This collection was disappointing. It wasn't horrible, and as with most collections it had it's highlights, but considering that Schiaparelli had been dormant for so long, and now has a new designer...wouldn't they try to make it a little bit more exciting? I don't mean provoking to provoke, or ridiculous cleavage dresses, but something fun! Something Elsa would do herself.
The first look was pretty horrible. A sheet folded into a dress. The print looked like something a Whole Food's water bottle would have. 2 was just a sloppy Celine suit clone. 3 was okay, but it doesn't belong in a Schiaparelli show; It belongs in Dolce and Gabbana! Look 4 luckily brought something interesting. The slightly off-white dress flowed and looked so smooth, with a fluffy flower(?) holding up the skirt. I loved the white metallic jacket and it's ruffles, too. What was 5 supposed to be? A wrap dress put on the wrong way? Look 6 had a 70's/techno thing. The stripes and colors went together perfectly, but the dress had no shape! You have to wonder how something is ''made to meaaure'' when it has to be that wide.The dress of look 7 was nothing to squeal over (that is what fashion is for, after all!), but the jacket was fabulous. A white cropped jacket, with huge circular puffs at the end of the sleeves. This is something I could actually see Schiaparelli her self doing, or at least liking.
Look 8 was much better than some of the looks, and had a nostalgic early 80's Oscar De La Renta look, with the polka dots and puffy sleeves. Pastel colors for the dots reminded me of a clown, and Schiaparelli did have a circus themed show back in her day. Look 11 was a favorite. The print of children looked like a 30's-40's kid wall paper (and that is a compliment!). I really didn't like 12. Colors didn't work, and it looked like cheap replica Baroque decorations. I won't even go into how much 14 copied the Dior wedding dress Jennifer Lawrence wore to the Oscar's. We are paying tribute to SUCH an iconic couture house, one which has, may I mention again, been dormant for years. Is it pushing it too hard to expect pieces that are for the house, and not copies of others? Look 15's pants and top had a hotel-wallpaper print, and the sleeves were so garish.
I really liked 16. A fitted pale blue dress with a leaf(?) print, and a full layer of black tulle over it. The best part was the skirt. It flowed perfectly. 17's blue jacket was fun (and very luxurious), but the shorts were typical and the top was, yes, another copy of another designer, in my opinion Comme Des Garcon, with the folds and twists. Look 18 was one of the better looks; it reminded me of something Carolina Herrera would do. I love Carolina Herrera's designs, but she's a ready to wear designer, and this is a couture show! For lack of better words, could we have something just a little, I don't know...CRAZY? One of the things I highly disagree with is the overwhelming effort to defend boring couture shows. Everyone knows it's bland and stupid when a designer sends models down the runway in a denim dress, or just black suits, but they still defend it and give it some ''artsy'' and precocious argument.
The last look, 20, was disappointing. The only thing that made it bridal was the veil, which can be bought anywhere else (and for much cheaper). The tropical embroidery at the bottom of the jacket looked like souvenir jewelry from a trip to Florida. Schiaparelli's reopening was something I really anticipated. I (and I'm sure many others) expected iconic Schiap pieces, colors, and avant garde outfits. If you believe that all clothing has to fit into the rigid standards of wear -ability our society has, then you really don't like Schiaparelli.
On a more blog-ish note, New York Fashion Week/Fashion Month is starting today. I will start putting out my reviews for those, but I will have a review of the Chanel Haute Couture show soon. I can't skip that!
No comments:
Post a Comment