Showing posts with label 2011. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 2011. Show all posts

Saturday, January 15, 2011

The Beautiful Fall...

I have to admit that when I saw the first image from the Spring Summer 2011 Vuitton campaign it left me a bit underwhelmed. Besides not looking quite how I pictured it, I kind of felt like it could have been even more over the top than they were. I guess my attitude has always been if you're going to do gaudy, then do it big, you know? But I kept going back to that first image, and I suppose by the time the rest of the campaign made an appearance it had really grown on me. Now having seen the entire set (or what I assume is the entire set) I actually kind of love it.





For starters it perfectly captures the spirit of the collection, which was wonderfully flashy, fun and decadent. I love the kind of Tony Duquette-lite vibe, all of that glamorous chaos going on in the background. Combined with the sort of louche poses that Kristen, Raquel and Freja are striking and the lurid clothes the photos remind me of vintage Yves Saint Laurent Opium ads. There aren't any blatant similarities, just the hint of both the 70s and Orientalism in the styling, but there's still something similar about the feel of this. Going back to the poses, I like that they seem somewhat candid. I mean obviously they're not, but they don't seem as deliberate and precise as, say, the poses in the Gucci campaign. I have to say though that the one thing I'm not completely thrilled about was the choice to publish two separate images with the same clothes. There were a lot of looks shown in this collection, so it seems silly not to use different looks for each of the shots, but I guess that's a pretty minor complaint. Much as I've grown to like this campaign though I can't help wondering what Mert & Marcus would have done if they had shot this. I'm not necessarily saying that I wish they had, but I am curious about what it might have looked like if they did. Still, that doesn't change the fact that this is the first of Steven Meisel's campaigns for Vuitton that I've actually liked. I also have to say that these images don't do the photos justice. They look much better in print.

images from facebook.com/louisvuitton

Friday, January 7, 2011

Barbie Girls...

It is my belief that the only thing worse than falling into a rut yourself is having to bear witness to somebody else's. Unfortunately a rut is exactly what we're witnessing with Gucci's advertising these days. Now realistically it's only been a year since Gucci first tapped Mert & Marcus to photograph their campaigns but because Gucci releases campaigns for more than just the main S/S and F/W collections it seems like it's been a hell of a lot longer. Also worth taking into account is that when the dynamic duo revert to their comfort zone, as they have with the Gucci campaigns they've shot so far, the result is instantly recognizable and, by this point in time, predictable. Sure every photographer has a signature style that they carry with them throughout their career, but I think Mert & Marcus's has the tendency to come off as repetitive because it's so specific. It's also a bit of an acquired taste. I myself have seen more than enough of their turquoise skies, bronzed skin, reflective crimson lips and highlight-laden tresses to last me a lifetime. I guess it's no wonder that none of their Gucci campaigns have impressed me. Here's the thing though; I don't blame Mert & Marcus for how tedious the campaigns are. As specific as their signature style is and as boring as it can become it's not the only thing that they're capable of doing, and in fact I tend to like what they do when they branch out a bit. Clearly the only reason that their Gucci campaigns have become completely indistinguishable from one season to the next is because that's what Gucci wants. Why Gucci wants to repeat themselves and have all of their seasonal advertising blur into one never-ending campaign of plasticized beauty I can't say for sure, but the only logical explanation is that it sells.





I can respect that this may work from a business standpoint, but I'm not looking at it from that angle. Aesthetically I'm just plain sick of this look. I mean I could learn to live with and even enjoy seeing this kind of hyper-glamorous unnatural beauty if the composition of the photographs changed a bit, which was the case when Mert & Marcus were the photographers behind Vuitton's ad campaigns. But there really isn't any change in any of the Gucci campaigns they've done. I mean how many times can you look at a photo of a beautiful young woman who's been airbrushed into oblivion shot from a low angle while striking ridiculously overdone poses in some sun-drenched exotic location while the solid mass of her so-shiny-it's-practically-sparkling hair is billowing down her shoulder like some caramel waterfall before the whole package gets boring? Clearly I have a low tolerance for it to begin with, which probably has a lot to do with the fact that I've seen it countless times before, but I know I can't be the only one who saw this campaign and promptly rolled their eyes at it's sameness. On top of the predictability this season's campaign in particular seems even more artificial than usual. I mean the satin clothes are practically glowing for chrissake. But bitching aside there are a couple of things I do like about it. For one the pops of bright color are extremely eye catching and very refreshing after two seasons filled with neutral clothes from the runway. They make a nice contrast to the ubiquitous turquoise sky and golden terrain. I also really like the models that were cast. Joan Smalls and Karmen Pedaru make a wonderful change from Natasha Poly and her cheekbones or everybody's go-to model Raquel Zimmermann. It's just a shame that two of the more beautiful models working today both look like they're the product of CGI in this campaign. It's also a shame that as long as Mert & Marcus are employed by Gucci this is all we're likely to see.

images from facebook.com/GUCCI

Tuesday, January 4, 2011

Return of the King Part II...

What better way is there to start off the new year than getting a look at what was no doubt one of the most eagerly anticipated and hyped up fashion events in years. That's right kids, after nearly four months of waiting we, the viewing public, finally get to see Tom Ford's womenswear debut in full. By now I'm sure everybody has seen at least some of the teaser images that have been floating around the net. The clothes have shown up in a number of magazines and last month Harper's Bazaar previewed a handful of official runway images. Now I can only speak for myself, but seeing those eight or nine runway photos didn't satisfy my craving at all, quite the contrary in fact. They made me crave more. Well, now we have more and I'd say I'm satisfied.
Fabulous, no? The editing really creates a sense of excitement, of being there in the midst of it all. Watching it is actually kind of hypnotic, and even now having watched it, oh, a dozen times at least I still can't help but smile. Don't get me wrong, I'm crushed that it's been edited down to what is essentially a tease, and it sucks that we don't get to hear any of the commentary Mr. Ford was providing along with the show, but given the choice between a short video and no video at all guess which one I would choose. And btw, can I just say that I think the Karen Elson song playing over the footage is perfect for the presentation. I guess we'll never know if it was actually used in the show, but it's a great fit.

