The Costume Institute Gala and My Disdain of the Strapless Dress.

Gotta get something off my chest, right off the top.....I HATE strapless dresses. Hate 'em. Loathe 'em. Almost nobody can pull one off, and as evidence, I bring up the 2010 Costume Institute Gala at the Met last night. I have been much enjoying scrolling through the photos; it is always a night of amazing fashion, and it's fun to see people pull out all the stops, dress-wise. There were some spectacular threads on display, but it really came clear to me as I examined the fashion eye candy on display that I really, truly hate strapless dresses. I don't get them. They just look...wrong. I can't even put my finger on what bugs me there. The bodices always look so artificial, with the clutchy-looking boob encapsulating frames, and if a body doesn't feature height, small boobs, wide shoulders and a perfect neck, fuggedaboudit!! I get that a body might want to bust out some skin, and work the sexy on an occasion like the Costume Institute Gala, but girlfriends, there are better ways. A lovely halter neck, say. One of my personal favourite choices...Or, a one-shoulder number, of which there were a few lovely examples at last night's Met Ball.

I will now go to specifics. Ladies and Gents of the jury, I give you this: http://ca.eonline.com/photos/gallery.jsp?galleryUUID=2105#74427. Kristen Stewart looks unutterably heinous. This is apparently a sad excuse for Chanel couture. Poor old Karl Lagerfeld may well have finally lost it, his four inch high collars having choked the last of life and sense out of him. This is a bad, bad gown, and though K. Lag. has much to answer for in designing it, Kristen has even more to answer for in choosing to wear it. Did she think it added to her vampire street-cred or something? I tend to think that Kristen did a bunch of bong hits and then went dress shopping. Regardless, she slumped and scowled her way up the red carpet last night, in this grim AND STRAPLESS Wicked Witch of the West number, and did herself no favours. None. To boot, it appears as though she brylcreemed her hair and opted out of make-up whatsoever. *head shakes with bemusement* I think the next worst strapless had to be Donatella Versace, in Versace, and she looked like a saran andgift ribbon-wrapped old ghoul.

I turn now to this: http://ca.eonline.com/photos/gallery.jsp?galleryUUID=2105#74409. Doesn't young Taylor Swift look lovely? I don't know much about her, or about her counterpart in the Hall of Tragedy above for that matter, but I do know that Swift looks so pretty, glamourous, and yes, sexy, in a gown WITH SLEEVES. See, there they are...say hello to them. Sleeves...small sleeves, that leave her collarbones and shoulders bare, but do not feature the bodice of doom that characterises dresses with a lack of strap. This dress of Tay's is Ralph Lauren, and Ralph, please stand up and take your dues. You done good. Seriously pretty, this dress. Interestingly, it seems as though Taylor took a little flak for looking young and innocent in this number last night, to which I say, "Hello? The girl is 18, for the love of God. What do you want her to look like? A 42 year old crack-addled streetwalker? Joan Collins in her nasty Dynasty gold buttons and shoulder pads? Yeesh..." Taylor 's pretty earrings, soft, floaty hair and perfect red lipstick make this a winner. Score one to the sleeve department.

There were, admittedly, a few strapless numbers which weren't half bad: much as I dislike her, Jennifer Lopez rocked her Zuhair Murad sparkly number, Anne Hathaway was pretty in her blush Valentino, and Claire Danes looked really lovely in her metallic Burberry, and one of my favourite necklaces of the night. Thandie Newton wore a purple Vivienne Westwood strapless, with emerald jewellery, and looked spectacular, though it must be said that she would look spectacular in a grocery bag.

Likewise, there were some epic fails in the sleeved department, and I point out Padma Lakshmi's godawful satin Roberto Cavalli, Demi Moore's shiny Lanvin number, with her mopey hair and mopey face, and one of my personal worst, Gisele Bundchen's revolting, black leather woven Alexander Wang. This dress is a horror, and she ought to have stopped at a mirror, and had the self-satisfied smirk wiped clean off her face at the sight of reflection.

A few other folks need a mention: gold stars to the ever glamourous Iman, in a perfect, bluey-black, 30s-inspired Prada, the lovely young Emma Watson, Princess Burberry herself, in a one-shouldered white from her home base, Burberry, and Sienna Miller's funky-yet-sophisticated navy Pucci. Slaps across the face with a soggy fish sandwich to Renee Zelwegger, who's be-bowed Carolina Herrera left me a little ill, Eva Mendez, who got caught up in the curtains and came anyway, Maggie Gyllenhaal's Vuitton, which looked as though it was crafted out of used Glad bags, and Kristen Bell's Diane Von Furstenberg, which the cats clearly got at before she left the house. Oh, and Andre Leon Talley, who apparently wore his housecoat. Not sure what to do with Katy Perry, who wore a light-up dress. Yes, a light-up dress, with rows and rows of tiny LED lights. This choice clearly showed balls and creativity both, and while the light-up dress looked cool from certain angles, I'm just not sure. The jury is out. What do you think: http://fashionista.com/2010/05/in-defense-of-katy-perry/katy_perry_met/

Well, I'll shut up now. Thanks for indulging my "fashion critic" flight of fancy. I really do have to let it out every now and again, or I get a headache which canonly be cured by a few swift whacks with a rolled-up copy of Vogue. If you want to view most of the aforementioned dresses further, here's a link to a nice encapsulation of the fashion last night: http://ca.eonline.com/photos/gallery.jsp?galleryUUID=2105#74384

p.s. again, Kristen Stewart, you ARE NOT an extra on the Munsters, ok?