c4countdown

Thought I may start a new thread here on Rachel's outfits. No-one else has yet so let this be one of my first contributions to the forum.

My wife cannot believe Rachel has worn the same pair of shoes over the last 3 or 4 programs. C4 must be paying her very little!

Does anyone know if Rachel and Jeff have to pay for their own outfits, or are they a part of the deal?

There we are, over to anyone else who may care to comment.

Laurent wrote:My wife cannot believe Rachel has worn the same pair of shoes over the last 3 or 4 programs.

They record five shows a day, so I technically wore the same underwear over 4 shows (actually it was 23 shows but we won't go into that)

Laurent wrote:C4 must be paying her very little!

100k a year, apparently

Laurent wrote:Does anyone know if Rachel and Jeff have to pay for their own outfits, or are they a part of the deal?

Wardrobe lady buys 'em from the Countdown budget.

Laurent wrote:There we are, over to anyone else who may care to comment.

Did you feel the need to specify that you had a wife because you were worried that such a post may have people speculating about your sexuality?

Laurent wrote:My wife cannot believe Rachel has worn the same pair of shoes over the last 3 or 4 programs. C4 must be paying her very little!

What's wrong with wearing the same shoes over 3 or 4 programmes? She should get a pair of Doc Martens, they never go out of fashion and she'll get years of wear out of them. And they won't get caught in bits of the set.

David O'Donnell wrote:

Laurent wrote:My wife cannot believe Rachel has worn the same pair of shoes over the last 3 or 4 programs.

Did you feel the need to specify that you had a wife because you were worried that such a post may have people speculating about your sexuality?

David - surely with 'wife' and 'Rachel' both being female, one or the other makes no difference to Laurent's sexuality?
Did you mean his fidelity? Sorry if that sounds nitpicky.

Laurent, just for the heads up, we did discuss this elsewhere briefly in another thread, when they mentioned the word 'recessionista' on the show - a fashionista who continues to wear a huge collection of outfits despite the economical situation.

Interestingly, I did think about this on Monday but didn't bother mentioning it - I have a funny feeling Rachel was wearing the same outfit on Monday's show as she was on the previous Monday's? Someone else in the forum who fancies her (nearly everybody oddly) and thus pays more attention will have to confirm or refute that.

Matt Morrison wrote:

David O'Donnell wrote:

Laurent wrote:My wife cannot believe Rachel has worn the same pair of shoes over the last 3 or 4 programs.

Did you feel the need to specify that you had a wife because you were worried that such a post may have people speculating about your sexuality?

David - surely with 'wife' and 'Rachel' both being female, one or the other makes no difference to Laurent's sexuality?
Did you mean his fidelity? Sorry if that sounds nitpicky.

I meant sexuality since he was referring to Racel's wardrobe rather than her appearance.

David O'Donnell wrote:I meant sexuality since he was referring to Racel's wardrobe rather than her appearance.

There's a joke about being in the closet here...

Michael Wallace wrote:

David O'Donnell wrote:I meant sexuality since he was referring to Racel's wardrobe rather than her appearance.

There's a joke about being in the closet here...

If you make it I may kill you. I still haven't forgive Matthew Green for his, "Brittain's got Talent."

Jennifer Turner wrote:

Laurent wrote:My wife cannot believe Rachel has worn the same pair of shoes over the last 3 or 4 programs. C4 must be paying her very little!

What's wrong with wearing the same shoes over 3 or 4 programmes? She should get a pair of Doc Martens, they never go out of fashion and she'll get years of wear out of them. And they won't get caught in bits of the set.

Hmmm...tongue firmly planted in cheek there, methinks. Well, me certainly hopes, anyway!

I think Rachel's outfits have been really nice so far, but it does help that she has a young pert body on which everything would look better anyway. Some of Carol's dresses were really nice and fitted well but probably cost a fortune. However, some of her outfits were really awful and would have looked much better on someone younger. I didn't notice that Rachel wore the same shoes each show, but I did notice that she often looked uncomfortable in such high heels.