Before I go into the collection I have to get this out of the way first: I HATE the quality of the photography. I know that it was intentional, but I don't think all of the photos do justice to the clothes or the women wearing them.
Now, I tried to be brief and concise while writing about this collection, I really did, but it just wasn't working. Each look left me with something to say, so bear with me...

  • The first look confuses me. Maybe it's the kind of thing you need to see in person, but I'm afraid I just don't get it looking at this picture and the video.
  • Love the painted fringe dress on Liya. Something about it combined with the big, intricate updo and the bohemian-esque earrings gives me a kind of mid-Sixties vibe. It's such a dramatic look.
  • The smokings on Emmanuelle Seigner and Lauren Hutton are pretty much perfection, end of story.

  • I'm in love with the entire look on Natalia Vodianova. From the pompadour down it's got a haughty sex appeal that really works. The skirt has a gorgeous silhouette.
  • I like the dress in different shades of pink, but seeing something so femme and girlish from Tom Ford is kind of throwing me for a loop.
  • The purple chiffon wrap dress on Joan Smalls is beautiful, although I don't know if I love the color of that bolero with it. That's also not the best picture of her, and she's gorgeous so there's really no excuse.
  • Karen's cobalt fringed dress is easily one of the most striking pieces in the collection. It's such a simple design when you think about it, but between that amazing color and the all-over fringe it makes for a look that's hard to forget. I think I preferred it with stockings the way it was styled in Vogue.

  • I die for Rachel Feinstein. She looks so sexy and vibrant and gorgeous. That red hair suits her perfectly, in fact the first time I saw her photo it didn't even dawn on me that it's not her normal hair color.
  • The words leopard print pant suit don't necessarily paint the prettiest of pictures, but damn is that suit fierce. I never say fierce, so you know it must be true if that's the only word that I can think of.
  • I don't really love Julia Restoin-Roitfeld in her leather skirt suit. The pieces are nice, but the whole look with the Winehouse hair, raccoon eyes and fishnet boots renders it a little vulgar.
  • Anja's white suede trench coat on the other hand is gorgeous, though highly impractical if you ever want to venture outside of your walk-in closet. Nice touch tying the coat in with his Private Blend fragrance White Suede.

  • I don't love the saharienne kind of look on Jac, but I think it's really just the color that's bothering me. Olive green really doesn't relate to anything else in the collection.
  • The white skirt suit is beautiful. I love the longer silhouette, and I'd really love to see a close-up of the stitching on the skirt.
  • The only complaint that I have about Chanel Iman in an overblown Prince of Wale's check smoking is that I might have preferred it with a fedora instead of that cloche. Other than that the suit is fantastic. So, so chic.
  • I really like Abbey's Faye Dunaway as Bonnie Parker look. It's no the most exciting outfit in the collection, but it's styled really well. It's got a great silhouette, too.

  • The look on Karlie and the leopard dress that came next seem like filler looks to me. They're not bad, they're just lost in a sea of impact-making looks.
  • Carolyn Murphy's look is impeccable, definitely one of my favorites. It's very simple, bordering on boring, but the styling of that little black dress really takes it somewhere else. I'm a sucker for an open back.
  • The dress on Daria has already appeared in two editorials, once in American Vogue and once in Vogue Paris, and both times it looked amazing. The silhouette is just so unlike anything I would expect from Tom Ford. Here though the shape has none of the drama or precision that it did in the magazines. I also don't like those shoes with it.

  • I didn't really love the metallic embroidered jacket Freja's wearing when it first appeared in Vogue. Even though it recalls Ford's last YSL collection it read as a little too dated to me. Apparently it's grown on me since because I really like the look here. The jacket photographs beautifully.
  • The styling on Victoria Fernandez is great. Lingerie under mannish tailoring seems like such a cliche, but clearly it works, and I'm digging the cat eye shades under the veil. You don't see enough veils these days.
  • Love Stella's outfit. That jacket is stunning. For some reason when I first saw images of this look I assumed the skirt was floor length. I think I might have loved it even more if it was.
  • Beyonce is wearing a lot of look, and I guess that suits her personality. The dress itself looks gorgeous in that shot. Unfortunately the lighting didn't do Bey any favors.

  • I still can't make up my mind about the gown on Marisa Berenson. On the one hand it looks like something that Travis Banton might have designed for Marlene Dietrich; on the other I'm not so sure that that's a bad thing.
  • I wish we could see all of Rita Wilson's look, although from what I do see I think I like it.
  • The tuxedo on Edita is, like all of the other suits in this collection, perfection. Cummerbunds are the new belt.
  • The painted fringe dress on Du Juan is actually the one look I'm having the most trouble making up my mind about. The print and colors are really beautiful and so unusual looking, but I'm not 100% sure that the whole look isn't too much.

  • I didn't really love the kimono-sleeved le smoking jumpsuit worn by Lou Doillon when I saw it on Lara Stone in W magazine last month. Seeing it now it takes on a whole new feeling. On the right woman, in this case Lou, that piece is unbelievably striking. It has entrance maker written all over it.
  • Julianne looks fabulous in her fringed and feathered gown, and judging by the picture she knew it. She was so fabulous in the video.
  • Considering that Lisa Eisner's gown is one of the simplest pieces in the entire collection it also happens to be one of the most dramatic, I think. That sharp column of black, barely touching the body inside and plunging in the front to show the top of the corset is so unlike anything that's been seen on a red carpet in god knows how many years that I can't help but love it. A dress like that is the perfect antidote to Marchesa-syndrome. To me it's the most Gucci-esque piece in the collection.
  • And finally there's Daphne Guinness in a look that only Daphne Guinness could ever pull off. It's so over the top, from the two-tone bouffant and patented Tom Ford smokey eye (which is a good look for her) to the feathered shoes. I love how the gown just seems to melt on her body. It's a lot of look, even more than Beyonce's, but it suits her perfectly.
Not that I'm surprised or anything, and I doubt any of you reading this are either, but I really ended up loving this collection. As plenty of people have already pointed out it's nothing new or radical, but that was never what Ford was about anyway. His strength was always his ability to take something old, or classic, or retro and rework it for the here and now. But while none of this is new or radical I do think that the overall feel of the collection is very fresh. These 32 looks are extremely dressed up and "done", which is the antithesis of what fashion and style have been about for years now. I love that the collection is unapologetic about that. Conviction to a mood is classic Tom Ford. As for the clothes themselves I think that there's a great variety. Not only are these clothes addressing women of different sizes, shapes and ages, they're addressing different styles and tastes as well. The woman who is going to wear the black column gown worn by Lisa Eisner probably wouldn't be the type to wear the sequined mesh sheath on Beyonce, just like the woman who'd choose a black silk tuxedo for an evening event probably wouldn't go near a ruched ballet pink georgette dress like the one Rinko Kikuchi has on. I think that's one of the best things about this collection, that rather than just talking about addressing different women Mr. Ford actually did. It's not about one specific look for one specific kind of customer like his work at Gucci and YSL was. At the same time though you can clearly see echoes of his Gucci and YSL women throughout, although to me it doesn't look distinctly like either of them, which I think that is a good thing. There is enough difference to separate his past from his present which definitely gives him license to play in the future. I'm extremely excited to see where Ford will take this collection now that he's back to doing what he does best, and while I know that this show is supposed to have been a one-off kind of event that doesn't mean I'm not holding out hope that Tom will change his tune and take up a more permanent residence on a runway of his own. If there's one thing that his hiatus from the fashion ranks made perfectly clear it's that fashion really isn't as exciting when he's not apart of it.

