EXCLUSIVE I'm a wedding expert - here's what's not worth splashing out for your big day (and what you should splurge on!)
Couples are splashing out as much as £20,000 on average for their weddings - but one expert has warned that the splurge is not always worth it.
Nearlyweds hoping to curate the happiest days of their lives will likely be more tempted to spend more in hopes of an unforgettable experience.
And with everything from videographers, to live painters and trendy photobooths on offer for nuptials these days, it's perhaps no wonder that the bride and groom to be may find themselves enticed.
However, Zoe Burke, editor of bridal outlet Hitched.co.uk, cautioned against getting caught up in the euphoria of photographers, customised napkins, and bougie decor.
Speaking to MailOnline, she explained that there are some things where an extra penny makes a difference - but in other instances, it's much more sensible to save the cash...
SAVE
Save the dates
'Honestly, I've never paid much attention to save the dates.' Zoe admitted. 'If it's a loved one's wedding, I will most likely already know the date (even if it's only the month and year) and will plan my life accordingly.
'If it's a more minor friend or colleague, I'm not going to skip my dream holiday if it clashes with their wedding.'
She assured that if you are anxious about guest availability, or want to give people a heads up for a wedding in a busy time period or abroad, a handy solution is a wedding website.
'It's much easier to access repeatedly (instead of a piece of card),' Zoe added. 'And you can update it in real time.'
SPLURGE
The best photographer and videographer you can afford
Zoe says that these are, in her opinion, the most important spend on your wedding day.
'It's your main keepsake from the wedding,' she added. 'You need a photographer you gel with and like, as they'll be around you more than anyone else on your wedding day, and you need to make sure you love their work.
'It used to be pretty common to skip the videographer, but I'd caution against this.
'Your day will go in such a blur, you'll be so grateful you can watch it back. Even if you just have one for the ceremony and the speeches - those are bits you're going to want to remember forever.'
SAVE
Enormous guest lists
'Unless you're incredibly popular and you have loads of friends and you adore them all - bail on the pressure to invite everyone,' Zoe advised.
'The average wedding guest costs couples over £260 - think about whether you'd realistically be comfortable spending that much money on each of your guests.'
She advised not to invite 'colleagues, distant cousins and cantankerous great aunts'.
'Keep your guest list lean with the people you really want to celebrate with,' she added. 'You'll save money and you'll have a better time as you won't feel resentful when you spot Great Aunt Gladys filling her bag up with bread rolls.'
SPLURGE
Zoe said that she believes it's well worth it to invest in something that will get everyone up and on the dancefloor.
'Whether it's a DJ, a band, a singer, roaming musicians - find a wedding entertainer that suits your style and brings the vibe,' she urged.
'Spotify playlists just don't cut it for your wedding - a professional entertainer knows how to build the atmosphere in the room and elevate a party.'
SAVE
Evening guests
'Similar to the above - if you don't want them at the full day, do you really need them at your wedding at all?' Zoe questioned.
'I say this as someone who has been an evening guest - it's a bit annoying, especially when you have to travel and pay for accommodation, for what is essentially an evening out.
'It's also annoying when you arrive and everyone is already really tipsy and you feel out of the loop. Do away with it, save your B-list guests the faff and save yourself the money.'
SPLURGE
A celebrant
'I love a celebrant-led wedding,' the expert admitted. 'I get that it's not convenient or practical for everyone, especially in England or Wales where you'd then need to pay again to legalise your wedding, but even taking the time to add personal vows into your wedding ceremony makes all the difference.'
She advised not to rush through the wedding ceremony - as it's 'the most important part'.
'Take the time - and honestly, that is all you need to invest here - in making sure your ceremony reflects the two of you and celebrates your love,' Zoe added. 'It's so special.'
SAVE
Oversized wedding cakes
'Now, don't get me wrong - I LOVE a wedding cake. But smaller wedding cakes look so chic and they often contain ample servings,' the pro explained.
'You don't need a slice of cake for every guest, as most guests don't eat it after they've had their meal and hit the evening snacks.'
She added that you don't need to worry about having 'four tiers to serve 80 people'.
