
Sarah, as we've covered, appeared to have such a gas at the Met Gala that I really wish I could frost the cake with some lavish praise. But we've seen versions of the Muppet sleeves plenty of other times in the past year, including most closely this blue suit on Sienna Miller, so there's nothing particularly fresh or considered here. Worse, the front is an eye sore, as if this used to be an apron-style sideboob extravapalooza, and someone made the label add a bodice and sleeves. It looks crazy on her chest. Time and time again, it seems that the merest question of breasts is not one Prada can answer. And Sarah's head is unimpeachable here, too. What a shame to deploy top-notch cranium, only to be betrayed by the gown.

I pointed out on Twitter that she and Jessica Chastain both look like they just auditioned to be Disney princesses, and someone kindly reminded me that Elle TOTALLY already DID that, and in fact got the job (Maleficent). This is exactly something she would or should have worn as Sleeping Beauty, and though it's... fine... it bespeaks a complete lack of interest in the Met parameters by the designers.

The Krugs fared much better. That is an extremely lovely shift which, yes, has no pertinence, but at least fits her and is lovely and relaxing to behold. Well, from the front, anyway.

I assume the strap in the back is Miuccia being all, "Uh, it's deconstructed, so it's on-theme, YES YES LET'S GO WITH THAT."

From the side, though, it seems half-finished, doesn't it? Did she spend so much on the table that she ran out of budget for the gold beading?

No idea AT ALL why Baz is wearing floods, other than... because it's the Met, so people just do whatever. Catherine is wearing the most lively offering, even if Gucci is going to want to sue for shoplifting the animal motif too close to its own Wild Kingdom collection.
