| USD Cart (0)
Ruru
NY
My Style: Casual Chic, Edgy, Low-maintenance cool
Reviews: 52
Average Rating: 3.5
REVIEWS & RATINGS
52 reviews 1 2 3 4 5 6
Quality not meeting price expectations
Great idea, no? But doesn't seem to be well constructed in real life. The "cover" and the actual connector do not fit seamlessly together. There's a gap in between even as you snap them "shut". And, the alignment is off on one cufflink - it looks "twisted". The finish is chintzy, like cheap jewelry. For great most people, these cufflinks are just too big, like wearing a fruit chew or something - counterintuitive if you're imagining being "stealthy"...
Sizing: Larger than Expected
 
report inappropriate content
Posted February 07, 2013
Cool color, and best for pear shapes
I'm an hourglass 35-24-35 - and this dress makes me look surprisingly masculine (kind of an unusual experience) and takes away from my curves. I definitely don't shy away from padded shoulders - scored the famous Roland Mouret dress a few years ago - but this dress's shape (or is it the length) does me no favors at all. So, chances are if you have a pear/triangle shape, the padding will counteract it. Also - Rachel Roy dresses this season are running small (I wore 2 last season, but 4 this year). I'm not loving the amount of polyester in her dresses running near $400. It's not like the wool ones she made before. *sigh*
Sizing: Smaller than Expected
 
report inappropriate content
Posted October 16, 2012
Wish they used better fabric
I wasn't sure about the design - it seemed a bit old-fashioned, not in a Hollywood-glamour way, but reminded me of movie depictions of an auntie-type who's trying to recall her youthful days. :( I don't see myself wearing this to go out. It just would seem like I was trying too hard to be vavavoom and not really exercising any creativity. Maybe I'm just biased by the fabric - it feels like a rumpled t-shirt material. And, as you can see in the back photo, the elastic thing that holds the top of the 'skirt' to your waist, serves to cheapen the look of this. I would've preferred a finished waist band, hook & eye, zipper, etc. But that's just going back to the material again...t-shirt material that makes this dress contradictory in its execution. And, for $350? Lastly - I should have noticed from the model's stance - she's keeping her feet very close together. Moving in a realistic way, the front panels just part, showing the underskirt. Not sexy. Sorry.
Sizing: True to Size / As Expected
 
report inappropriate content
You won't see this on many others!
This dress is classy. Looks a little conservative (on this model); in person, it's cut well and floats over you without being loose, and the column cut elongates & slims. Be sure to wear the belt with the side that matches the mid-section facing out - not the olive side.
Sizing: True to Size / As Expected
 
report inappropriate content
Posted August 29, 2012
S is 0 in this style
Size: A.L.C. dresses very frequently fit smaller than other designers in the same price range. This style fits even smaller - I tried an S, and it fits like other A.L.C. dresses in XS. I'm 24" in the waist, BTW. Style: the ruffle-y double hems seem to contradict the sleek top (I'd buy the top just by itself, if they made it). I prefer A.L.C.'s usual cool-y sophisticated style, so the hems don't do it for me. Construction: the inner slip? Its spaghetti straps are placed too wide, and keep sticking out the dress's armholes.
Sizing: Smaller than Expected
 
report inappropriate content
Posted August 21, 2012
Not for me - wanted ethereal, got vampy
The color is paler on the screen than in person - it's just too bubble-gum for me, which destroys the classy thing that I was looking for...yes, this dress, despite the down-to-the-waist neckline, isn't shocking on, and as this model wears is, feels almost demure w/ the full length + cap sleeve + high-collar behind the neck. I think you need to be a bit on the flat side to keep the look streamlined, another reason I'm not keeping this as the girls point outward and that isn't the vibe I want. I was also expecting a higher grade silk fabric, which ended up feeling more like a crepe/jersey. Oh well.
Sizing: True to Size / As Expected
 
report inappropriate content
Posted August 21, 2012
Not to be worn without a 2nd slip
So it is obvious that 1) the dress is see-through and 2) there's an inner slip for mitigating that. But wow - unless worn over a swimsuit near the beach, I cannot see myself going out in this without a self-supplied additional slip. Your undergarments are on display (every seam, ridge and line from your bra and undies), and your legs' outline. Sizing, this is kind of typical of A.L.C. (i.e. fits smaller than other designers in the price range). The rayon fabric doesn't stretch that much and so makes it that much smaller. In particular, it's a pull-over entry, no zipper - which is really kind of wrong for something this restrictive. It's very puzzling that this one, sans zipper, is actually $100 more expensive than another white rayon A.L.C. which does have a zipper (albeit that dress is knee-length and not tea length, but that doesn't add to the cost that much). I like the design, I'm just not sure it was executed as it should've been.
Sizing: Smaller than Expected
 
report inappropriate content
Posted August 10, 2012
The heel wrap digs
I like the 2-tone contrast of these. I may try sizing down or something just to see if the heel wrap to dig into the back of my ankle, like the wrap was too big/tall for my heel and cutting into where the heels bends and meets the calf. Not comfortable to even stand in for the time I was trying one foot on. I could also do without the shoe lace thing because it struck me as somewhat ruining the sleek/modernness of the design, but that's just me.
Sizing: Larger than Expected
 
report inappropriate content
Evening beach party, maybe
Obviously, the mesh/netting placement of this dress screams for attention - don't think you'd really want to wear this to anything 'proper' - quiet, fancy dinners probably would be wrong, but some place (warm) where people flaunt lots of skin all year round, OK. Personally, with heels (as the model demonstrates) I can only see myself wearing this to an evening gathering somewhere near the beach. The fabric is very casual/dressed-down, despite the midi length. Because of the fabric, I just can't see this as something much more than a bikini topper. The XS fits more like an S compared to typical TbAW.
Sizing: Larger than Expected
 
report inappropriate content
Posted July 19, 2012
See-through
$1,150 designer dress - I didn't expect it to be un-lined and see-through. Fabric is thin; the observer's eyes are drawn to all the darts and seams, when you'd rather have them admiring your overall look. The drape in the front is reminiscent of a sumo wrestler's diaper-y loincloth thing - that portion provides a double layer and thus not see-through, but then highlights the fact that the rest of the body is. This aspect really cheapens what could be a classy vibe. From a design standpoint, I would have liked a square/sharp-looking neckline instead of the scoop (on me, matronly). Also, the short straps that you see zeroed in on in the pictures stick out like a sore thumb. I guess they are meant to hide a bra - with the one I had this didn't work, so it'll take some trial-and-error to find the right bra. The straps are removable - a bit too much at that, and I'd worry about thing unsnapping just randomly while you're naturally moving around.
Sizing: True to Size / As Expected
 
report inappropriate content