video and images from tomford.com

Monday, November 15, 2010

Return of the King...


It's been six long years since Tom Ford took his last bow on a fashion runway, although take it from me at times it's felt like an eternity. There have truly been moments when I have been keenly aware that something was missing from fashion, and not surprisingly those times have usually coincided with fashion week. What I'm about to say might sound like I'm giving Ford too much credit, but I honestly believe that when Tom left Gucci fashion lost a bit of it's luster and excitement, and it still hasn't entirely recovered from that loss. While his departure certainly hasn't been the only cause of that, nor has it been the biggest blow to fashion, looking back it does seem like his farewell was the beginning of the end. Slowly fashion has become less glamorous and less seductive, not to mention that any kind of mystique surrounding the industry has been completely obliterated thanks to factors like the increasing influence of celebrities in fashion, the insane popularity of fashion among people who don't actually know anything about it, and the marketing of fashion as yet another form of entertainment. It also just seems like real fashion moments have become fewer and farther apart. Not all designers can create true excitement with a runway show, or an ad campaign, or a fragrance launch and whether you like him or loathe him the fact is that Tom Ford was, and is, capable of working a fashion moment for all it's worth.

In the six years since he bowed out of the theater of fashion he has collaborated with Estée Lauder, branded his name on status symbol eyewear, created a line of successful luxury fragrances, launched a full-scale menswear collection, dressed countless celebrities in said menswear, opened about 20 free-standing Tom Ford boutiques internationally, directed a critically acclaimed film, and recently expanded into cosmetics with his new line of lipsticks and soon-to-be-released nail lacquers. Writing it all down in one sentence kind of makes you appreciate just how busy he's been, and lord knows a self-proclaimed perfectionist like Ford isn't going to let any product with his name on it escape inspection. But despite all that he's done in the last six years the one thing that his fans have been most concerned with was when Ford would finally go back to designing womenswear and showing on a runway. Back in September right at the start of New York fashion week, after years of waiting, speculation, and wondering "what would it be like?" the news spread like wildfire that Ford would finally be launching his women's collection with an intimate presentation at his Madison Avenue flagship. As the scoop leaked we found out that not only would celebrities be modeling the clothes but that photography of any kind was strictly prohibited. That news just about killed my buzz until the reviews from the show started pouring in the day after it took place. In all seriousness I cannot for the life of me remember a show that garnered such unanimously glowing reviews from those in attendance, and the descriptions of the scene, the clothes and the impressive cast of celebrities, style icons, veteran supermodels and in demand new faces that graced the catwalk only stoked the flames of anticipation. With the reviews there were a few snapshots that quickly made the online rounds, adding to the excitement. It was after the show that the reason for the media ban was announced; Ford would not only be relaunching his website with photos and video footage of the presentation come winter, but he would also be guest editing the December/January issue of Vogue Paris where the collection would be featured in it's entirety. What we didn't know was that American Vogue would also have a feature on Ford's women's debut and that the feature would be available before Vogue Paris. So here it is, kids. Savor it, because who knows how long it will be before we get more.


Gorgeous, not that I'm at all surprised. I don't know about you, but for me winter can't come soon enough. Needless to say that when it does, and when the rest of the features finally become available I will be reviewing the entire collection as soon as the euphoria wears off.

all images from vogue.com thanks to Flashbang at tFS

Friday, October 8, 2010

Camp Out...

Louis Vuitton

Well, Paris fashion week has come and gone ending yet another season's worth of shows. I have to admit that this week in Paris has been sort of low on emotional reactions from me. That's not to say I haven't liked any collections, but there's a world of difference between liking something and having a visceral response to it. God bless Marc Jacobs for managing to stir something in me, and not a moment too soon. His collection for Louis Vuitton, always a must see, turned out to be just the high note I was looking for. Like his eponymous collection shown in New York which was easily one of my favorite collections this season, Marc's collection for Vuitton was positively brimming with glamour, color, sex appeal and fun.





The mix of colors, shiny fabrics, pop art-y animal prints, fringe, sparkle, transparency and a heady whiff of the Orient makes for a collection that's deliriously, deliciously over the top. All of the different ideas, all of the design elements and influences that Jacobs crammed into the clothes were cranked up to their loudest decibel resulting in a collection that's almost defiantly campy and excessive. Looking through the pictures and watching the video all I kept thinking was that this is kind of the idealized fantasy version of fashion that people who don't follow it have. In fact this is the idealized version of fashion that likely draws people in to begin with. It's so completely ridiculous and glamorized, so flashy and downright decadent, but most of all it's above the every day. I think that's what really draws me to it, that deliberately fantastical artifice. I'll be honest, following fashion with any kind of dedication can remove a bit of the glamour and fun from it. When you become very familiar with it some of the mystique is inevitably lost and when that happens you start to see that fashion can at times be really boring, which makes a show like this, loud, gaudy and ridiculous as it may be, a welcome dose of fun and frivolity. I don't know if I truly love the clothes themselves as much as I love the message of the show as a whole, but I will say that for the second time in a single season Marc Jacobs has made me, an ardent fan of black, absolutely adore bright color. That's no small feat, believe me. Say what you will about the level of taste or practicality shown in this collection but Marc is that rare designer who is so utterly attuned to the zeitgeist that he can give people, including me, what they're craving before they've even realized they were craving it.

all images from vogue.com

Wednesday, October 6, 2010

The next chapter...

