Marc Jacobs S/S 08 NYC

[mimiko]

I wonder who the stylist was

 

[chloehandbags]

THINK OUTSIDE THE BOX (as the mise-en-scène suggests).

This is REconstruction not deconstruction. Do you see anything unfinished?

No, you're right, vintage designs have been deconstructed and then (IMO, unattractively) reconstructed.

I don't see the point of taking interesting, beautiful designs and ruining them, like this.

I know it's supposed to be clever, but I just find it gimmicky. I don't think people from the future will view this as fashion's finest hour.

I'm all for modern adaptations of older designs (isn't that what fashion is, really, all about?), but that can easily be done in an aesthetically pleasing way.

Things are not as they seem as is shown throughout the collection. (masks,witness the GENIUS construction of the faux sleeves, the inventive miniature mules.)

The surrealistic touches are fantastic and reference Schiaparelli NOT chanel, Dries etc that some of you critics love to dream up.

To be fair, I think that the people who have said that this collection reminds them of the work of other contemporary designers are also correct, as these contemporary designers were also inspired by designers from the same era as Marc was; such as Schiaparelli.

 

[disco54]

^^^^ agreed , i think its OK to look at older periods , fashion has gone through all its cycles and its a matter of building or tweaking on it. To be original doesnt mean you take decent dresses cut them up , fix them up again and voila ........ohh and ahh. From artistic point of view that might be great , but art is subjective. Practicality and sense are not , most of these clothes interesting they maybe are pure non sense . I find something very 'cartoonish " about this . I hope doesnt have this in mind for LV. He had established i nice sihlouette in the fall , he should develop that rather jumping to another era.

 

[chloehandbags]

^ I totally agree.

 

[disco54]

type o...I hope he doesnt have this in mind for LV. He had established a nice sihlouette in the fall , he should develop that rather than jumping to another era.

 

[liberty33r1b]

this here screams Chanel:

could he possibly be karl lagerfeld's heir??

 

[youarearockstar]

I really, really hope that those ornamental pieces/hats are going to be available for consumer purchase. I'm already lusting over the bedazzled devil horns that Inna Pilipenko worn. Plus, all the animal clasps and details in the jewelry are so interesting for me. Especially the mouse necklace that Uliana had on (which reminds me of the mouse MxMJ flats a few years back). Its such a bad girl's prom-night...I love the details more and more.

 

[luckyme]

Oh I put my finger on, it looks Margiela!

Mutterlein, me too, I thought of Margiela, then it seemed I saw the rise of the "DaDa" art movement again.

 

[liberty33r1b]

but honestly, the shoes are the best part of the whole collection!!! i want all of them!

 

[BerlinRocks]

and I wanted to introduce François Rouan... french artist from Support/Surface (not getting into the he belongs to Support/surfarce or he does not... debats)....
He worked on the canvas... painting one and then taking off every single bit of the canvas to reconstruct another one... so on and so on... inventing new forms from a primary one....

 

[esquire]

Margiela would be good, this is not, looks like marc is spending too much time in the gym.

Or in rehab..

sincerily IMO what make this a great show is the sytiling.. by the way a very Mcqueen-ish hair.

 

[esquire]

this here screams Chanel:


could he possibly be karl lagerfeld's heir??

Never.. he will need to born again.. this time in Europe.

 

[youarearockstar]

I didn't see that anyone had posted the review from Style.com yet. It has a little 'sound bite' from Marc that kind of gives a little insight into the collection:

NEW YORK, September 10, 2007 – At 11 p.m., precisely two hours after his official starting time, Marc Jacobs surprised his audience by running out onto his Stefan Beckman-designed set for a quick bow. Next came the music, Ravel's Boléro, and out filed the models in finale formation. Then here was the first girl (or rather the last, because by now it was clear this extraordinary show was unspooling backward, starting with look 56 and running down to one). She wore a "silly-string guipure gown," her satin under-things peeking out and her heels perched on top of her "too-small pumps." Behind her, an image of the model in nothing but the bra and panties she wore underneath her outfit was projected on two large screens.

Jacobs collaborated with the video artist Charles Atlas to create the film that played simultaneously with the show. They shot the piece Sunday evening, and Atlas spent the whole night in the editing booth finishing it. As for the clothes and accessories, they were just as off-kilter and knock-your-socks-off as the production, with a bonkers surrealist streak. Trompe l'oeil underwear decorated georgette slipdresses, the heels of pumps protruded not from the heel at all but from the ball of the foot, and three-dimensional quilted leather bags were grafted onto square totes. Transparency was a key theme, too: Cashmere sweaters were inset with sheer panels at the waist, and reconstructed black bugle-bead evening dresses came suspended from their nude linings. Gimmicky? You bet. But also fascinating. If you want normal or tame, you're going to have to look on a different runway. Even the suits came with hip-high slits—though, this being Jacobs, the effect was just as often gawky and awkward as it was provocative.

So what was it all about? With most of the models in varying stages of dishabille, Jacobs appeared to be saying something conceptual about the process of getting dressed—or getting undressed—but he was typically vague backstage. "It's cartoon versions of all the women I know—conservative types, vamps, everybody," he allowed. From the looks of two number-emblazoned team-jersey T-shirt dresses that appeared on his runway, there are footballers' wives in the designer's inner circle along with all of those rockers and artists. One thing's for certain: He's moved on from last season's bourgeois austerity. This sublime performance was about sex, which is one of the reasons why we couldn't look away.

– Nicole Phelps

(style.com)

 

[kuba01]

Mutterlein, me too, I thought of Margiela, then it seemed I saw the rise of the "DaDa" art movement again.

I thought so too! Fashion for fashion sakes!! It doesn't mean anything, it isn't inspired by anything, its just fashion for fashion sake!

 

[kuba01]

This sublime performance was about sex, which is one of the reasons why we couldn't look away.

What?! Really?! I thought it was more about sexuality rather than sex itself!

 

[chloehandbags]

type o...I hope he doesnt have this in mind for LV. He had established a nice sihlouette in the fall , he should develop that rather than jumping to another era.

It's OK, I knew what you meant!

 

[youarearockstar]

^^I agree kuba. For me it had much more to do with what tangible aspects of your sexuality you leave on, and which layers you take off; and very little to do with the act of having sex. It wasn't, for me at least, about all of the girls being interested in sex, but more so, how they convey their sexuality and interests and drive through their clothes.

 

[disco54]

i disagree with that article too

What?! Really?! I thought it was more about sexuality rather than sex itself!

The clothes dont show a women whose confident in her sexuality or sex , it shows a troubled late 40s/ early 50s era secretary who found her husband cheating and she has lost it lol......TOTALLY , and she is rummaging through her lingerie , her childrens toys and is off some where , did anyone see the heels..they are bizarre but interesting. The heels are the on the foot palm lol...this collection is disturbing and interesting but not wearable omg hell no!

 

[Kerry]

very disappointing!don't like the flower stuff.the pattern is...
and Unorignal.

 

[BerlinRocks]

i never thought of sex when looking at this collection...
maybe lingerie... but sex??? where is sex or sexuality in there???