Givenchy Mens S/S 10 Paris

[KKnardi]

not a interesting collection at all.

 

[BerlinRocks]

^Please make sure that your source is not abbreviated, BerlinRocks or these will be deleted. Thanks

diorboy @ ModelHommes Forum

 

[Scott]

i can see your distinction,berlin. it does have that sort of arabian knights feel about it.

 

[Deleted member 7575]

i used to see skaters doing the same (i didn't really grow up with skaters wearing skinny jeans and converse ... mine were influenced by hip hop and gangsta!!)

I moved to a new neighborhood 2 years ago and it was the first time I saw skaters like that, it's a way of dressing I am just now associating with being "skater".

 

[Zazie]

Hideous beyond words....

 

[Dkammern]

the lights could've gone after the 5th look and i'd tell you this is good.
i don't get his vision for menswear. i really dont. i don't know who wears this, or where, or how can it possibly be styled to make it look half decent.
It feels more like a bad pseudo-punk rehearsal of a tom of finland comic book, than a reflection of future (needless to say current) menswear fashion.

 

[simons]

it gets worse every time i come back and look at it, giving it another chance. i love love LOVE his work for womenswear but it seems he does not give a care for the menswear. his first collection was beyond spectacular but its been getting worse since. there are admit good (boring) pieces but if he thinks putting a "gothic" whatever urban iono print on some shirts are gonna fly, they should hire someone else to do the menswear. we want to wear nice things too!

 

[C0UTUR3 4 SUR3]

I really like this. Not as much as his previous shows, but I'm happy he went in a different direction to keep things fresh. I really want those shoes.

 

[Demelza]

I'm sorry but i dislike the cast. Some of these boys look very muscular. That makes the collection look even worse.

 

[cesarcmma]

I think Cathy Horyn said it best.

I found Riccardo Tisci’s collection for Givenchy just plain tedious. Heavy layers, black and white trousers in broken star patterns, gold metal stars scattered across tops, gold chain mesh t-shirts: a chaotic collection that tried to bully you into thinking this banal stuff was loaded with contemporary significance. Who were these dudes? On the whole, the clothes made me think of footballers who wear free designer clothes.

I have really said nothing. This was a lazy, pretentious, overwrought collection marked with the slight tear stain of Michael Jackson’s legacy, since, according to Tisci, he was to make clothes for the pop star’s concert series. If other designers, like John Galliano, were asked to make clothes for Jackson, we didn’t hear from them. They had enough good sense not to say anything. Besides, many designers are usually involved with making clothes and accessories for a performer’s tour. Yesterday, while going around to the shows, a number of editors said to me, “The Givenchy look is contemporary—a lot of young guys dress like that.” And I replied, “That’s great, but it doesn’t mean the look is interesting.” To me, the Givenchy collection—the gold mesh top and leather shorts, the gold-studded tartan, the layers of baggy shorts over leggings, the Moroccan ethnic influences—smacks of the work of a stylist, rather than the specific vision of a designer. The collection has a cadged look of picking things up from here and yonder, notably Comme des Garcons. This method just betrays insecurity—the insecurity of a designer who doesn’t have a meaningful, real vision. No doubt the references in the collection could be explained by Tisci, but the best shows are generally clear to us—as well as the result of some kind of magic.

 

[mikeijames]

I think Cathy Horyn said it best.

it just shows that cathy horyn does not know what's she's talking about. even a little. perhaps she's trying to stir controversy to get herself un-invited from yet another show....

it's very telling to watch -- even in this forum -- as people RAVE about those transparent looks at dior homme, but decry them here. who else has presented leggings for men on the runway in the past few seasons? maybe marni? maybe calvin klein? also, stylists (generally speaking) do not sketch, do not select fabric, and do not sew the clothes! you're telling me this pair of pants is the work of a stylist....? this is laziness?!? and WHERE ON EARTH DO YOUNG PEOPLE DRESS LIKE THIS?!

men.style.com

 

[the-raven]

i agree. cathy horyn comes across as a frustrated critic who has realised she no longer has a vaild opinion, so why not slate the only show this season that got a standing ovation?!? her write up is such a desparate effort to seem marginal, anything that exudes any form of sexuality intimidates her frigid sensibility.

 

[Zazie]

it just shows that cathy horyn does not know what's she's talking about. even a little. perhaps she's trying to stir controversy to get herself un-invited from yet another show....

it's very telling to watch -- even in this forum -- as people RAVE about those transparent looks at dior homme, but decry them here. who else has presented leggings for men on the runway in the past few seasons? maybe marni? maybe calvin klein? also, stylists (generally speaking) do not sketch, do not select fabric, and do not sew the clothes! you're telling me this pair of pants is the work of a stylist....? this is laziness?!? and WHERE ON EARTH DO YOUNG PEOPLE DRESS LIKE THIS?!

men.style.com

You can't be serious??? Different designers design differently - it doesn't mean that if one designer does a certain thing, eg. transparency, it should therefore be raved about when some other designer take up the same theme. KVA did transparency to show impeccable tailoring and construction details normally hidden, and also to layer shades and hues, eg. white under black, which Yohji Yamamoto did with his women's collection as beautifully. I don't know what kind of "transparency" Tisci is doing, didn't even notice it, since the show's more about gold studs, collaged stars at the crotch and hoods, and that's the whole problem isn't it. And anyone can like or dislike a collection, that's their right. You can agree or disagree, debate the outfits, etc., but no one should be insulted and disparaged for their criticisms.

