Laughing in the face of fashion
Posted by Lucky on Jan 16, 2010
Tomorrow the Golden Globes will mark the official beginning of the international 2010 fashion year. Unroll the red carpet and unpack your gowns! Bring on the paparazzi and magazine “people” pages!
Yet, in spite of the fact that various (non-fashion) people keep coming up to me and announcing they “feel in their bones it’s going to be a great year”, a number of things about the show are giving me pause for thought. For unlike last year’s Globes, where Jennifer Lopez in plunging gold Marchesa and Drew Barrymore in bias-cut Dior ice-blue chiffon provided a sort of glamour-based antidote to the prevailing recessionary gloom, a fashion statement about dressing up in the face of adversity, this year clothes seem destined to play a much smaller role in the proceedings. From films to figureheads, the emphasis, it is a-changin’.
It was clear things would be different as soon as the Hollywood Foreign Press Association announced they had decided to pick a host for the first time since 1995, and that host would be none other than … that great British fashionplate Ricky Gervais. Tom Ford, where are you when we need you?
Busy dressing his Best Actor (Drama) nominee, Colin Firth, apparently. In contrast to Oscar hosts such as the super-suave Hugh Jackman or the trim and tailored Billy Crystal, Gervais has made something of a name for himself by playing a schlub – not just on-screen in The Office and the films Ghost Town and The Invention of Lying but in real life, stalking the streets of New York in baggy T-shirts and gym shorts. He even admitted on his blog, rather proudly, that last spring he toured the White House in his pyjamas, as when the invitation came from the Obamas all his proper clothes were at the dry cleaners.
Indeed, as far as I can tell, Gervais’ involvement with fashion has been limited to his appearance in a PETA video with the singer Pink: he played a skinned rabbit demanding his “coat” back from a woman retrieving her outerwear in a restaurant. Of course, he also designed a messenger bag featuring a pink drawing of one of his cartoon “Flanimals” for Manbagcompany.com, to be auctioned for a prostate cancer charity. And, granted, he is aware of what he wears; he likes to say he has to buy new clothes every three months because it beats going on a diet.
But though the indications are that Gervais will don the requisite tux on Sunday, his appearance does raise two questions: first, will he make his usual snide comments about the nominees – the kind that make people’s mouths twitch on camera, unsure whether they should laugh or cry – or will he cave in under pressure to make nice with the industry; and second, does this mark the beginning of the end of the fashion/Hollywood symbiosis?
Certainly, his fellow award presenters do not have “adventurous style-setters” written all over their foreheads, either. Some major magazine cover celebs will be represented, but even they are playing safe, sartorially-speaking. Sophia Loren, for example, is guaranteed to be gussied up in sequins and cleavage, but she’s also a loyal Armani-ite, so the chances are it will be restrained, decorous sequins and cleavage. Nicole Kidman, after years of being a fashion pioneer (remember the chartreuse Dior?), seems to have settled into a comfortable, if skintight, L’Wren Scott rhythm (see her black waistcoat and trousers at the People’s Choice Awards earlier this month). And Jennifer Aniston appears entrenched in the minimalist camp. As for the men – Tom Hanks, Leonardo DiCaprio, Robert De Niro – they ceased to make waves long ago. Mickey Rourke is the biggest wild card, but given his appearance last year in a velvet tux, sequinned scarf, and waist chain, the chances are his look will prompt raised eyebrows not copy-cat spend.
And as with the presenters, so the situation with Best Picture films is even more dire. After all, one of the hottest movies of the year features almost no clothes at all, just necklaces and loincloths. I’m speaking of Avatar, of course. And while Proenza Schouler did make a spring/summer collection featuring body-con sweaters and fish scale dresses very much like the skin of the Na’vi, it’s hard to imagine the industry embracing the trend.
Then there’s The Hurt Locker (yes, military is in, but not that kind of dust-covered military); Precious (fashion as unattainable fantasy); and Up In the Air, where the gorgeous cast seems locked in middle-management dark suits. Inglourious Basterds, featuring Diane Kruger in 1940s fashions, had the potential to influence style, but the decision to focus the advertising campaign on Brad Pitt in that moustache pretty much squashed it.
And the Comedy or Musical category isn’t any more promising. In 500 Days of Summer, Zooey Deschanel is cute enough to be a spokesperson, but her cinematic clothes are strictly last year; as for The Hangover – well, the name says it all. Meryl Streep’s double bill, It’s Complicated and Julie & Julia, showcases an astonishing talent, but one that also announced before her 2009 Screen Actors Guild Best Actress win, “Well, I didn’t even buy a dress.” Only Nine, with its Swarovski-encrusted showgirl numbers, seems destined to create style sparks, though the movie is so oddly constructed – a string of one-song wonders by various divas – that no single garment makes much of an impact. What’s ABS by Allen Schwartz, the fashion brand famous for its ability to identify THE dress after every awards show and reproduce it in hours, going to do?
Somehow, I don’t see the question keeping Gervais up at night. The luxury houses, however, for whom the awards season normally provides months of free marketing fodder, well … does anyone have anything to help them sleep?
source:http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/eb54670c-0160-11df-8c54-00144feabdc0.html