Alexander McQueen

Easily the most anticipated collection of Paris fashion week this season was Sarah Burton's runway debut since she took the helm of Alexander McQueen earlier this year. It must be daunting enough for any designer to follow in the footsteps of someone so iconic and so revered, so I can't imagine how that feeling of pressure and nervous excitement must be compounded by the fact that people are still coming to terms with McQueen's untimely death. On the one hand that's not an enviable position to be in, where not only are people's expectations high but there hopes for a successful debut are as well. On the other, if you do succeed it stands to reason that you will be embraced that much more warmly by all of the people - buyers, stylists, editors, critics, customers, and fans - who are watching. From the beginning people have been wondering what it is that Sarah will do with the label, and I think her resort collection served as a very strong mission statement. She kept pieces of McQueen's DNA, filtered them through her own sensibility and created something that was in many ways the perfect middle ground. It felt McQueen, yet it didn't try to be McQueen, if that makes any sense. But I digress...

After looking at the Spring Summer 2011 collection, taking it in and sorting it all out I feel kind of terrible to say that it doesn't wow me. Don't get me wrong, it's not bad by any stretch of the imagination and there's no doubt about it looking like a McQueen collection, but something isn't clicking for me. It's not the lack of runway theatrics, because her static resort collection clicked pretty easily], and it's not the lack of something macabre or perverse either. There's beauty here, that's not the issue, and the clothes look very well made too. I truly wish I liked this more than I do, but the most I can say is that I like the collection. It does what it needed to do, which is continue in the tradition of the label, but something feels off.




I just can't put my finger on exactly what's keeping me from feeling more for this collection. The best I can come up with is that I don't get a purposeful statement from what was presented. Pretty as the pieces may be they don't seem to add up to a whole, for me at least. And I hate to say it because I'm really rooting for Burton, but some of the pieces seem over-designed. The things I like best are the more simple looks like some of the tailoring and the few chiffon dresses that were shown. The more dramatic structured pieces, while very McQueen, just aren't working for me. Same goes for the elaborate prints, although I can't blame Burton for that. I'm honestly just burnt out on hyper-detailed photo/digital prints after seeing them everywhere for a solid two years, if not longer. Still, like I said, I'm rooting for Burton, and I really look forward to seeing her grow into her position and find her footing. Maybe in the long run this show will have served as something of a palette cleanser, something to bridge the end of one era and the beginning of another.

all images from style.com

Monday, October 4, 2010

Striptease...

Haider Ackermann

Haider Ackermann has become one of the shows I consistently look forward to during Paris fashion week, and that mainly has to do with the fact that he consistently makes clothes that leave me breathless. I know that sounds like your typical melodramatic fashion hyperbole, but it's true. There's always something in his collection, be it an idea, a look or a single piece that stops me in my tracks, so to speak.

I don't know for sure what was going through Ackermann's mind while he was working on his Spring Summer 2011 women's collection, but if I were to go by what he showed it would seem that he had sex on the brain. Almost all of the looks he sent out onto his runway appeared as if they were either in the midst of falling off or as if they'd been hastily thrown back on and as a result there were copious amounts of skin on display, whether it was a neckline plunging down to the navel, a back that's completely cut out, or a skirt slashed open over the hip and up the leg. The double whammy of clothes that appear to be barely hanging onto the body and glimpses of naked flesh definitely gave the collection a bit of an erotic charge. The hints of kimono dressing, seen most prominently in ribbons tied and bunched into half-tied obi-like bows, as well as the few striped silk pieces that recall men's pajamas only added to the collection's overriding sense of elegant seduction and déshabillé.


I'm absolutely in love with this collection, as I have been with all of Haider's work for a couple of years now. Something about this one in particular feels more forceful, more assertive than I would normally think of his work being. You can see that in the colors, those bold splashes of crimson, yellow, emerald, cobalt, turquoise and purple that were used as a contrast to black. But you can also see it in the sometimes graphic way the clothes are cut. Those few skirts that are slashed along the hip, or the tops that look like a sliced up tuxedo jacket are a good example of that. Those qualities give this collection an entirely different spirit than what I've come to expect from Ackermann. It's still 100% in keeping with what he does best. Bright color aside there's no way you would mistake this for anybody else's work. One thing that's bothering me though is the shade of green that was used for a few looks. I'm generally not a huge fan of green, although I can tolerate it sometimes, but that particular shade is a huge turn off. I wouldn't have included it and I probably wouldn't have included the single turquoise dress either, but mostly because it's just kind of random among the other colors. Other than that this is yet another beautiful offering from Mr. Ackermann, which is exactly what I've come to expect from him.

all images from style.com

Saturday, October 2, 2010

Bare Essentials...


Lanvin

Imagine, if you will, a Lanvin collection stripped bare of all beading, feathers, fringing, draping, volume and jewelry. Easier said than done, right? That's because all of those things, which of course sound like a successful recipe for a drag revue, are at this point so much a part of Lanvin's identity that imagining a collection without them is like not imagining a collection at all. But the lack of all those things is precisely what defines the Spring Summer 2011 collection that Alber Elbaz whipped up. Compared to recent offerings this one is uncharacteristically spare, and it's probably better off for it. Don't get me wrong, I love what Alber does with embellishment and drape, but he's been on that train of thought for a while now. I loved (and still love) his Fall collection, but like I said when I reviewed it, the pieces that I responded to most were the sharp, simple ones that opened the show. At the time they felt fresh and this collection sort of picks up where those looks left off. The clothes for spring have been almost universally stripped bare of anything extraneous and as a result the clothes, from the zippered day dresses worn with flat sandals to the billowing skirts worn with what appear to be bodysuits, read more like sportswear than anything Elbaz has done in a while. In fact many of the opening looks, with panels of draping inset onto a fitted dress or those aforementioned billowing skirts, almost make me think of modern dance wear, the kind of stuff Martha Graham would have worn. Actually looking at it now quite a few of the looks make me think of that. Pieces like that chocolate off-the-shoudler caftan, the full, billowing nylon parkas, and even the few short chiffon goddess dresses in colors like rust, nude and lichen could be costumes for some kind of performance.




