Yeah, she's trying to give Les a bit of competition.

Ironically Claudette, who also has big boobs, wears some lovely dresses and they get them from a decent shop(I know because I shop in that shop). Sharon's clothes look like they pick them up from one of those cheap clothes shops you find and for someone with a big top half are highly unflattering and just make her look bigger. She also needs to tone down the "power dressing" she used to wear jeans sometimes.

It fascinates and alarms me that time and time again on this forum, people decide it's absolutely okay to comment on Sharon's body like they're mulling over how to display cattle at a market.

This is a WOMAN, a grown adult woman, and she can dress however she bloody well pleases without some well-intentioned (or possibly mean-intentioned) keyboard critic deciding what would suit her figure best.

Between trips to the tanning salon and shopping mall* what does Sharon do all day? She gave up The Albert ages ago and only worked at the Vic (where her presence wasn't really needed) for a few weeks when Ollie had his accident.

*She's been seen with shopping bags recently, last night breezing past the grandfather of Ben's recently deceased bf without so much as asking after him with some. The tanning is rather more self-explanatory.

You would think with her husband on the cusp of death pending a miraculous liver transplant she'd have more important things to worry about. And whilst the Mitchells have a business portfolio you have to wonder where all the cash comes from for her to go shopping every day. A tin pot garage and nightclub, neither of which we see attracting much custom, is hardly the big time.

Sharon's character does need some serious work. She's gone from being one of my favourite characters to someone who comes across as unbelievably removed from the reality of what's going on around her with her close friends and family.

Isn't it more the rarely flattering clothing choices made by the show's wardrobe department that are being criticised? (I've only skim-read the thread as I'm at work)

I think the worst thing they ever put her in was the wedding dress when she married Phil. It looked like a stained tatty old net curtain. Although the navy blue monstrosity she was going to get hitched to Jack in is a close runner-up.

If anyone has commented on the actresses' body shape that is out of order, I agree.

Do you mean the actress Letitia Dean or the fictional character Sharon that she plays the part of?

Comments about the actress Letitia Deans looks, dresses and private life are strictly off limits as far as the forum rules are concerned,

Whereas comment about the way fictional Sharon dresses and behaves are not surely.

I don't think it matters. Comments on what suits 'Sharon's' body shape are basically comments about the way Letitia looks and what does and doesn't suit her. I'm not really comfortable with most forms of body or image shaming, be that of a fictional character or a real person. The only thing I think is acceptable is when it's to do with the development of a character; for example sticking Tina in deeley-boppers to emphasis how 'quirky' she is. When it's just someone wearing everyday clothes they feel comfortable in, I don't think it warrants all these comments we get time and time again.

But even with Sharon the shows wardrobe department are responsible for the way she dresses, they will decide how she has her hair and how her makeup is done too.

Again, I don't think it matters. The comments about what suits 'Sharon's' body type are still essentially about Letita's body type as well. It all just strikes me as a bit mean-spirited. Nobody makes multiple threads (and there HAVE been lots of threads about Sharon's style) about Ian's wardrobe which IMO is a lot worse than Sharon's.

Well you could always start a thread about Ian's wardrobe if you want, just to address the balance and it might be interesting to just see the responses you get?

Agreed, I thought she looked good here in her promotional return image
http://vignette2.wikia.nocookie.net/...20130905040104

I think the wardrobe department just do the best with what they got. It must be a full time job trying to disguise Sharon's ever expanding girth.

It's not the wardrobe departments fault. The actress is fat and she needs to lay off the pies. She could do some exercise if she isn't so self conscious. Harsh but true. It must be a bloody nightmare for the makeup team when the actress is constantly applying herself with fake tan.

She did. I also really liked this look.


And I suppose you have the body of an Olympic athlete.

There was an article about how the producers of Corrie were unhappy about certain actors use of fake tan and how it would cause havoc with continuity.

Utter nonsense.

She's never in casual clothes, I even think her PJs are 'silk'

Agreed loved that look. It makes her look more like she did in the 00's suited her.

It's a fact of life that the same clothes won't look good on everyone and I think it is okay to comment broadly that the outfits a character is wearing don't suit the actor's figure, if you're not saying anything negative about that figure on top of that.


This post is completely out of order IMO.

This is long before DTC, this fugly 80s style has been in place since Kirkwood bought her back claiming falsely it was her signature despite her 01-06 appearances being generally stylish and polished.

The style team are definitely doing Letitia Dean a disservice. A lot has been said about the wardrobe but the ridiculous side-pony and New Jersey bump-it hair styles aren't doing her any favours. It was much more flattering and didn't mask her face when it was straightened and simple rather than these Gemma Collins-esq numbers they keep doing on her.

As hetrosexual 23-year-old man I can't say I know enough about womens fashion, but I hate the clothes Sharon wears.

A character like Sharon should wear bold and bright colours to match her personality.

She looked great circa 2001/2002 like here http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/...13_634x442.jpg

Depends which one you mean, we talking Mo Farah or Usain Bolt?