Well first of all Prince Charles and Princess Diana's was a long time ago so you have to compare the two as if they took place in 2006. I would think that the Prince's wedding would far outdo the other wedding, they are royalty after all, but I am sure Katie wants to feel like a princess and I can imagine that Tom had the idea of the whole castle thing!
2006-11-19 07:09:41
·
answer #1
·
answered by steffy 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
I could care less and think it's a waste of money. Princess Dianas wedding probably cost more.
2006-11-19 07:14:41
·
answer #2
·
answered by The Garage Dude 4
·
2⤊
0⤋
Princess Di's was more expensive...it cost nearly $4.5 million, whereas Cruise's cost about $1.2 million. So, I think that answers that! Otherwise, the most expensive wedding in the history of the world would be Queen Isabelles, which adjusted for inflation would now cost approximately $10 million!!! How would you like a wedding of such proportions? lol
2006-11-19 10:50:09
·
answer #3
·
answered by Justin 3
·
0⤊
2⤋
Princess diana. Plus the coverage was world wide...Most of the world does not know tom cruise and does not give two shits about him.....
2006-11-19 07:04:23
·
answer #4
·
answered by ray b 3
·
4⤊
0⤋
Maybe, if it costs more than 3 millions that Madonna spent on her castle wedding sometime ago.
But the castle wasn;t haunted though :):) Hey they can make a movie about this castle and get the money back ...!
2006-11-19 09:01:24
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
Probably Diana's and it was probably less annoying than Tomkat's. At least Charles and Diana were real royalty.
2006-11-19 09:57:15
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
OJ Simpson
2006-11-19 07:08:12
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
i hate tom cruse, but i dont think so. he's not the richest man in the world.
2006-11-19 09:03:20
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
dianas
2006-11-19 07:03:34
·
answer #9
·
answered by Big dummy 2
·
1⤊
1⤋
Not even in the same ballpark
2006-11-19 07:03:54
·
answer #10
·
answered by Sid B 6
·
1⤊
2⤋