This is what I’m talking about: you see a cute-as-a-button shoe, just adorable, and then you check the brand, and it’s some cheapo, Chinese-made, all man-made materials low-end shoe and you wrinkle your nose and say, I’ll pass, thank you, so what if it’s only $19.99, it’s not worth it to me.

And then you go into a Fendi or Louis Vuitton or Bottega Venetta boutique and you see a blah or fuglirific product that is, granted, well made (although that doesn’t mean it can’t be made out of plastic entirely) and you fawn over the craftsmanship and say, well, I know it’s $790, which is my rent for the month, but it must be really worth it if they charge so much money for it.

There are high end shoes out there I wouldn’t look at twice unless their exorbitant sticker price didn’t compel me. Just to be clear, they’re not all horrendous or anything, just something I wouldn’t be caught dead in–an example in which the otherwise world-renown taste of the designer is a little…off.

Let’s start with the “blah” range:

I know, it’s a “basic nude” or something, but honestly, $690 for this? Ok, it’s a Bottega Veneta, but that doesn’t make it more palatable.

And these boots–I find them swerving from blah to ugly:

But they’re Chloe and $775, so I’m guessing they’ll have a lot of takers among the snobbish crowd.

And the king of stilettos himself is asking for $1,575 of your hard-earned money for this fringed monstrosity:

But it’s a Louboutin, and I bet that come fall I’m going to see these fringes swaying vigorously around the ankles of many a Hollywould starlet.

Speaking of fringes (I had posted about this trend a while back, and to my horror, I notice more and more of it lately)–I find these distasteful:

And yet, they’re $1,075 because they’re Alexander McQueen. I bet you feel differently about them now, don’t you? There’s so much magic in the name of the designer! A shoe you would have only deemed fit for the 4 a.m. shift in Place Pigalle  or to go in circles around a shiny pole is suddenly a work of art worthy of an entire paycheck.

And Zanotti, you king of zany, what the heck are these?

While I appreciate their fashion-forwardness, their aesthetic is a bit…off. The balance is no good. The harmony is missing.  Plus, they’re $750.

I guess in the world of fashion, the old Shakespearean rhyme wouldn’t apply: “What’s in a name? That which we call a rose/By any other name would smell as sweet.”

Sometimes, in this world, name is everything.

6 Comments »

Shipping is also free with code–so what I’m saying is, that’s a good opportunity to save on gorgeous Manolos, cheeky Pradas, sassy Guccis, and other similar fashion weaknesses you might have. Here’s a selection of my favorites:

Manolo Blahnik Leopard Sting Ray sandals, now $308 (down from $685):

Manolo Blahnik Scalloped Patent sandals, now $308 (down from $685):

Prada Wavy T-Strap sandals, now $257 (down from $570):

Tod’s Malibu sandals, now $164 (down from $365):

Giorgio Armani ankle-strap flats, now $191 (down from $425):

Christian Louboutin stretch metallic ballerina, now $234 (down from $520):

Oscar de la Renta ballerina mini wedge, now $233 (down from $555):

Sizes are, of course, limited, so you’d better hurry. Happy bargain hunting, shoe lovers!

No Comments Yet »

Charlize Theron is one of those actresses who seems to have a complete package. She’s definitely talented (I could barely recognize her in the role of a sympathetic serial killer in Monster), benevolent, looks like a super model, is dating the handsome Stuart Townsend, AND recent shots of her in various countries promoting the movie Hancock shows that she has great taste in shoes.

To wit, let’s start off Charlize’s shoe fashion bonanza at this week’s Hollywood premiere of Hancock. I love that she’s forgoes stilettos and paired the soft dress with romantic Giuseppe Zanotti sandals.

I couldn’t find the exact shoes online, but Zappos does have a similar Giuseppe Zanotti version with the same stone color available as a slide for $699.

If you prefer the same Zanotti style but not the color, it’s available at Zappos in white stone for $599.

Still another slightly cheaper option (though not by much) is the pink Giuseppe Zanotti t-strap, on sale at Endless in pink stone for $455. I would have preferred Charlize have worn either the white or pink colors with the light seafoam colored dress as there is less of a contrast in colors, but nonetheless I’ve still pretty satisfied.

And going further back to earlier premieres of Hancock, Charlize Theron glams it up at the German premiere wearing a black Christian Lacriox dress and Dior ankle booties, currently selling at Eluxury for $880.

Charlize Theron wearing Givenchy Gladiator ankle booties; Available at ShopBop for $995

Keeping with the current trend of ethnic and tribal prints, Charlize is wearing the Sigerson Morrison toe sandal (on sale for $315) and is accompanied by that scrumptious boyfriend, Stuart Townsend.

Charlize in a Balenciaga dress and black Louboutins ($540 at Saks). It might be the angle of the photo, but that’s some foot arch!

And finally, Charlize in a white Dior dress and beautiful bejeweled peep-toe animal print slingbacks (whew, say that all in one breathe). Shoe designer unknown…any ideas? At first, the animal print made me think Roberto Cavalli but the heel tip doesn’t seem to fit.

Photos from Celebutopia.net and TheFashionSpot

9 Comments »

I know, I know: saying that a Louboutin is pretty is like shooting fish in a barrel, but truth be told, I’m not crazy after ALL his styles, and there is a certain market saturation that triggers stylistic monotony (he’s almost TOO popular, if you know what I mean). Not so for this Alta Perla sandal: when I saw it, my heart gave a slight jolt, and I sighed the sigh of contentment I reserve for True Beauty:

Too bad True Beauty has to come with Utter Impracticality, but that’s the way things go sometimes in the shoe world. This jewel of a shoe is $955 at Barneys or Net-a-Porter.

3 Comments »

Last night was MoMA’s annual benefit, Party in the Garden, which was less star-studded than it usually is (perhaps because the wealthy glitterati are feeling the pinch of the purse what with the volatile economy), but not lacking in noteworthy shoes.

A friend of mine works at MoMA, so I headed on over to the party with her last night and brought my camera along for to snap away at the most outlandish, beautiful, or hideous shoes. So here are the fruits of my photographic labor.

First up: these gold snakeskin slingback peep-toes. Pretty. Not terribly outrageous, but pretty.

Next: some beautiful satin platforms. They look a tad big on her feet, and I bet they hurt like hell, but they were gorgeous with the pinkish-creamy satin contrasted with the purple cap toe.

Next is a pair that’s hard to see from this angle (blame my surreptitious photo-snapping), but were probably my favorite shoes of the night. They were gorgeous and silver and shiny and had the wide ankle-strap thing going on that we’re seeing all over the place this season.

Here’s a photo I took for the shoes on the right (the metallic heels). But upon closer inspection, they’re actually the least interesting of the three.

The next two photos are shoes as worn by my friends (and therefore falling into the actually affordable category). First off, we have shoes by Bandolino via DSW:

And next (from left to right) shoes by Payless, Seychelles, and Aerosoles:

But in the end, what fun would a swank party be without a few high-profile (and high-pricetag) numbers, like these pink-and-cork numbers from M. Louboutin.

Or these clunky platform wedges that look like they’ve come from the Chloe runways.  [ETA: Attentive reader Yowza has identified most of these, and twigged my memory of this shoe on the runway last year.  From Marni, of course.  Not Chloe.]

So there you have it, dear readers. Eyewitness report on the shoes of the New York modern art set.

3 Comments »