In place of beading, volume or heavy draping there are details like zippers, leather belts or harnesses, and tight Fortuny-esque pleating. Even the colors are mostly on the subdued side, save for a middle passage that included neon yellow, hot pink, crimson, and plum. Much as I like some of the pieces from that section I don't really get the color choices. Compared to the rich mineral colors that opened and closed the show they seem kind of jarring, pretty as they might be. I also don't get the four suits comprised of a jacket, matching skirt and matching skinny pants. They seem really odd for the sake of being odd, and that's never a good thing. As usual the collection is pretty dress heavy, though a number of them could be worn for day as evidenced by the choice to pair them with flat sandals and shoulder bags. Overall the clothes were easy to like and seem like they'd be really easy to wear, and while I kind of feel that the pendulum might have swung a little too far into the direction of "practical", robbing the collection of some of it's potential lust-worthiness, the bottom line is that these are still pretty clothes. It must be said though that the collection is extremely disjointed, like it's unsure of what it's trying to communicate. I don't think that's ever been an issue with a Lanvin collection before, so it's a little hard to process. Still, I think this might prove to be the right direction to take the house in moving forward. I don't think anybody wants to see Lanvin lose any of it's luster because it refused to change.

all images from style.com

Tuesday, September 28, 2010

Like a strand in the wind...

Roberto Cavalli

In a way it makes sense that Roberto Cavalli, granddaddy of the glammed-up boho babe aesthetic, would have the final word on all things hippie-deluxe this season. In just 40 looks he managed to make every other collection that has toyed with the look seem so sad and half-assed by comparison, at least to me. Cavalli's been in an ongoing state of flux these last few years, trying, it would seem, to move his brand forward. Some of the results, like his F/W 2009 collection, struck me as positive steps in a new direction that still kept his aesthetic intact, while others have abandoned everything the label is about for reasons unknown. I guess I'm of the mind that if you're good at something you should stick to it, and what Cavalli is good at is super glamorous, super luxurious rock star clothes, which is exactly what he delivered for Spring Summer 2011, his 40th anniversary. I'm not even going to try hating this collection because frankly between the craftsmanship and the conviction of belief I think it's an extremely well done take on one of the season's prevailing moods.




On the Fashion Spot some threw out a comparison to Cher, and I can kind of see that. Hell, Cher was probably wearing Cavalli back in her early bohemian days with Sonny, so it's not far off the mark. But if the hair and hiphuggers are Cher then the more ethereal, floaty pieces trailing fringe every which way are pure Stevie Nicks. The dreamy sun-baked color palette certainly adds to the effect. I mean really, can't you just picture her twirling around in some of these dresses while singing Edge of Seventeen? Part of what makes Cavalli's brand of trashy, flashy fun stand out has always been his commitment to beautiful workmanship. Questionable taste aside the man and his staff have quite a way with leather, embroidery and printmaking, and this collection is a testament to those specialties. From the whipstitched crocodile, ostrich and python jackets to the lacing that held together pants and dresses the work that went into the clothes is obvious. To me that's one of the things that separates his take on this look from all the other designers who have done it this season, it really does look handmade, homespun even, but in the best possible way. Even the way it's styled seems somewhat authentic, like real women put these looks together with the things they own. It comes pretty close to looking and feeling one of a kind. The other thing that sets this apart from the crowd is how it really goes there. It risks being ridiculous in order to be convincing, unlike collections such as Gucci and Pucci which only dip their toes into the boho pool. Cavalli dove in head first and went as far as he could, and whether the clothes appeal to you or not I think that kind of commitment is something worth praising. Like Versace or Prada earlier in the week this collection is focused and uncompromising, which of course means that it won't please everybody. But since when is anything that pleases everybody worth noticing?

all images from style.com

Saturday, September 25, 2010

The long and the short of it...

Versace

If you were to play a word association game and the chosen word was Versace, I'd be willing to bet that "restrained" wouldn't be a response. Let's face it, there are dozens of adjectives that can be used to describe Versace, but words like restrained, minimal and spare aren't among them. Leave it to Donatella when she's in the mood for something different to change that perception.

Everything about the collection feels extremely focused and considered, from the restricted color palette to the sharply tailored (and limited) silhouettes. Even the house's signature Greek key pattern, which hasn't made an appearance on the runway in a while, was used very carefully in abstract painterly prints or as PVC/patent leather insets or appliques. Nothing about the collection, not even the silk fringe that was the only embellishment on evening dresses, felt excessive. But despite the rigor displayed in the clothes the collection recalls so much of the house's past. Watching the video I saw a lot of Gianni in the collection, although to me the collection doesn't feel burdened by references to his work. It's classic Versace but Donatella really made the look her own. None of Gianni's work that I remember was quite this slick or controlled. This being a Versace collection there's certainly no shortage of sex appeal, but this time around there's something about it that's very grown up and, dare I say it, sophisticated.




I haven't been this nuts about a Versace collection in a few years. Something about it feels genuinely fresh, unlike anything that's been seen from the house in recent memory. While the fall collection also had a graphic quality to it, I think this collection achieved much more appealing results. I do have a couple of complaints which I almost feel bad bringing up, but can't avoid. The first is the total lack of pants. I can appreciate that Donatella presented an extremely uncompromising vision - that's something to respect a designer - but considering how sharp the tailoring in this show was I wouldn't have minded a few looks based around this season's pant. But then I may just be idealizing that in my head and in reality pants would have lessened the overall impact of the presentation. The second complaint is the gowns at the end. To me they feel less like the logical conclusion of the collection and more like meeting an expectation. People expect gowns from Versace, and if we're being honest Versace does them well, but the three that made it onto the runway, all of them made of fringe built onto bodices and swinging from the skirt, weren't as strong as all of the pieces that had come before. They weren't necessary, and they weren't the best I've ever seen from Donatella, though I will grant that they also were not predictable Versace gowns, either. Ultimately the good far outweighs the bad in this collection though. It's a wonderful synthesis between past and future, and the result couldn't be more perfect for the present.

all images from style.com

Thursday, September 23, 2010

Tourist Trap...

