Elizabeth Banks in Marc Jacobs

Posted on May 14, 2012

Let’s all give Lizzie a round of applause for helping us illustrate a Very Important Fashion Point. Lizzy? Why don’t you come on out here?

Elizabeth Banks makes an appearance on the ‘Late Show with David Letterman’ in NYC in a Marc Jacobs dress paired with Jerome C. Rousseau sandals.

Marc Jacobs Fall 2012 Collection 

Jerome C. Rousseau ‘Orner’ Strappy Sandals

Okay, first: FABULOUS shoes.

Now. What Lizzie is helping illustrate is the important fashion maxim: “What you see on the runway is NOT what you get.” This is an important thing to remember when one is viewing a runway show and thinking “Who the HELL would wear that?” The answer, darlings, is often “no one,” because the version of the garment available to the public will quite often only refer to the original design rather than recreate or mimic it.

We don’t know if this is the retail version or if this is a version that’s been altered for Lizzie. One thing’s for sure (to us, anyway) the proportions look off to us. The skirt is too short on her, given how it flares out. And that fabric looks awfully stiff. It’s a cute overall look – and definitely more wearable than the runway version – but we’re not convinced this works on her as well as it should.

Still. Gotta love those shoes.


[Photo Credit: PacificCoastNews.com, elle.com, jeromecrousseau.com]

Please review our Community Guidelines before posting a comment. Thank you!

  • Patricia Gillett

    Those shoes deserve a much cuter dress. 

  • Pennymac

    I was prepared to like this despite the awkward skirt proportions, and I adore the shoes. But the back view, with the odd bow thing and the solid black rather than the interesting pattern veers it right into “mock apron dress” for me. I suppose if I only saw it from the front, and Liz remembers to back out of the room, it’s okay. (I’m a sucker for anything with a paisley type print)

    The runway version is HIDDY!

    • AmandaCathleen

       I completely agree—why couldn’t they just do it all in that fabulous paisley print? The apron / frankendress look isn’t really working for me here.

    • mmgk

      it also looks oddly shorter in the back. reverse mullet?

  • AWS

    I wonder if EB got fitted for garments BEFORE all the baby weight was lost…

    FIERCE shoes, def…

  • hughman

    Her version’s re-imagining of the runway reminds me of when they make “sexy” Little Bo Peep outfits for Halloween. 

  • CassandraMortmain

    Frankendress!  Two different dresses, front and back.  And neither one of them work on her.  I actually like the runway dress though I would lose the blouse.  But the pilgrim shoes and pimp hat make me want to slap Marc Jacobs, hard.

  • Super_Red

    She looks amazing here!! I’m not as sold on the back of the dress, but the front has such immediate high impact “Fabulous!!” that I rather don’t care. Shoes are great. Loving it. 

    If the runway version was a little shorter, I’d love that, too– I like the  neckline on both. 

  • Sophie Collier

    Much too stiff but a cute idea and waaaay better than the runway version.  And omg those shoes are awesome!

  • AmandaCathleen

    Think this would be pretty fabulous if it was either knee-length or just above the knee. As is, that shape with the ultra-stiff fabric just looks off. Way too short—that first pic especially makes me uneasy, like we’re about to see too much or something.

    • janetjb

      She seems to favor dresses that would be more flattering if they were a few inches longer.

    • Warmheartedgirl Seattle

      Right?  I wonder how the dress looked sitting down with Dave?  TLo, got any screen caps of that?  Not crazy about the back of the dress, but love those shoes.

  • schadenfreudelicious

    please don’t make me look at those bejeweled pilgrim shoes on anyone anymore, and that especially includes Marc Jacobs!

    • sherrietee

      oh that’s not pilgrim, that’s Quaker.  

      • holdmewhileimnaked

        thats more than likely true, but the style has been called pilgrim since right around the time roger vivier re-introduced them to the world circa a little bit before what is supposed to be the date of the current mad men.

  • Pants_are_a_must

    I’m not digging the frankendress elements here. The matching of those two fabrics doesn’t work in reality, and it makes me wonder if a full version of the front fabric would’ve been that much heavier than this.

    In any case, this is too much dress for spring or for late night.

  • holdmewhileimnaked

    i like both this dress & the runway version from the front. i spent some moments looking & finally realize the runway version looks the same as this one does from the back, if longer, so i hate them both equally. marc jacobs sometimes has no sense. no sense whatsoever.

    otoh, these shoes are exponentially better than, i think, jimmy choo’s modified version that’s been showing up a lot lately, most recently & w/ lower heels, on chloë moretz.

  • sagecreek

    Well, in all fairness, it looked like crap on the model too.