'But if you love the look of tall cakes, speak to your cake maker about dummy tiers - or even cool perspex tiers you can fill with flowers to go in between layers of your cake,' Zoe continued.
SPLURGE
Catering
A dry chicken breast no longer cuts it. Make sure your wedding catering reflects you - choose wine from the country you got engaged in, serve food that pays tribute to your cultures.
'This is where I really lean into the idea of smaller guest lists,' Zoe said. 'Especially if it allows you to invest more in catering.
'Serve a meal you love that means something to you - after all, it's one of the most significant meals you'll ever eat.'
SAVE
Traditional wedding favours
'It kind of pains me to say this, as I do personally love a favour. But if you're looking to save money on your wedding, skip giving each guest a favour that you've bought,' the expert warned.
'We're seeing a rising wedding trend right now of couples writing personalised notes to their guests - it doesn't cost a thing, and it means so much more than a chocolate truffle.
'If you don't have the energy to do that, instead invest in some interactive entertainment, such as a live wedding illustrator or a magician (they've had a glow up!) and you'll likely spend less, but your guests will get more out of it.'
SPLURGE
The right venue
Your setting is everything - look for a venue that meets all your needs - they're out there.
Zoe advised: 'Whether you want a late license, glamping, a romantic, intimate vibe - you name it, the right venue exists.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
39 minutes ago
- Telegraph
28 Years Later's incendiary Jimmy Savile twist: All your questions, answered
Contains spoilers for 28 Years Later Now then, now then. When I attended a press screening for 28 Years Later the week before release, a note sent with the tickets asked us not to spoil the ending in our reviews. This is a common ploy by publicists seeking to build buzz and intrigue, and often the result is disappointing. (Think a Marvel character you've never heard of appearing for 15 seconds.) However, when Danny Boyle and Alex Garland's excellent zombie epic ends with the introduction of Jack O'Connell's character Sir Jimmy Crystal and his band of murderous desperadoes, all of whom are dressed in colour-coded outfits that come over as a cross between the Power Rangers and the infamous Jimmy Savile, to the accompaniment of the Teletubbies ' 'One, two, three, four!' on the soundtrack, it is a jaw-droppingly provocative and incendiary ending. For once, it really did need to be left for audiences to discover it for themselves, rather than having it spoilt by critics. The film makes great play of (specifically British) audiences' knowledge of the chilling spectacle of Savile, a DJ, presenter of the wish-fulfilment show Jim'll Fix It and, we now know, notorious rapist, paedophile and suspected necrophile. He has become rightly despised as one of the most evil men that Britain has ever seen since his death in 2011. Even during his lifetime, and fame, there was clearly something not right about him. Savile would make black humoured jokes about how he had only evaded detection for his many crimes because of his charity work – jokes that no longer seem very funny – and took an almost perverse pride in how his closeness to the establishment allowed him to groom and assault his victims with impunity. Overseas audiences will inevitably know less about him, and so should probably watch the comprehensive 2022 Netflix documentary Jimmy Savile: A British Horror Story, which explores his crimes in sickening depth. Perhaps surprisingly, he has been largely kept out of fiction. A recent Steve Coogan drama, The Reckoning, explored his grim life and depraved antics, and it was also suggested in series three of Line of Duty that the character was somehow involved with the (fictitious) details of child sexual abuse as depicted in the show. However, film-makers know that accusations of opportunism and bad taste might be made if he was to be included in mainstream drama. These accusations have now indeed been levelled, in some quarters, against 28 Years Later and its makers. To say that the ending has proved divisive, especially in the United States, would be an understatement. (Not that the twist has hurt the film's box office performance; half its $60 million opening weekend haul has come from the US.) Yet Boyle and Garland have never been film-makers who have taken the easy option – think about the various outrageous and shocking scenes in their films, encompassing everything from Trainspotting and Ex Machina to their previous collaborations, Sunshine and 28 Days Later – and so this full-strength conclusion to the picture not only sets