Prada

Not many designers can manage to do something interesting with as tired a theme as resort-wear, but then not many designers have as twisted a mind as Miuccia Prada. In rapid change mode yet again (she is the queen of rapid change, after all) Prada ditched the headline making curves of her Fall collection for light, crisp, sometimes boxy clothes that combined such clashing elements as rugby or sailor stripes in a rainbow of crayon colors, prints inspired by baroque-era interiors, medical scrubs, the 20s, the 40s, the 50s, and souvenir t-shirts. The overall effect, at least to me, brought to mind a kind of retro tourism vibe, the look of post-WWII American or European women traveling to places like Cuba, Mexico and Brazil with a brand new wardrobe of clothes perfectly suited to a tropical climate. This being a Prada collection the results had a kind of intentionally cheesy and tacky quality to them.




While I don't necessarily love all of the clothes on their own, I can appreciate them for the most part. For instance, I don't actually like the three chemise dresses embroidered to look like souvenir t-shirts, but I certainly enjoy the humor of them. Same goes for the cartoon banana and baroque monkey prints, which I don't think many people would be able to pull of very convincingly. But they're still pretty clever. The pieces I do like are some of the colorful striped looks. More than sailors or rugby they make me think of beach towels, and that's really not a bad association when you're looking at summer clothes. I also love the fox stoles that a lot of the models were carrying. It's such a ridiculous idea, a fur stole for the summer, made even more ridiculous by the fact that they weren't even being worn. I'm especially fond of the striped ones. With the dangling tails they kind of look like the Cheshire cat from Alice in Wonderland. I don't know if anyone else got that, but it makes me smile, so who cares? One thing that this collection makes clear, yet again, is that Miuccia is undoubtedly at her best when she's fucking up a cliche.

all images from style.com

Wednesday, September 22, 2010

Crash and Burn...

Gucci

I knew it couldn't last. The restraint she showed, the optimism I felt. They were temporary, erased by the new. Logically I knew that I'd probably be feeling let down, but I still hoped I wouldn't. This is my way of saying that the Spring Summer 2011 collection that Frida Giannini presented was such a drastic departure from the positively good collection she put out last fall and which won me over, despite my distaste for the woman's prior work. With this new collection she reverted back to her former tactics faster than you can say "stiletto", and it's killing me. Watching the show, which seemed to unintentionally be broken up into three separate collections, was upsetting because after last season I've seen what Frida is capable of. She's still no Tom Ford, and she never will be, but she can do luxurious, sexy, grown up clothes that positively reek of Gucci's essence. Why she decided to shoot herself in the foot instead of going 2 for 2 is beyond my comprehension.

The collection started out with jewel tone silk separates, tapered trousers, blazers, blouses, and tulip skirts and in their clashing shades of orange, jade, purple and cerulean accented with gold accessories and red lips it would be nearly impossible not to think of Yves Saint Laurent. He was the master of these kinds of lurid mixes of color. I wish I could say that Giannini's homage did the originator justice, but instead of looking artistic, beautiful and unusual Giannini's mix of colors just looked cheap. There was zero sophistication which, mean as it sounds, is a testament to her eye for color. She may like using it but in this case anyway it wasn't used well. Ignoring the color the pieces are no great shakes with their slight 70s vibe. Compared to Marc Jacobs collection, which went there and back, it's no wonder I find these looks completely forgettable. I do like the black blouse on Natasha though. Apparently the back was cut out.



The next section, which was significantly larger, was done in shades of beige, tan and black and had a vague "safari" flavor. You know what that means, harem pants, neat jackets in exotic skins detailed with lots of junk like tassels, fringe, and braiding, and a bit of ethnic beading to finish things off. Again this section recalled Yves Saint Laurent, though an entirely different side of his work. If the opening looks harked back to his vibrant disco days then this section was pure, unadulterated, mid-60s Saharienne with just a hint of Marrakesh thrown in to cover all the bases. It's a look that's been done countless times, and honestly Frida isn't adding anything remotely new to the theme. Save for the overload of details this was textbook fashion, the kind of ready-made go-to inspiration that designers latch on to like flies to a zebra carcass. While this was the largest section of the collection it was also the most uneven. There were some beautiful pieces, but between the over-styling and the over-embellishing that went on they got a little lost in the shuffle.



The third and final section was, unsurprisingly, eveningwear and for evening Frida referenced yet another moment in Saint Laurent's career, his African collection of 67/68, in all it's tribal beaded, feathered and fringed glory. After sending out three black jumpsuits with gold detailing that, were it not for the extremely dropped crotches would have been kind of pretty, Giannini sent out what were no doubt meant to be her "drama" pieces, the ones that end a show with a bang. It's unfortunate that, for me at least, the obvious work that went into making them is overshadowed by the fact that they are both overdone and unflattering. Watching the live stream, with the size 0 and 2 models walking down the runway in their fringed, beaded, and feathered dresses, hands thrust into side pockets, I couldn't help but think of how insane it is to make a dress that is already wide around the hips appear even wider by adding pockets. Frida's a woman, and if a woman is making dresses that look kind of bulky on a too-thin model (forget about a woman who actually has a waist and hips) there is seriously something wrong.



Besides feeling like a completely unfocused collection it also feels like a giant step backwards for Giannini. I've always felt that she has relied way too heavily on special effects and not enough on the basics of designing clothes such as cut, shape and fit. There are times when it feels as though she's thinking of the embellishments first and simply applying them to whatever garment will accommodate them, and there are others when it seems like she thinks she needs to work a piece to the nth degree for it to be luxurious or special. I don't understand why she'd revert back to this comfort zone after showing that she can in fact restrain herself and produce results that are better looking than when she goes for the glue gun. I also can't help but criticize the lack of continuity in this collection. Style.com namechecked Guy Bourdin and Chris von Wangenheim as two sources of inspiration, and while I could maybe grant that the bold colors that opened the show have a vaguely Bourdin kind of feel (and I do mean vaguely) I don't see much of Wangenheim's twisted sexuality here. I also don't see how photographers who helped define the look of the mid-to-late 70s relate to Marrakesh, safari or tribalism via YSL. Fact is those references come from an entirely different decade than Bourdin and Wangenheim. There's no real connection between them and Frida didn't succeed at creating one, which is why this one collection of 44 looks is broken up so jaggedly. There's no flow from those colored disco silks to the beige harem pants and leather jackets that came next, just like there's no flow from the desert tinged safari section to the glitzed up sub-Saharan tribalism that closed the show. Weird thing is I don't all out hate this collection. It's certainly not the worst that Giannini has done and some of the pieces, like those black jumpsuits which are really the only pieces that successfully merge all of the references, are kind of nice. But I can't say that I think the collection is very good. It's not. Like I said, I knew that last season would turn out to be a fluke, I really did, but I still hoped that it might be the start of a new chapter at Gucci. It was nice while it lasted I guess.

all images from style.com

Wednesday, September 15, 2010

A clean slate...