  • Neckline, paisley fabric, updo, earrings, SHOES – all good.  Dress length … why?  To paraphrase, THE SKIRT IS TOO DAMN SHORT

  • I have to say I like it. At least in the front. I like the way it’s been altered, because I remember seeing that picture and detesting it.

  • Susan Crawford

    You guys are on FIRE today, T and Lo! Thanks for the MANY fabulous posts.

    Yes, those shoes are magical. I mean MAGICAL! And although they probably cost as much as a sub-compact car, I feel I need them.

    And the dress on Elizabeth is SOOOOO much better than the cray-cray styling of the runway version, which looks like a Pilgrim lass on crack. I like the front of the dress, but I just don’t get why the back had to be so drastically different. It is too flat and makes the front look awkwardly poufy.

    But then again, Marc Jacobs wore a see-through black lace dress with boxershorts under it to the Met Gala, so who am I to try to figure out anything he does?

  • NC_Meg

    It looks like the entire dress shrunk in the wash (you know, if this was a dress you could just throw in the washer.)

  • octopol

    I think that dress will look good on television when you are mainly seeing her from the boobs up – much like the photo you see on the main page.

    That said, I would cut a bitch for those shoes.

  • I’d forgive the proportions, if only the back weren’t so over-designed.  The shoes very nearly redeem it though.

  • funkypeanut

    Did they staple it to the back of another dress?

  • Lina_bee

    Oh, wow, what an unfortunate skirt. The top is cute, the shoes are great, the hair and makeup and jewelry are great — it’s just the skirt.  I’m tentatively okay with the back of the bodice being black and strappy and all, just because it adds interest, but I wish the skirt were the same pattern all around. And weren’t a tulip skirt. And had a better sense of drape.  Still, applause to EBanks’ people for continuing to dress her in unusual and somewhat daring getups! Stylist win!

  • giiiirrrr

    How the heck did she avoid showing the good china during her Letterman interview?

  • janiemary

    Is she wearing a dress??  I can’t take my eyes off her shoes!!  Gimme, gimme… PLEASE!!

  • Beth G

    From the back it looks like she’s wearing an apron.

  • MilaXX

    It’s almost cute. I could give a pass to the length. I think Lizzie is pulling it off. But then we get the back view and it’s another franken-dress. Why, people, why?!

  • kimmeister

    Those shoes are amazing.
    Also, her hair looks great.

  • MilaXX

    Also, if they are going to regularly snap pics of the celebs going in and out, could they find a place a little more photo call ready? Lizzie is nearly upstaged by the chick with the dark hair and copper suit case & the teamsters on a smoke break add little to the pictures as well.

    • formerlyAnon

      I actually was pondering if that were her [stylist’s] case – but boggled at the idea that someone paid to make her look good would leave the case in a photo.

  • She going all out for fashion, that’s for sure.  Dress is a bit too odd, though.

  • BigWhiteGrannyPanties

    At least she’s not wearing the hat.

    • Celandine1

      I can imagine the meeting for styling the runway: “I’m thinking Maria Von Trapp having cocktails with the Mad Hatter! “

  • PastryGoddess

    Those are some great shoes…that dress did not deserve them.  Although maybe it’s a smokescreen, look at the SHOOOOES!….notthedress

  • lamamu

    Only E Banks can make this look WERQ. And she does. That’s right: Head…to…toe.

  • PaulaBerman

    I like it! Good for her for seeing past the asinine pilgrim styling of Marc Jacobs.

  • erinbinek

    Love her, don’t care what she wears.  She is my fashion idol.

  • Lisa

    Holy crap, is the runway version of that dress hideous!  She really does wonders for it – it’s gorgeous on her, and the shoes rock!  The only thing I don’t like – which isn’t her fault – is the print fabric on the front and the solid fabric on the back.  It just looks like there wasn’t enough print fabric to make the whole dress, so they improvised.

  • Anathema_Device

    Not sure I’m loving the disconnect between the front and back of that dress, and it really should be at the knee or just above, especially with that bulky fabric. I do love that neckline, though.

    So glad she didn’t opt for the pilgrim shoes.

  • MzzPants

    I was sold until the back view.  Hate the Jeckyll/Hyde effect.

  • Bia

    I actually love it 🙂 Fun, playful, makes her look young.

  • ThaliaMenninger

    Two inches longer, with the original neckline (not the underblouse, just the simpler neckline) and I would really love it.

  • Knightley

    love the dress from the front, but do not like it from the back.  Bad frankendress!

  • mom2ab

    Hmm from runway amish sparkle pinafore to Judy Jetson sparkle frankendress…I can’t decide which one Marc would be more likely to wear.  Either way its ugly and unwearable.

  • TieDye64

    Kinda wish the front and back meshed a bit better, and if the proportions were better this would be really cool on her. Almost girl, almost. At least she’s not sporting the pilgrim shoes.

