[hautechild]

Actually, not as bad as expecting, Giles seems to have reigned himself in a little, although he is capable of good, non-gimmicky work! And this is not to my taste at all so I find it hard to judge but I personally prefer it to Archs' last collection for Ungaro, at least the clothes fit...still not convinced they should keep Ungaro going though. I suppose if Giles collection sells they will regardless of anything else.

[liberty33r1b]

the poor label really has to suffer a lot....

[Botnus]

A damn mess...

Background reminds me of 2-3 previous season of Dior Couture

[Salvatore]

This seems to be very close to Ungaro actually. Especially the lace pieces.

[helmut.newton]

I don't see anything intrinsically Ungaro about this collection. Ungaro was known for three things; bold colour combinations, mixing printed patterns together and above all, he was a master at drape. On top of that, he managed to combine all three into a very feminine and sensual vision.

What Giles and Katie have given us is a humorous take on the Ungaro legacy, yet it does not translate in the way that his own collection would. This humour translates into something more farcical and almost insulting to the House of Ungaro. I, for one, am not laughing at this joke of a collection. It's also a shame that we will have to suffer through this collection in Love Magazine and everywhere else that Giles and Katie are connected to.

I think, in retrospect, Peter Dundas was the most successful designer for Ungaro. Sure, his collections weren't perfect, but they were as close to modern and relevant as Ungaro could possibly get given their ownership and mismanagement.

[Zazie]

I agree. This is actually worse than Lohan/Archs, as at least there is serious tailoring in the ruched pieces by Archs in the previous spring collection. Minus the silly sequined pasties (no doubt Lohan's idea of "cool") and other ridiculous touches, it was a decent enough collection with quite good ruching and bias techniques, if I correctly recall.

I hate the lack of direction and the awful, awful gimmicks here, the pieces of boa, the flower buttons, and to top it all, the ugly "Giles" prints. I find it more tasteless than Lohan/Archs, especially all the transparent "boudoir" pieces and that gold toga piece slashed open at the front. It reminds me of Galliano at his worst for Dior.

And does anyone else think it is unseemly for a fashion editor to go and TRY ON CLOTHES at a fashion designer's atelier??? I understand if some models are parading for the said editor to have a first preview, but it is just rubbing it in about the freebies that editors get in return for their biased support, not to mention the kickbacks, and lucrative "consulting".

I feel sorry for the poor clueless millionaire who bought Ungaro - he must have thought he finally got an "insider", but Giles is one of the least talented but highly favored designers around, and he's on his way to Jeremy Scott status. Much better to have signed on someone more serious, eg. Erdem, or to have given Archs another shot *without* Lohan.

[MagFan]

daylife

[hautechild]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zazie Much better to have signed on someone more serious, eg. Erdem, or to have given Archs another shot *without* Lohan.

I thought Lohan didn't have any input into the F/W collection? Didn't they terminate their contract with her prior to that?

[Zazie]

Quote:

Originally Posted by hautechild I thought Lohan didn't have any input into the F/W collection? Didn't they terminate their contract with her prior to that?

I was mostly refering to the Spring Collection in referring to Lohan/Archs, but yes FW was Archs alone. I thought it was a decent, if not outstanding collection, with nice fortuny pleated little black dresses, decent color combinations, and lots of the familiar Ungaro ruching. She could have had another stab at this Spring Collection, to see what she could have done with prints, ruching techniques and colors, all key pillars for Ungaro.

Imagine this dress in a lovely shade of red, much better than Giles.

[nothingless]

Two HQs!

getty

[dodencebt]

Okay, I am really sorry to say this but I needed a few seconds to calm down from the screaming I did. I am crossing out the Ungaro name from my fashion brands list. Seriously.
This is the worst thing I've seen in.. god knows how long. At least Lindsay's collection didn't have this.. tackiness in it.
****Edited***** I might as well get a knife and kill myself.
This is.. just awful for my taste.

[TaylorBinque]

Well,,I don't feel it. Yep, this had mood and sort of fun, i guess but I don't find the sexiness and luxe of the collection. I hope he fids better direction next season, if he's around.

[ForChicSake]

too distracted by the damn flowers at the back, a few nice pieces nothing special

[maxlinden]

I thought the Hair&Make up was terrible but the clothes were chic and youthful(a little). Love all the workmanship, MUCH better then the "Lohan Tragedy"

[Versace-Goddess]

Not bad at all for me. Looks more like the old Ungaro days are back, which i liked it because it was the True Ungaro, the same now.