Narciso Rodriguez

Once upon a time at the beginning of the decade that is rapidly coming to a close, I was a Narciso Rodriguez fan. His razor sharp, super spare dresses that were cut to hug the female form were some of the sexiest clothes around, certainly some of the sexiest clothes being shown on this side of the pond. There was, I would guess, a two year period where I really grew to love his aesthetic and the way he dressed women. Sex on legs is actually a pretty apt way of describing it, though it never veered into Versace/Cavalli/D&G levels of skin and sin. But, as with all good things, he had to change things up to keep people interested. In the years since he has played with volume, movement, shape and color, and while there have been times when I've liked the results overall they never really whipped me into a tizzy.

But for Spring Summer 2011 he sent out a collection that, while not quite the same as the good old days, certainly shared some similarities. Back was his familiar long, lean silhouette that ended somewhere between the knee and the ankle, though this time around, with many of his dresses rendered in soft, fluid fabrics, it was as if all the internal structure was removed from his signature sheaths leaving a languid fabric shell that barely grazed the body. God only knows why but pieces like a long white satin t-shirt dress with a scooped neck or a slip made of contrasting panels of gray silk held up by spaghetti straps and slit up the leg just looked damn sexy. Granted I'm not an authority on what makes a woman sexy, but even still I'd stop and look if the right woman walked by wearing one of those dresses.






While I realize that the length and shape of the majority of these skirts are extremely uncompromising, they're the kind of clothes that make me wish more women could be flattered by them because it's such a beautiful way to look. I feel like I say this a lot, but I really, really hope that this collection signals a change in direction for Narciso. Plain as they are these clothes are a welcome return to what made me fall in love with his collection to begin with.

all images from style.com



Tuesday, September 14, 2010

Love to love you, baby...


Marc Jacobs


One can always rely on Marc Jacobs to provide a solid jolt of electricity when fashion week is off to a slow start. It's not that the collections shown so far have been bad necessarily, it's just that most of them have been lacking a point of view. I guess it's not really a surprise that Marc's should stand out; it's just about as different from everything else that's been shown this week as it could possibly be. Everyone else is showing tons of white and barely-there pastels, Marc goes all out with rich jewel and spice tones. Everyone else does sharp, streamlined silhouettes, Marc does volume. And while I wouldn't go so far as to call the collection maximal, compared to the recent movement towards minimalism fashion has been experiencing there was a sense of frivolity and fun on Marc's runway that I just don't think you can achieve when you're stripping clothing down to their most basic form. I don't think this collection is such a departure from the beautifully restrained collection Jacobs showed last season. Yes this is louder and far more extroverted, but just like last season the focus here is primarily on the clothes. There's nothing conceptual about it, no message to decode, no figuring out what is and isn't meant for retail. Really the only difference, except for the surface stuff like color, shape and fabrication, is the mood. In that way this collection is last season's polar opposite. Whereas fall was sedate, soulful and romantic spring is sexy, vibrant and very, very glam.






While I was watching the live feed I kept thinking of "The Beautiful Fall", author Alicia Drake's non-fiction account of Karl Lagerfeld's and Yves Saint Laurent's individual but parallel rises to fame, a large part of which took place in Paris during the early 70s. In the book there is quite a cast of supporting characters, including model Donna Jordan who was something of a muse to both Lagerfeld and illustrator Antonio Lopez, and whose look must have inspired this collection to some degree. I also see bits of Donna Summer, Loulou de la Falaise, Pat Cleavland, Bianca Jagger and Jodie Foster's character in "Taxi Driver", not to mention vintage Saint Laurent and Chloe designed by Lagerfeld himself. Those are just the references I myself can spot, I'm sure I'm missing some. It's no surprise that the clothes are unmistakably retro when you can see style icons of the decade so clearly in the show, but that doesn't really bother me. Maybe it's because this particular look that calls to mind the transitional period between the early 70s bohemian and late 70s disco eras isn't something that's been big on the fashion landscape recently. There have been hints of it in stores with items like high-waisted flared denim and printed maxi dresses, but it hasn't been a main theme in fashion of late. Even though a lot of the clothes are fairly literal interpretations of the past I can still see a great deal of them appealing to women of today. Of course the styling, from the frizzed out Bourdin hair and vampy makeup to the flower and feather chokers and those fantastically kitschy parasol hats, really help make the look as fabulous as can be, but I accept the fact that those things probably won't catch on with the public. All in all this was a wonderful shot of energy in what's been a fairly lifeless New York season so far.

all images from style.com

Wednesday, July 21, 2010

Hate is a strong word...

