If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
this is dreadful. silly shapes only outshined by the even sillier palette. Never been a fan but I can usually see the appeal of brands that I don't particularly embrace — but not here. The textures don't even look appealing.
There's something really unsettling about this. Like a bunch of mental patients who escaped after the apocalypse wandering around with relic's of pop culture's past. The odd silhouettes, the odd assortment of references, and the wacky wigs that make no attempt to look real is all very disturbing.
It is either Chaplin or a clown parade at CDG. This time the big shoes are colourful.
Accessories a bucket and squirt flower?
All that said, I have the utmost respect for how CDG nurture talent and manage retail. I just don't get clothes that look like either a costume or a cry for help.
The pieces playing with proportion and volume - tiny lapels, high button stance, cutaway jacket shapes - are pretty solid. Silhouettes on the pants are crazy, and I like them.
Silks, brocades, prints - all Comme signatures. Rei constantly talks about exploring ugliness and garishness. Don't know why anyone who agrees with the spirit with which the house works, likes reading Rei's interviews, or digs their "80s/90s" collections is hating on them now...
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying I love all of this, but it's more or less the same approach they've taken, manifested in different visual directions over the years. Last S/S they sent out printed skirts and everyone went nuts for it.
I can appreciate playing with proportions but I'm not a fan of it when it becomes exaggerated to the point of comedy. I will always like CDG for what it does best...the solid cuts of blazers and jackets and the amazing material on their more basic items.
My favorite piece this entire winter has been a boiled wool coat...I wear it daily and it's one of those pieces that feels classic in cut and material...feels like it belongs on me.
But this presentation just seems abysmal and feels forced. It's almost a satire of fashion itself in a way, like something you see in a comedy that's making fun of the whole thing. The patterns, the proportions...even most of the non-outerwear material looks cheap.
Nothing else to really note, unfortunately. I'll always respect the CDG pieces that I have and the legacy of the label but it just feels like the wheels fell off of this particular collection somewhere.
... it becomes exaggerated to the point of comedy ... It's almost a satire of fashion itself in a way, like something you see in a comedy that's making fun of the whole thing ... material looks cheap ...
I feel like all of the elements that you're complaining about here are practically tenets of the entire comme des garcons philosophy - something I see fairly often in threads about the CdG shows. Sure, they make a nice blazer on occasion but I don't think that's even close to 'what they do best.' I think this collection is pretty much what CdG does best. It may not be a great CdG collection although I happen to personally think it's a good one but you don't see anybody going into the Rick Owens thread and saying 'I really like his leather jackets but why does he have to make all this weird monotone semi-futuristic stuff?'
I just don't get clothes that look like either a costume or a cry for help.
i think alot of people walk away thinkin that after lookin at an entire homme+ collection but theres some extremely solid fits here , more than a handful even .
this fits my fave so far . take away the wig and its pretty great . nice soft lookin fabric and i even like the colors , blue shirt under black and the collar has some kinda black trim . slightly cropped wide trousers and some flat soled shoes . u kno this shit looks good
i dont often view homme+ collections and finish thinkin , dammmmmmm yes ( i did say that with ss09 tho ) . theres usually alot more i dislike in each one but the fits and individual pieces i do like are stellar imo . and for all the shit i do like in each collection im sure theres people who prefer the shit i dont like instead , so its somethin to pick from for everyone ( whos into this shit )
More and more I just like the basics at CDGH+. Washed polyester pants, Boiled wool jackets, just great stuff, but I'm not feeling this runway or F/W '10 for that matter.
I can appreciate playing with proportions but I'm not a fan of it when it becomes exaggerated to the point of comedy. I will always like CDG for what it does best...the solid cuts of blazers and jackets and the amazing material on their more basic items.
My favorite piece this entire winter has been a boiled wool coat...I wear it daily and it's one of those pieces that feels classic in cut and material...feels like it belongs on me.
But this presentation just seems abysmal and feels forced. It's almost a satire of fashion itself in a way, like something you see in a comedy that's making fun of the whole thing. The patterns, the proportions...even most of the non-outerwear material looks cheap.
Nothing else to really note, unfortunately. I'll always respect the CDG pieces that I have and the legacy of the label but it just feels like the wheels fell off of this particular collection somewhere.
That was the point. The idea was to reflect decadence, in the bad sense of the word.
Fashion is a form of ugliness so intolerable that we have to alter it every six months - Oscar Wilde
I feel like all of the elements that you're complaining about here are practically tenets of the entire comme des garcons philosophy - something I see fairly often in threads about the CdG shows. Sure, they make a nice blazer on occasion but I don't think that's even close to 'what they do best.' I think this collection is pretty much what CdG does best.
nailed it
from the photos alone, the fabrics and cuts look unmistakably Comme, probably more so than the past few seasons.
Comment