Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Ad Campaigns' started by sixtdaily, Oct 29, 2020.
screenshot from Vogue Paris November 2020, digital issue
by Karim Sadli
one word: cheap.
Lol, It’s Chanel x H&M?
I don’t mind these to be honest.
It all looks so cheap
it's very "Hello youth, we are now trying to cater to you. We are now a cool and hip brand no longer just for mature women. Please give us your (parents) money"
It's a very Chanel at the mall kinda-look.
The problem is the customer base they're targeting is already wearing Balenciaga.
Lily-Rose Depp is for Chanel what JLAW is for Dior and Emma Stone/Léa Seydoux/Alicia Vikander are for Louis Vuitton...
Chanel for teenagers lol.
I don't mind it either...I actually like the first shot.
Persisting with their nepotism gives Chanel a problem here, in that her legs really aren't Lily's selling point, so it'll be interesting to see all the tricks they'll use to disguise them... pose like this, crop the image there...
New campaign images:
I disagree. I think Lily-Rose fits Chanel and looks great in it; her 2019 Met Gala look made my jaws drop. She has a combination of both French chic and L.A. cool, which fits the essence of the modern Chanel woman (mid-to-late 2000s Chanel was all about that trope). She is revered as style inspiration for many girls her age and seems to enjoy fashion. In addition, she is the daughter of Vanessa Paradis who also has a connection to Chanel. While her relevancy may have dimmed since 2018 (possibly due to all the bad press her father has gotten), I do not think she is as random of a choice for Chanel as Alicia Vikander is for LV. Though I think she fits Karl's Chanel much more.
I think the campaign is good. It's good photography and slightly uplifting.
I don't mind Lily Rose but I find the use of her as a strategy here, questionable.
It's obvious with this campaign, more than ever before that they are trying to attract millennials.
The clothes are very basic, the styling is very "millennials" and the attitude gives "IG photoshoot".
It's a very accessible campaign.
I don’t mind Lily for Chanel at all probably because of the hole familiar background that makes it less phony. the styling is a little basic but she looks good and some of the shots are very good too.
Chanel is not Instagram. Their customer isn't even in that category. And who in god's name would wear those outfits? They look like cheap Chanel imitations. Lily looks great, but cheap looking clothes are cheap looking clothes no matter who is wearing them. Gisele could probably make them look presentable, but even that would be betting a million.
I'd say Virgine has a good two years left before her mediocre products catch up to her. The pandemic has slowed down sales, so she lucked out this year. Once things pick up her termination will be inevitable.
It's the denim shorts for me!
Chanel under Karl always had that one off-putting element each season which I'm sure he did on purpose to rile people up, but at least the optics looked better. You still hated it, but in the end, the campaign always argued a different case.
In Sadl-ey's instance everything looks cheap, and the H&M reference is spot on but to me, it looks like Juicy Couture for Kids, if it even existed! He shouldn't be shooting for Chanel, sorry. He's not creatively diverse enough for a brand this big. See Willy Vanderperre at Prada!