Sometime in high school, I quit TV (I know I know) because I was too busy, so I never finished watching Dawson’s Creek. Thanks to Netflix, I am now remedying that, and HOLY BAZOOKA I LOVE PACEY. It’s getting wonky now that they’re all in college, but Wikipedia assures me that Joey makes the right choice in the end.
I like them too.
I like the shoes, but not with that dress. They don’t really “go” together, IMO. I kind of like the cut of sheer side panel, but I don’t like the sheer fabric itself. Or the length of the sheer in the front. It might have looked better if the sheer fell only a few inches below the solid.
The netting would have worked if it were the same width all the way down, it was widened at the boob area. The shoes are trying too hard.
I love her bracelets.
Do they just show up at things, looking (usually) glamorous or well-done? She looks glam, he looks like he just stepped out of a J. Crew catalog. But golly, are they pretty or what?
As for her dress — lose all the sheer (make the side panels solid), give the dress an even hem and get rid of the oversized appliques, and we’re in business. Agree with Ellelake about the shoes.
Apparently they get paid to show up, or at least Diane does.
This is at the premiere for The Host. Diane has a major part in this film.
Most things they show up at, they have a reason for being there. However, Diane does go to events that are linked to her friends.
Are we sure that’s her boob? Its such a different color from the rest of her, and it’s not like she’s tan. The dress is ugly either way, but particularly so if we are seeing her no-sunshine places.
Not a fan. Hate the side boob, and dislike the sheer paneling on both the sides and the bottom. The shoes are cool, but not with the dress.
Im going to pass on the entire dress. Throw it away and find something else to wear with the shoes.
Pacey…how YOU doin?
I feel like I’ve said all one CAN say about stupid lace overlays, sheer panels, and side boob. To her credit, she makes this – and everything else – look better than it has any right to.
But lest you despair of love, Danny Devito and Rhea Perlman are back together, so we can all believe again….
It doesn’t really look slutty but it’s kinda funny that she’s standing beside letters that read THE HOS.
Hi-lair! I love DK but I do not love this ensemble at all. Not even the earrings. And her hair-do is unflattering for her forehead… 99 times out of 100 she gets it so right. So she’s allowed this 1 fail
I love these two so much… I bask in the glory that is their relationship! And I would LOVE this dress if it was all the same length, the side sheer doesn’t bother me! Those shoes are AWESOME and the styling is beautiful! Great jewelry too!
Kruger wins me over every time. Now that you point out the sheer bits, I am questioning it slightly more… but I will admit that when I first saw this I just loved it. Oh Diane!
She and her man are both awesome. She makes cracked out stuff seem quite legit.
That last picture of Pacey might be the cutest picture of him EVER. That smile!!!
Nothing is cuter than him doing that adorkable little dance in the red sweater in the Dawson’s Creek opening credits.
I find the sheer stuff at the bottom more objectionable than along the sides. Not sure who came up with that sheer over knees look, but it’s bizarre.
I really dislike the dress, but give me those earrings. I’ll wear them every day.
Let me get it out of the way: Eeeee Pacey!
Diane Kruger is generally gorgeous, so it’s hard for me to recognize the fug of some of her clothes. But this dress is fug. I think it COULD be better without the side cutouts, but I don’t know if it would make it great. I DO, however, love and want her accessories – her shoes, her jewels … and sorry to objectify, her man.
Love the shoes! I don’t think I would mind the side panels so much without the weird sheerness at the bottom, although it would be better if it was uniform and not wider at the boob zone like someone mentioned.
PS, Pacey, I loved you since the Charlie Conway days. Your triple deke makes me swoon!
The shoes are hideous.
Hate the dress, dislike the shoes, love Diane+Pacey.
It was a bold attempt, but it’s a week too late to get her into this year’s Fug Madness.
Good try, though, because nobody else thought to wear a see-through dress with a Medieval-style tabard attached. I’d give her a write-in vote, if write-in votes were allowed.
She’s in this year’s competition! No write-in required.
No, no, and no.
Reduce earbobs by one third. Shoes, delightful for a sportier outfit. Dress, loose the sheer and Bob’s your uncle.
I love the shoes, a couple of inches more coverage on the side boobs and I could sign off on the dress, but the hair! Presumably she has people who handle her hair? Why is it plastered to her head like that? She has such a pretty face, but it is angular, thats just way too severe a style for her.
Everything is dreadful here except the shoes, which would be great fun with something white.
Those things on her ears appear to be eating them.
Well, OF COURSE Pacey doesn’t mind the ensemble: she’s got her hand on his ass.
Me, I love the earrings, hate the shoes, and would have been able to stomach the dress better without the see-through bottom, but even then only because it was on Diane Freaking Kruger.
If the dress just had the sheer down the sides it would have made me happy.
I actually like the earrings ( because I secretly adore HUGE jewelery pieces that I can’t wear). I think I would have liked them better if she’d pulled her hair completely back, but I appreciate the sleek do.
I love the shoes. They are kind of space age-y. They don’t “match” the dress which is usually a no no with Little Miss Matchy Matchy here….but she’s Kruger….she wins.
I love Diane Kruger, she’s on my shortlist of fashion faves (along with Cate Blanchett, Naomi Watts, Zoe Saldana, and lately Leslie Mann). But she has GOT TO STOP plastering her hair to her skull. So unflattering! I get it girl. I have fine, thin blonde hair too. It’s hard to infuse some volume in there. But if you attend to it with as much gusto as you do your clothes, I’m sure you’ll come out fine in the end.
Oh, and I think the sheer on the sides could have been interesting if the dress were floor-length, but as it is, it’s just a bit too much. Like Boobs McLeggsly, pre-Ryan Reynolds.
She looks fabulous, as do most of the women you have posted about recently. I used to really like this site, but have recently come to realize that you basically think every woman should just wear a nice shift dress and ‘natural’ look make-up.
I am not a fan of sideboob, although this is not a tawdry look on her. I’m not sure she could come across as tawdry. Anyway, I think it’s probably lovelier workmanship in person – bead work can be hard to pull off on camera. I like the shoes.
Maybe if it were all opaque at the bodice and the sheer material were at the top only. Then, I think you could get away with the bottom being as it is. Although I still feel as if side sheerness is clearly in existence to prove that one isn’t wearing one’s undies. Top and bottom sheer is a bit predictable, but if it were styled maybe with a slit up one side with the lace sheerness over it, but still cover where the undies would theoretically be? I don’t know. Now all I see is a boudoir apron too.
You probably love this:
A German magazine does interviews just with pictures but without words….