But sometimes it's the only word that seems appropriate. When the first image from the new Gucci Fall Winter 2010 campaign hit the Fashion Spot, I was excited to see what it would look like. The collection itself left a good impression on me, so naturally I was hoping the campaign would do the same. Let's just say that my initial impression of it wasn't so good. But I was willing to hold off announcing my verdict until I saw more. Unfortunately seeing more didn't change my feelings at all, and I pretty much hate what I've seen of the campaign. Now frankly, I don't think that Mert & Marcus' style suits Gucci. Their work is always recognizable for it's hyper-fection (I know that's not a word, but give it time), and I think that their super exaggerated look has it's place in fashion, Gucci just isn't it. But these photos go beyond exaggeration; they're downright cartoony looking. Seriously, I look at them and I see a digital illustration, not a photograph. I'm assuming that's the point, but I honestly cannot stand the way it looks. The plastic Barbie and Ken doll quality is just extremely unappealing. It's also kind of odd considering that most of Gucci's appeal is based on the suggestion of sex. As far as I'm aware there isn't anything sexy about a Barbie doll. The poses are unappealing as well, and despite what seems like a lot of effort on Raquel's part, I don't see anything "fierce" about them. To me they just look ridiculous and far too modely. Back in the day you never would have seen a Gucci girl hamming it up like some contestant on America's Next Top Model, trying to out-pose the competition. She was far too cool for that. Apparently that's not the case anymore, and that also goes back to Mert & Marcus. Love 'em or hate 'em those poses are very much a part of Mert & Marcus' ouvre. Something about the color palette is bothering me too. Rather than enhancing the warm tones of the clothes, the goldness of the sand is just sort of washing everything out. It's just one big blur of different shades of beige paired with a shade of blue that's better suited to the ocean thanthe sky. Color wise I think the shots with black clothing are marginally better, although that's not saying much. But I think I might be able to look past the aesthetics if these ads had anything at all to do with the look and the message that both the men's and women's collection delivered. Both collections were slick, sharp and very polished looking, they wouldn't be out of place on the streets of any metropolis or in a dimly lit nook at the chicest of nightspots. However, the clothes do look completely out of place in a desert. I mean, I don't demand utter realism from my fashion ads, but the sight of a fur coat or velvet hiphuggers in a desert with the blazing sun glaring off of every surface is a little too ridiculous.







Oddly enough this isn't the first time a Gucci campaign has taken place in a desert. It's happened at least twice before that I can recall, and one of those campaigns, Fall Winter 2000 by Alexei Hay, seems to have inspired this one. There was even a shot of a model in a fur coat reclining on a desert rock (for the record I believe all of the backgrounds used in that campaign were fake/digital). I actually happen to like that old campaign quite a bit. I've been trying to figure out why I like that one and dislike this one, and I suppose it boils down to two things; while the backgrounds in that F/W 2000 campaign look intentionally fake the models themselves don't, and the incongruity of the backgrounds (there were also shots that took place in front of a freeway overpass and on a stormy beach) seemed intentionally weird, whereas this background in the Moroccan desert probably wasn't meant to be as incongruous as it is. Those ads didn't make sense, and I get the feeling they weren't supposed to. They were just supposed to be beautiful, unusual images, and that's exactly what they are. I don't think this new campaign has either of those qualities going for it. More than anything I'm just disappointed that this collection, easily Giannini's best and probably just a fluke, wasn't better represented in print. It deserved to be.

images from oystermag.com, stylelist.com and twitter/rushes via ThiagoMello at tFS

Thursday, July 8, 2010

Paris, Je ne t'aime...

Jean Paul Gaultier

You know it's like clockwork, twice a year at six month intervals I'm reminded of just how much I used to love Gaultier. I wish I still did but I just don't anymore. In fact there are times, like last season, where I don't even like Gaultier's haute couture. I've wondered if maybe I've changed, that I've seen more of fashion than I had when I first became aware of Gaultier's work, or that my taste has simply evolved, or maybe even that I just idealize his past collections. But then I've looked at those older collections, the ones that left an impression, the ones I loved then and still love now, and it's plain to me that it isn't me that's changed, it's Gaultier.

As for what has changed about his work, that's not as easy to pinpoint as it is with, say, Galliano's work at Dior. The general impression I'm left with is that these days there isn't much subtlety in Gaultier's work any more. It's a given that he's always liked to play with wit, subversion and kitsch, but these days it seems like those elements are the dominant ones, whereas in the past his couture collections were a wonderful mix of wit, intentional bad taste, faultless French chic and old school glamour with whatever his seasonal inspiration happened to be. Comparing his older work to his newer work is like comparing wry humor to slapstick. The former uses intelligence to make you laugh, the latter uses silliness. To me this season's collection highlights that difference between Gaultier's past and present extremely well. The collection was inspired by Paris via Yves Saint Laurent's infamous 40s collection of 1971. That collection, if not the most famous collection of Saint Laurent's 40 year career, is certainly one of the most famous. It's been extensively referenced by many, many contemporary designers over the years. The look of that collection is instantly recognizable; turban, red lips, a fox fur chubbie or stole, ruched jersey dress, stockings and heels. Once you know the formula you can see exactly where Gaultier found his inspiration this season, from the exaggerated knotted turbans (or hair styled to look like turbans), to the exaggerated rounded shoulders on coats and jackets, and the fishnet stockings with exaggerated Cuban heels that were actually a photo print of the Eiffel Tower. Notice I'm using the word exaggerated to describe everything. That was the overall effect; too much. Considering that the original Saint Laurent look is pretty exaggerated to begin with, Gaultier's riffs seemed more like caricatures than anything else. Paris isn't a new inspiration for Gaultier, in fact it's where he always seems to wind up even when his inspiration comes from somewhere else. That innate Frenchness is why so many people regard him as this generation's Saint Laurent. So it was disappointing to see him channeling that inspiration in such a cartoony, almost childish way this time around.




That lack of subtlety is really what bothers me about Gaultier these days. He just sort of whacks you over the head with how "witty", "ironic" or "chic" each look is, instead of letting you decide on your own whether they are or not. Even the shout outs to Saint Laurent, which have always been present in Gaultier's couture collections, are done in such a loud, obnoxious, tactless kind of way. I think it's safe to say that most people who are attending a Gaultier Haute Couture collection, whether as a client, critic, or editor would be able to recognize even the most subtle or subversive nod to YSL, so I really don't understand why Gaultier needed to scream them through a loudspeaker as if he were speaking to the hearing impared. And to me it's not just the styling or the presentations that have changed. I just don't think the clothes have the same magic that they used to, not for me anyway. Of course they're beautifully made, and of course his clients will buy them, but it's been a while since he sent something down a runway that took my breath away or made me do a double take. Even his extravagant show pieces don't do anything for me anymore, because they're usually so far over the top that they could make some of Galliano's mile-wide ballgowns seem almost subtle by comparison. I don't know, maybe this is the real Gaultier and all of those collections where he created sophisticated, sexy, chic, subversive clothes that were presented in an equally sophisticated, sexy, chic, subversive way were just the result of Gaultier holding back. If that's the case then I personally wouldn't mind seeing him shackle his more outlandish impulses.

Take a look at some of his older collections and see if you feel the same way.

Spring Summer 2001
Spring Summer 2002
Fall Winter 2002
Fall Winter 2003
Spring Summer 2004

all images from Style.com