Matt Morrison wrote:Interestingly, I did think about this on Monday but didn't bother mentioning it - I have a funny feeling Rachel was wearing the same outfit on Monday's show as she was on the previous Monday's? Someone else in the forum who fancies her (nearly everybody oddly) and thus pays more attention will have to confirm or refute that.

Nope. She was wearing blue on the first Monday, red on the second. Of course, the only reason I know that is because I have all the episodes still on my Sky+. I didn't remember without looking at all.

I would say Rachel's outfits have been a great success in that, like Carol's, they have inspired debate. My parents won't stop talking about what she's wearing and how much they dislike this or that. Her black tights are a particular topic of discussion, for some reason.

Martin, I think that Rachel's tights are looking dark too, but I think it's compared to Carol's usually 'nude' (as in shade) legs.

I think that overall Rachel and Carol are wearing things that make them look gorgeous - they have different figures (boom boom, lol) and look good in what they choose to wear for their shapes.

On the publicity photo I got a bit of stick for saying I didn't like Rachel's outfit. Having seen her on TV now I think she dresses really well, although I didn't like today's outfit much. I think the show is going really well, it will be interesting to see how Rachel and Jeff respond when it's non-CofC contestants taking part.

Oh and she's really fit.

Martin Bishop wrote:

Matt Morrison wrote:I have a funny feeling Rachel was wearing the same outfit on Monday's show as she was on the previous Monday's?

Nope. She was wearing blue on the first Monday, red on the second. Of course, the only reason I know that is because I have all the episodes still on my Sky+. I didn't remember without looking at all.

Cheers Martin, is that also a confirmation of sorts that she hasn't worn the same outfit twice? Clearly I have the days wrong, I was referring to a red top and skirt combo that I thought I'd seen twice at some point.

kathleen batlle wrote:...some of her outfits were really awful and would have looked much better on someone younger.

Some of Carol's outfits would have looked better in a skip - fussy patterns and rubbishy extra layers. Rachel's outfits would look better on anybody, including Carol (all right, excluding me).

Blimey. I have worn the same pair of shoes every day for over two years now... They're shoes! They're for separating my feet from the floor! Why on earth would someone get stick for wearing the same shoes every day for a week (even though as we know it was actually one day only)?

I know though, I am slightly unusual...

Rosemary Roberts wrote:

kathleen batlle wrote:...some of her outfits were really awful and would have looked much better on someone younger.

Some of Carol's outfits would have looked better in a skip - fussy patterns and rubbishy extra layers. Rachel's outfits would look better on anybody, including Carol (all right, excluding me).

Going by that video that was showed of Carol from over the years there are quite alot of nice outfits in there. Rachel's outfits are quite nice too.

Joseph Bolas wrote:

Rosemary Roberts wrote:

kathleen batlle wrote:...some of her outfits were really awful and would have looked much better on someone younger.

Some of Carol's outfits would have looked better in a skip - fussy patterns and rubbishy extra layers. Rachel's outfits would look better on anybody, including Carol (all right, excluding me).

Going by that video that was showed of Carol from over the years there are quite alot of nice outfits in there. Rachel's outfits are quite nice too.

Carol did look great, most of the time, but she had some outfits that looked as though they were cut from curtain material, and others that looked more like nightgowns. Not to mention the one the audience hated so much she took it off and gave it to Digance (who promptly put it on). Even my husband was scathing occasionally, and he normally knows better than to comment on women's clothes. And I wasn't criticising Rachel or her clothes - I was trying to say how great I thought they were. But they are so well cut they would look good on anybody, and she would look great in anything, so C4 could hardly go wrong.

I always though Carol looked a bit too slim, her head looks massive (maybe because she's got a big brain) and I was always a bit worried if she moved to quickly she might get whiplash. The odd thing about Carol, is she dressed quite conservatively when she was younger, and started going for the more revealing stuff when she hit 40!

I think Rachel looks great!

Also, this is for Pete Fraser. Yes, I do think of Vanna White when I think about Rachel. One of the elements of the show that will not change is the hostess' outfits. But, it may take a while for a trend to develop with Rachel.