The other great collection out of New York was Marc Jacobs, who always puts on a good show but not necessarily one that I like (case in point: last season). You can't see this in most coverage, but it started with a gold curtain revealing the models on a spotlit stage, posed in a jazz-dancehall style scene like something out of All That Jazz; I'm sure the kind of thing that would give you shivers of excitement if you were lucky enough to be in the audience.
Hamish Bowles (of Vogue) wrote in his review "this was not another playful twist on period dressing", referencing the 1970s extravaganza of last Spring, because although there were 1920s-dropped waists and headscarves and gingham and sassy attitudes, there wasn't the same costume element. Extended from the flapper look, a new silhouette emerged out of the tight tops pulled low over equally narrow , long skirts. And with all the cellophane wrapping and shimmering ruffles and gingham it was definitely forward, rather that backward looking.
Over at style.com, Nicole Phelps thought the whole thing "fell a little bit flat" and that the set was more exciting than the clothes. Hmmm. Sure, at first I wasn't at all impressed with the clothes , but I think that the styling was responsible for obscuring some of the individual pieces. The show wasn't styled for consumers to lust over, but I think this sacrifice resulted in, overall, one heck of a show. Maybe part of the reason Phelps didn't like it is that there is definitely something off about it, something totally unusual - which has kept me thinking about it for days.
Finally, let's hand it to those headscarves:
Hamish Bowles (of Vogue) wrote in his review "this was not another playful twist on period dressing", referencing the 1970s extravaganza of last Spring, because although there were 1920s-dropped waists and headscarves and gingham and sassy attitudes, there wasn't the same costume element. Extended from the flapper look, a new silhouette emerged out of the tight tops pulled low over equally narrow , long skirts. And with all the cellophane wrapping and shimmering ruffles and gingham it was definitely forward, rather that backward looking.Over at style.com, Nicole Phelps thought the whole thing "fell a little bit flat" and that the set was more exciting than the clothes. Hmmm. Sure, at first I wasn't at all impressed with the clothes , but I think that the styling was responsible for obscuring some of the individual pieces. The show wasn't styled for consumers to lust over, but I think this sacrifice resulted in, overall, one heck of a show. Maybe part of the reason Phelps didn't like it is that there is definitely something off about it, something totally unusual - which has kept me thinking about it for days.
Finally, let's hand it to those headscarves:
First photo from models.com
Runway photos from vogue.com
No comments:
Post a Comment