up next year's sequel, The Bone Temple, very intriguingly, but also leaves audiences with numerous questions which deserve answering. Who are Sir Jimmy Crystal and his gang? The introduction of the presumably villainous Sir Jimmy in the closing moments of 28 Years Later gives an already unsettling film a horrific jolt. As he and his companions – also all referred to as 'Jimmy' – set about murdering a group of 'infected', as the film terms its zombies, with extreme, gleeful prejudice, it's a grim and shocking moment that brings A Clockwork Orange – a clear Boyle touchstone throughout his career – to mind. Yet the most disturbing aspect of the scene is that Sir Jimmy, and the other Jimmys, are all attired in hideous-coloured tracksuits, lengthy blonde wigs and have their hands festooned with jewellery: a clear homage to Savile. O'Connell – who, with his appearance as a sadistic Irish vampire in Ryan Coogler's Sinners, is surely becoming 2025's go-to villain for horror films – is too big a star to appear for as small a role as this. Audiences are promised that the Jimmys will return in a big way for The Bone Temple. When Sir Jimmy says to Alfie Williams's young protagonist Spike 'Let's be friends', the moment is chilling, not least because it seems quite clear that the Jimmys are not the kind of people anyone would want to be friends with. Yet the film has already teased his introduction with enormous sophistication. It's the young Jimmy who we meet in the terrifying prologue, set, appropriately enough, 28 years before the rest of the film. The boy is the sole survivor of the Teletubbies-inflected infected massacre and the recipient of his fanatical clergyman father's crucifix, which he's seen holding when he's reintroduced. There are lots of hints as to his reappearance, too, which many viewers may only pick up on with a second viewing. When Spike and his father Jamie (Aaron Taylor-Johnson) head to the mainland for Spike's first kill of an infected, they find the body of a tortured figure hung up upside-down in an abandoned farmhouse, with the word 'Jimmy' carved onto it; the same word is scrawled all over the outside walls. From these little clues, it's quite clear that the Jimmy gang is a bunch of murderous sadists who are intent on causing as much mayhem and torment as they can. How and why, and how they've managed to survive for so long amidst the infected, will (presumably) be explained in the second film. Why are the Jimmys in thrall to Jimmy Savile? Although the Jimmy characters are not named in the film, the end credits reveal that they all have a suitably grim collection of surnames. We can expect to meet Jimmy Fox, Jimmy Snake, Jimmy Jones, the unimaginatively named Jimmy Jimmy, the more imaginatively named Jimmy S___e and their female equivalent, Jimmina. No doubt all of them are going to play a greater role in the sequel, but the small clues that we are given about their dispositions in 28 Years Later are that they're violent, have hideous taste in clothes and are all followers of O'Connell's Sir Jimmy: a self-bestowed title, unlike the knighthood bestowed upon Savile. It isn't made clear in this picture as to why they should all be fascinated by the ghoulish disc jockey and TV presenter, but Boyle and Garland have suggested in interviews that it all fits with the film's warped sense of England and Englishness. As Boyle told Business Insider: '[Savile is] as much to do with pop culture as he is to do with sportswear, to do with cricket, to do with the honours system. It's all kind of twisting in this partial remembrance, clinging onto things and then recreating them as an image for followers.' (Incidentally, Boyle himself was offered a knighthood after directing the opening ceremony for the 2012 Olympics, and turned it down, saying 'it was insensitive of them to ask me, to be honest.') 🎬 | Bts photo of Erin Kellyman with the Jimmy gang on the set of '28 Years Later'. — Erin Kellyman Updates (@updateskellyman) June 23, 2025 Yet there's another telling detail that has been picked up on by eagle-eyed viewers who have been swift to disseminate it on Reddit forums. The film's prologue takes place around the same time that the first film was released, in the early years of the millennium, when Savile may have been regarded with suspicion (see the 2000 Louis Theroux documentary When Louis Met Jimmy) but was still seen by many (at least publicly) as a noble figure who had given his life, and fortune, to charity. Therefore, in this alternative world, Savile was never unmasked as a predator, but instead continued to be regarded as a hero by many, meaning that the 'Jimmys' are not following in the footsteps of a disgraced and evil man, but instead believe him to be a secular