 

[Zazie]

I personally think there's a lot of potential in the Urban Medieval Arabian Knight concept but it's so crudely and badly executed, it would have been better if he'd done something less "themed". Nicholas Ghesquiere did the Arab kefiyyeh before to fantastic effect - it's years ago but everyone picked it up and it's remembered.

Bernherd Wilhelm did the same street warrior gangsta thing a few seasons ago, and he did it with more flair, imagination, conviction and yes, humour.

 

[mikeijames]

You can't be serious??? Different designers design differently - it doesn't mean that if one designer does a certain thing, eg. transparency, it should therefore be raved about when some other designer take up the same theme. KVA did transparency to show impeccable tailoring and construction details normally hidden, and also to layer shades and hues, eg. white under black, which Yohji Yamamoto did with his women's collection as beautifully. I don't know what kind of "transparency" Tisci is doing, didn't even notice it, since the show's more about gold studs, collaged stars at the crotch and hoods, and that's the whole problem isn't it. And anyone can like or dislike a collection, that's their right. You can agree or disagree, debate the outfits, etc., but no one should be insulted and disparaged for their criticisms.

this is impeccable tailoring?!

men.style.com

 

[mikeijames]

...the show's more about gold studs, collaged stars at the crotch and hoods, and that's the whole problem isn't it. And anyone can like or dislike a collection, that's their right. You can agree or disagree, debate the outfits, etc., but no one should be insulted and disparaged for their criticisms.

anyone can like or dislike this collection on its merits. it's insulting and disparaging TO THE DESIGNER to call these clothes that footballers would get for free. clearly, more thought and craftmanship went into this collection. i mean, we all know that cathy horyn did not receive formal design training. and that's fine. but even she admits,

Yesterday, while going around to the shows, a number of editors said to me, “The Givenchy look is contemporary—a lot of young guys dress like that.”

which shows that other editors did actually have to explain to her the relevance of this look! and she goes further saying,

And I replied, “That’s great, but it doesn’t mean the look is interesting.” To me, the Givenchy collection—the gold mesh top and leather shorts, the gold-studded tartan, the layers of baggy shorts over leggings, the Moroccan ethnic influences—smacks of the work of a stylist, rather than the specific vision of a designer.

since when do stylists CREATE mesh tops in gold? when do stylists decide to choose leather as a fabric for men's shorts (i guess givenchy and lanvin have the same stylists)? reducing a designer of tisci's education and stature to "a stylist" while praising actual stylists (who i do love) like miuccia prada and others just strikes me as ignorant or intentionally disingenuous.

we can agree to disagree, but to trample on this work as if tisci didn't get inspiration from his travels, or choose the fabrics, or sketch these looks, or present them in a fresh, interesting way simply goes too far. we're all entitled to have our opinions, but it's not everyone's right to damage people's careers and their business based on a gut feeling that has no basis in reality.

 

[Dkammern]

^^
Cathy Horyn doesnt go out damaging anyone's career, or at least not Tisci's. She has supported his collections for some time and i think it's only fair that she remarked this seems somewhat "out of touch" if she thinks it is.

You've mentioned her lack of formal fashion training and you make it sound as if that was something bad, but you have to understand it's the New York Times she's writing for and she therefor focus goes beyond construction and other technical aspects. It is only natural that she tries to put this in context (that is, the whole Givenchy brand and it's evolution since the previous season, and what tisci has been doing for women too...)
Her approach must be more on the "sociologic" side. If the styling is the most vanguardist, or he is the first to do gold mesh like this is rather irrelevant to her function stricto sensu.

What tisci has done to Givenchy men is very weird to me. Because yes, he has most certainly covered a spot on the market that was empty and he is able to stick to it without distraction...
BUT
one i still really don't know what potential buyers seriously go for this (not even the soccer players horyn mentioned seem realistic )

two i just dont see why should it be givenchy doing it, when its men's clothing until now had been following a totally different direction (more like the first 6-7 looks maybe) and the raw sophistication of the collections for woman dont really do with this either.

 

[Spike413]

I have to say, as it happens at least once every season, that it comes off as completely juvenile when people say something to the effect of "Oh Cathy's just being a b**** cause she doesn't get it, or cause she's irrelevant, etc." because someone disagrees with her take on a collection.

I'm sorry, but saying she doesn't know what she's talking about because you don't like her opinion? Come on people. Who are any of us to say this is good or bad?

 

[b9409]

I'm sorry, but saying she doesn't know what she's talking about because you don't like her opinion? Come on people. Who are any of us to say this is good or bad?

Are you serious? That is all we do here. The only thing.

I do not see people saying "Frida's Gucci... who are we to say this is bad?" People murder her season after season...

 

[Spike413]

I'm quite serious. Every season I see at least one post in response to a review by Horyn blasting her simply because that person happens to disagree with what she says. I find it absurd and immature to question someone's credibility when speaking their mind and insulting them when you don't like what they have to say, and it begs the question "if she can't express her opinion on the collection without someone calling her out, then why the hell should anybody be allowed to?".