I definitely think that the wedding extravaganza is what a lot of women want these days. Years ago I taught a short course on marriage to a class of year 9 girls as part of the RE course in a catholic school. We looked at marriage from three perspectives - legal contract (de jure), common law (de facto) and religious (catholic - sacrament)
I presented them with different formats of the ceremony - church wedding and civil celebrant - and we compared the two, noting the differences and similarities. The latter included establishing consent of both parties, the solemn vows and the giving or exchanging of rings. They enjoyed dressing up as we role played each kind of ceremony for a formal marriage union.
I explained that there was no need to dress as a bride or to pay for a very expensive wedding breakfast.
The general reactions was, "No way." If they couldn't have the whole circus there weren't going to get married at all. We see that acted out when some couples live together for years, waiting until they can afford the wedding to formalise their union. Their children are often old enough to take part.
My wedding in 1963 was a very small affair, just immediate family, two girlfriends and three neighbours. I wore an after five dress from a suburban dress shop, not white, and my childhood mate took some photos. Then we all had a meal together at a nearby restaurant and Hubby and I had a couple of nights together in the nearby Blue Mountains. Married on Friday evening, I was back at work on Monday morning. Hubby ditto.
In March this year we will be celebrating 60 years of marriage. We have booked a function room at a nearby licenced club and will invite extended family and lots of friends to share your happiness. We can afford to splash out a bit now but I won't be buying a new and expensive outfit.