saint of sorts. That the audience knows differently is all part of the intrigue. As one commenter observed, 'I like the theory that they think Jim will fix it as per the TV show and save them from the infected.' What is the point of the Savile allusion? When the Jimmys appear, it's a deliberately shocking moment, both in terms of the violence and then the realisation that there might be worse things out there than the infected. This is something of a homage to the original 28 Days Later, when it becomes clear that Christopher Eccleston's demented army major and his men want to force female survivors of the infected into sexual slavery for their own perverse ends. Yet Boyle and Garland are both careful film-makers who would never include a detail as provocative as this simply to elicit a shocked reaction. Instead, Garland has argued that the ending is of a piece with the rest of the film's themes. He suggested that Savile was a 'trippy, f----- up kaleidoscope', which chimes with the film's similarly phantasmagorical evocation of Englishness, visual throwbacks to Olivier's Henry V and Agincourt included. Yet it's also because the Jimmy character – who has obviously been traumatised from a young age by seeing his friends and family torn to pieces by infected – has created his own version of reality from a mixture of half-remembered pop culture allusions, just as Alex in A Clockwork Orange is inspired in his ultraviolence by everything from Beethoven to Singin' in the Rain. 'The thing about looking back is how selective memory is,' Garland has said. 'It cherry picks and it has amnesia, and crucially, it also misremembers. We are living in a time right now which is absolutely dominated by a misremembered past.' Why is the ending so controversial? In the United States, where Savile is barely known, if at all, the ending has caused significant confusion and even disappointment amongst audiences, who have been mystified as to who these shell-suit wearing, blonde wigged antagonists are supposed to be. As one cinemagoer sighed on X, 'I personally don't appreciate having to do some homework to appreciate a sequence that's otherwise random to end a film.' It is also a (deliberately?) confusing aspect of the picture that the Aaron Taylor-Johnson character's name of 'Jamie' is close enough to 'Jimmy' for many viewers initially to believe that he is the grown-up version of the boy in the opening scene, safely escaped and now living in what seems to be comparative safety. The other argument against the ending, and what it sets up for the next film, is simply that the appropriation of Savile as a pop-cultural feature is inappropriate and tasteless. Certainly, the film's anti-Brexit subtext, suggesting that Britain is an isolated, backwards island that has been cut off from Europe by force, is unlikely to endear it to those who continue to think Brexit was a good and necessary idea. (Boyle and Garland are clearly not Brexiteers.) Hinting that this isolation has led to the creation of Savile cultists is a provocative and deeply controversial way to conclude the film. Finally, the jolt of black humour that comes moments after the deeply affecting conclusion of the storyline involving Spike's dying mother Isla (Jodie Comer) is an incongruous way to conclude the film that will be a true love-hate development. There will be those who believe that its kamikaze insanity ruins an otherwise thoughtful and serious film, and others who applaud its audacity. What does all this mean for the sequel? The choice of Candyman and the Marvels film-maker Nia DaCosta to direct the sequel, The Bone Temple – which has already been filmed and will be released in January – is an intriguing decision, given that DaCosta is a New York-raised American director who is tackling the follow-up to a film about Britain and Britishness. However, the idea that DaCosta will bring an outsider's eye to a film that Boyle has already teased is about 'the nature of evil' can only be a good thing. Just as Boyle brought his own inimitable perspective to the Oscar-winning Slumdog Millionaire (a film that, for understandable but regrettable reasons, he now claims he would not direct if he was offered the opportunity), so DaCosta has a chance to take the Savile-heavy mythology that The Bone Temple will inevitably be imbued with and make it not only comprehensible to American audiences but terrifying. Savile may be a British phenomenon but the traits that he embodied – the manipulation of power and what evil can be unchecked if those in positions of authority look the other way – are truly universal ones, and this brief tease should be a curtain-raiser for something extraordinarily dark and provocative, coming our way in a few months.
