Friday, March 28, 2014

Chanel Spring 2014 Haute Couture

                        Now I have finally gotten to this review! Hooray! I can't believe I've waited this long already! Well, I better get to it now; couture waits for no one.
                          Look 1 was boring, just plain white, with an almost invisible flower pattern. I loved 2's skirt and metallic color, but I hate super short tops. It looks like your wearing a kid's shirt, with really long sleeves. 3 was very elegant and spring-like. Though the flowers were subtle, but you could see them. They reminded me of baby's breath flowers. When looking at 4, the first thing that comes to mind is, EW. Did they original have a jumpsuit, but cut it right in the middle? 5's beauty came from its simplicity; the skirt mysteriously slips right into the top, and the way the skirt is buttoned together gave it a very relaxed look. 6 was filler, with some soccer/robot gear added.
                      Look 7 was another example of filler. Plain beige, with the top being split up into strange triangular shapes. And what's with the fanny pack? I think they get their fabric from Claire's cloth refuse. Then we had more half shirts. 10 was very pretty and ''spring'', but it just seemed like another random Chanel look. Soft gray print, with some color sprinkled around. How many times has that been done before? (many). Look 12 was beautifully textured in a snow colored flurry of glitter. Not very spring like, but certainly a chic exception. 13 reminded me a lot of Mugler, in a very bad, cliched way. If you look at just 5 pictures of Mugler's work from the 80's and 90's, you'd think, ''Oh, he just does a ton of robot clothes!". Which, duh, is wrong. But this was made out of that idea. 16 was an overpowering flurry of rainbow pastels. I just love couture inspired by 60's remake shirts from Gap Kids. Seriously. (Not).
                      Too many of the looks were filler. Just pink, gray, and silver too-small tops and suctioned in waists. Blah. And the printed ones were far too ''hotel curtain.'' 26 was frightening in an odd way; it reminded me of something I'd wear when I don't feel like getting all glammed up. Couture is about the fantasy, and for those who can afford it, a fantasy turned reality. If your going to make normal clothes, then make them radically cheaper. 27 was actually pretty cute, with the very light pink shade and thin sparkly metallic stripes. And 28 had light, multicolored stripes. I also loved how the shape of the jacket lightly hugged the hips... hmmmm... maybe this collections merits come from the ''light'' looks? Anyway, it  certainly was  a highlight. 29, again, wonderful! Finally! The only problem was the addition of a belt, which gave an unflattering shape in the middle. The tan-ish shade, pleats, and collar were so elegant and cute. And I have no problem calling something cute. Cute is awesome and powerful. 30 elicited a significant amount of tears; all these fab looks, and then the sheer (ha) horror of 30? NOOOOOOO!
                         Next we had more sheer looks, but 35's blue was perfectly spring, and though being sheer, I'd love it with a slip underneath. The blue shade was so light, and floral. It actually looked like a plant color. In my mind at least. 37 was another favorite; it had many of the aspects of a gown, but it was a short dress. The blue and red specks were glittery, and the white sash made it gorgeously formal. Totally unique. I'd never really seen anything like it. 38 was rather terrible and childish. Blue and red didn't work this time, and again: what is with the short shirts? They just look too small, not stylish! 39's fabric looked cheap and plastic. Many of the next looks were boring, with prints like cheap swim team bathing suits. But in 44, I saw some very subtle inspiration from the last Gaultier couture show. This was not butterfly themed, but the lush and feathery texture was very similar. The deep blue metallics were fantastic, and the dress was so cool and casual, at the same time. 45 was a super punked up version of 44. I wish it were from the past, because it would've looked great in the Chaos to Couture exhibit! The middle especially reminded of Gaultier's butterfly corset, in the shape and shade.
                    Look 46 was a more dark and detailed version of 45. And yet again: I love love love feathery looks. Especially this one, with the gothic black color, drama, and shape. Drama is a positive in reality TV, and in couture! Oh the coincidence. One thing I really appreciated about this collection was the spring aspect. I hate spring/summer collections that have jumbo fur coats or heavy wool. 48 was very spring, especially with the feathery blue skirt. And yes, the top was sheer, but it was so pretty that with a slip, it would look fine. 52 repeated the infamous robot shape, this time more sheer and glittery. I didn't like the shapelessness. It reminded me of a sack of potatoes! 54's top was very pretty; I really loved the mix of light blue and green, and the wrap aspect. But the skirt reminded me of that board at a hard ware store, with all the paint options on tiny cards. Couture is elegant and light asa feather. No tools or ''tough'' stuff please! 55 was one of my most favorites. This collection is also summer, and this was the most ''summer'' of them all. The dress perfectly hugged the middle , and I can only imagine how soft the orange, purple, and white fuzzy skirt was. 56 expanded on 55, but the brown and yellow was more fall, and not very appealing.
                     Look 57 seemed like filler, and a copy of all of the sparkly low cut Marc Jacobs gowns. I love a lot Marc's work, but not copies  from other labels. I found a favorite in 59; admittedly it was very winter-y, but in the best Chanel-snow princess way. Subtle sparkle, long, thin, and feathery at the bottom. 61 looked just like plastic! I'm going to assume the fabric is expensive... so why make it  appear cheap? Expensive-mirage is everywhere... but cheap-mirage? Please stop! 64 was presented as a wedding dress (with the little boy carrying the train), but it didn't have any... um... pizzazz?The plainness just made the casualness even more obvious.
                    This was one of my favorite couture collections; the biggest merits were good use of color and texture, and (when used!) good shape. The negatives would have to be some filler, especially in the long sparkly dress department. Now if only I could afford all this!

No comments:

Post a Comment