  • kikisayshi

    I am loving this look, even if it is a little short. Those shoes remind me a little of those Jimmy Choos everyone has been seen wearing, but these knock the “fabulous” out of the park.

  • I disagree! I think it looks super cute on her (though it would be better a couple of inches longer) and looks pretty matronly on the runway. 

  • quiltrx

    I hate the back!

    The neckline of Lizzy’s is more interesting, but not really flattering.  And the length is just way wrong…too short.

  • Agree about the troublesome proportions, but even so it looks 1000 times better than the runway version, which manages to make the model look dumpy.

  • formerlyAnon

    Really nice shoes.

    I’d say the dress is good on her (at least in 3/4 view), if not fitted quite right – I WOULD say that if I hadn’t seen the back.  Nope. The back & front don’t seem related, and they don’t flow into each other, and they don’t set each other off nicely (IMO.)  just emphasizes the seeming fit wonkiness in the front and makes the dress look disjointed. 

  • LilyPad

    I think she looks incredible here, because this dress has flattering proportions, neckline, and pattern and is stylish but not in the complicated, over-the-top way that you guys mentioned, and I agree, does not always work for her.

  • BradWatson

    I still think she and Julie Bowen swap photo ops without telling the hosts, then titter about it over amaretto tonics.

  • nannypoo

    This is one of those two-in-one dresses that look so stupid. The back is completely unrelated to the front and neither is flattering. The model looks even worse.

  • DesertDweller79

    Shoes are fabulous!  I was prepared to forgive the weird length because the dress looked okay otherwise…. from the front. And then I saw that it was a completely different dress in back.  Uh, no.  Sorry.

    But a big yes to the shoes.

  • aimee_parrott

    Here’s the thing: if someone told me she made that dress at home from a pattern?  I’d believe it.  The shoes are killa, though.

  • ccm800

    Not even remotely the same except for the fabric. 

  • Bozhi

    It will look fine walking out and the neckline and shoes will look great in the interview.  But for a party or event, would never work.

  • I liked it from the front. Then I saw the back, and vomited in my mouth a little bit. 

  • cleep1000

    Too short and the neckline is messy.

  • bellafigura1

    This dress is too young for her, plain and simple.  But yeah, whoa, shoes.

  • Larkin21

    Another frankendress? I agree about the proportions but it could still work if the back were as cute as the front. Why do that to a dress?

  • SewingSiren

    Ew, It looks like she only had enough money for the expensive brocade fabric to make a front, and finished off the back thinking no one would notice. We used to call these casket clothes, it only has to look good from the front.

  • Aurumgirl

    That dress only serves to make Marc Jacobs look like a fumbling amateur with fabric weights.  A dress “like” it, properly made so that the front didn’t bulge out and pull up the back, would have been much more flattering.  But the shoes are nice.  

  • ChaquitaPhilly

    Wish we could see the runway dress from the side. Is that an APRON? 

  • lordandtaylor

    No. You gotta love the hat.

    Three cheers for the punked out Amish look from Marc Jocobs with the “Plymouth Rock” shoes.

  • Judy_J

    Yes, killa shoes.  Dress, not so much.

  • if she would have worn the runway version, with the killa shoes, it would have looked better than that messy dress she has on. 

  • EEKstl

    I’m sorry, guys, did you write something?  I was so busy drooling over those shoes I’m not sure I read it…

  • Love her. Love the shoes. Hate the dress. Too origami-ish. Too much going on . Glad it’s not at her mid-calf though. Ew.

  • Shoes do NOT go with that dress.

  • Lilithcat

    Agree about the proportions, but still so much better than the runway version.  Hers needs to be just a skooch shorter.

    I must say, though, that I am not a fan of having the front and back of the dress made from two completely different fabrics.

  • marilyn

    That dress is completely different on the front than on the back.  Instead of making one dress, the designer should have made 2.  Together they look like an odd costume.  Besides, shortening the skirt may improvethe front, but it looks odd on the back, since the designer provided some banding on the skirt.  When the skirt was shortened, the banding was off-balance.  I think that it is difficult for very fair women to wear black, because it makes their skin look pasty/sickly.  She either needed a tan or some makeup so her skin looked more healthy.

  • guest2visits

    The shoes are amazing. But the hacked dress is no longer a dress; it’s a cocktail waitress’s uniform. I don’t blame her for
    altering the shoulders, but the shortness is so bad for that beautiful material.  Oh well.

  • belfebe

    I actually like the dress and the shoes.  The hair is awful though.

  • jessicasac

    It’s too short, the silhouette isn’t quite flattering, seriously another inch of fabric…

  • I suppose she could have given us Crazy Pilgrim, too … I like the length, but the neckline is prettier on the model.