Telegraph
39 minutes ago
- Telegraph
BBC moves ‘Today at Wimbledon' highlights show to permanent graveyard slot
The BBC's Today at Wimbledon programme has effectively become 'Yesterday at Wimbledon' for television viewers after being moved to a graveyard slot by the corporation. The traditional highlights programme for each day's play has ordinarily aired at either 8pm or 9pm on BBC2. But the first edition of the programme on day one of this summer's Championships has been scheduled for 11.55pm as part of what Telegraph Sport can reveal is a permanent move to a similar slot. That is despite the BBC airing shows that include repeats of Your Garden Made Perfect, The Pembrokeshire Coast: A Wild Year, and Upstart Crow in the 8pm-10.30pm timeslot next Monday. A BBC spokesperson told Telegraph Sport that Today at Wimbledon would still be shown at its traditional time on iPlayer, while describing the television broadcast as a 'repeat'. But many viewers, particularly in remote areas, may not have access to iPlayer or the BBC website, with Today at Wimbledon the only means by which they can catch up on the day's play. The corporation's commitment to elite tennis came under scrutiny earlier this month when it twice failed to show Emma Raducanu and Katie Boulter in the doubles at Queen's. BBC 2 aired two-year-old editions of Homes Under The Hammer and Bargain Hunt instead of the British pair's quarter-final defeat against Lyudmyla Kichenok and Erin Routliffe, footage from which was not even available on the corporation's website for the majority of the contest. That was despite complaints over its failure to broadcast the opening win by 'Boultercanu' over Wu Fang-hsien and Jiang Xinyu. The BBC will on Tuesday finally announce its commentary line-up for this year's Wimbledon amid growing anticipation over whether Sir Andy Murray will join the team. As revealed by Telegraph Sport, Nick Kyrgios will not be returning to work for the corporation this summer following a stint 12 months ago that provoked outrage after he admitted assaulting an ex-girlfriend. Kyrgios, who will not play at Wimbledon due to injury for a third straight year, hit out at the BBC's decision, telling The Guardian it was 'their loss more than mine'.
Telegraph
39 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Joan Collins: Lime bike louts leave me shocked
Dame Joan Collins has said she is shocked by the 'loutish' behaviour of Lime bike users. The actress, 92, shared a photo on Instagram showing her standing next to seemingly abandoned Lime bikes clustered together on a London pavement. She captioned the snap: '#shocked about the #loutish behavior of @lime #bicycle users #pavementsareforpedestrians #limebike'. Clad in a white summer hat and sleeveless dress, Dame Joan pictured herself gesturing at the bikes – two of which had been vandalised with graffiti. View this post on Instagram A post shared by Joan Collins (@joancollinsdbe) Lime owns the majority of the capital's estimated 40,000 rental bikes. The company's signature green-and-white machines weigh upwards of 30kg each. The bikes are automatically locked until registered users unlock them through the Lime app, paying about £4 for 30 minutes of use. Illicitly unlocking the bikes to obtain free use has become popular among Londoners, with videos containing instructions on how to bypass the lock easily found on social media. A Lime spokesman said: 'We never want our e-bikes to obstruct anyone's journey. Our bikes are popular with Londoners, and in high-demand areas this can occasionally lead to overcrowding. We're addressing this by working with TfL [Transport for London] and local councils to fund and deliver more than 2,500 dedicated parking bays across the city – making it easier to ride and park responsibly. 'We also have an on-street team of 400+ in the capital who tidy and redistribute bikes throughout the day to help keep busy areas clear.' Last year, the company was accused of failing to take dangerous and broken electric bikes off London's streets after a local news site asked a bicycle mechanic to inspect a 50-strong sample of Lime's machines. Lime insisted at the time that 99.99 per cent of rides ended 'without a reported incident', adding that 'safety is our highest priority'. Elsewhere, Dame Joan will shortly be gracing the nation's screens once again in her latest role as Wallis Simpson. A new TV biopic about the late Duchess of Windsor was announced in May. In The Bitter End, Dame Joan plays the wife of Edward VIII in her final years. Faced with a choice between his divorced American fiancée and the crown, Edward VIII abdicated less than a year after succeeding to the royal throne. While he passed away in exile in 1972, his wife lived on until 1986. The Bitter End explores the relationship between the American one-time socialite and her French lawyer Suzanne Blum. Blum became famously controlling over Wallis in the years after the Duke of Windsor's death, with their relationship being described as 'one of the most sinister… ever formed between lawyer and client' by Hugo Vickers, the royal biographer.
