Tom Ford F/W 2024.25 Milan

[Cocteau Stone]

I hate the fact that those tiered ruffled pieces have been "hemmed" just with pinking sheers, so no wonder their fit and flow looks off. They're bit of an afterthought, or perhaps a hasty decision. Same can be felt about the buttons at the start. They're fine, but not right so something immediately feels amiss.

Besides that it's a very straight forward and product driven collection. When tried to give us a touch more fashion, that's where it falls flat. Should have had a stronger consolidation of the looks because it feels like there's too many, when really he just doesn't have the confidence yet to be handling this many looks.

Some time and settling in will do wonders for Peter I think. He certainly has a "back to basics" approach which is done well for the most part and is easy to appreciate in this fashion climate.

 

[GoldenPetals]

The Tom Ford brand is still very young, a baby by fashion standards. I think it's wise for them to continue to develop and refine the Ford identity first, for at least another decade. The brand's aesthetic is very memorable and very promising so letting it cook is probably better, before the company is ready to be reinterpreted.

 

[Kanzai]

First the menswear collection by Dolce Gabbana last month, now this . So Sleek, so Yummy

 

[signifier]

Tom Ford makes me dislike peak lapels on a blazer/suit. Retrograde.

 

[Kennnnn]

The daywear part of this was very Gianni Versace. Some parts of it reminded me of Tom Ford's YSL (the burnt lilac colours, frills, etc), which was great. It's sleek and sexy, but not much of an evolution for the brand.

 

[pvtrickng]

VOGUE.COM

The opening pieces remind me of the Burberry Prorsum AW10 collection.

 

[Lola701]

^^^ OMG… Let’s dream for a moment how glorious Alexandre would be for Tom Ford…

But Peter isn’t going anywhere. He is very much the taste and mood of the current fashion era— one that has the Kardashians/Hadids/Jenners and Housewives as fashion icons. This branding is very much in their direction. The casting is typically children playing dressup in their way cooler parents’ closets— like what Lila is to Kate.

(...And even as critical as we may be-- yourself and your husband and myself will be picking up a coat/jacket/suit for the next winter, regardless LOL)

Sometimes I feel like I have a total different recall of what Tom Ford the designer was so my expectations are somehow different.
I love Tom Ford as a brand and as an aesthetic. As you said, as critical as I may be I will maybe end up buying something…
But what I loved from Tom Ford was the daywear. I have clothes from his Gucci and his YSL and the beauty about that and why I still wear those clothes it’s because it was great daywear with a grown up and sensual allure. I don’t buy eveningwear (unless it’s heavily discounted) so seeing a slinky column dress doesn’t do anything for me. Matter of fact, I have always disliked Tom’s last collection for Gucci! The dresses with the fringes were stunning but the whole thing was too dressy and formal.

My frustration with Tom Ford womenswear has always been the focus on eveningwear, even more when he moved back to LA. The collections were fun but his fashion proposition was essentially glamour athleisure and eveningwear. And I think it played in that perception that his work didn’t felt modern.

And that’s where the contrast between his menswear and his womenswear came from. Even if Peter Hawkings was the design director of menswear, I see a difference. Tom gave you a look! It was styled with much more confidence and fun.

And I know Tom would have never allowed those tacky buttons!

I’ve more desire to shop at Tod’s or N21 than Tom Ford.

 

[GivenchyAddict]

^ I don’t hate it. Very luxurious, very sleek, the styling is on point but… I did not feel anything. I need ‘good’ bad taste from him and to have a bit more on his personal taste. Feels very much a collection done by a studio.

And yes the buttons dear god

 

[disco54]

Terrible casting! Its basically Michael Kors with Fordisms from the late 90s/early 2000s . The clothes are nice in...parts but there is nothing inspiring, no story, no references just blah. In the end it does not matter because this will sell well and there are glamorous clothes here in an industry which seriously is lacking in high octane glamour. Though they really need to improve the casting its really that bad!

 

[Phuel]

Sometimes I feel like I have a total different recall of what Tom Ford the designer was so my expectations are somehow different.
I love Tom Ford as a brand and as an aesthetic. As you said, as critical as I may be I will maybe end up buying something…
But what I loved from Tom Ford was the daywear. I have clothes from his Gucci and his YSL and the beauty about that and why I still wear those clothes it’s because it was great daywear with a grown up and sensual allure. I don’t buy eveningwear (unless it’s heavily discounted) so seeing a slinky column dress doesn’t do anything for me. Matter of fact, I have always disliked Tom’s last collection for Gucci! The dresses with the fringes were stunning but the whole thing was too dressy and formal.

My frustration with Tom Ford womenswear has always been the focus on eveningwear, even more when he moved back to LA. The collections were fun but his fashion proposition was essentially glamour athleisure and eveningwear. And I think it played in that perception that his work didn’t felt modern.

And that’s where the contrast between his menswear and his womenswear came from. Even if Peter Hawkings was the design director of menswear, I see a difference. Tom gave you a look! It was styled with much more confidence and fun.

And I know Tom would have never allowed those tacky buttons!

I’ve more desire to shop at Tod’s or N21 than Tom Ford.

Tom’s Gucci daywear/separates remain supreme. By the early-2000s, he would infuse a deconstructed element to his hi-iglam bourgeoise sensibility in such a sleek manner, that it’s only upon repeated inspection, that you’d be aware of just how much experimental he was than even Yohji/Margiela/Rei at the time. People often just dismiss Tom as the penultimate Hollywood tastemaker because those people were being dressed in his designs, but he had a lot more in common with the likes of Helmut/Ann D/Gaultier when you gave him a second glance— see his A/W 2003 and A/W 2004 shows. None of this sort of subversion is present in Peter’s take on Tom’s Gucci he’s doing for the Tom Ford label— nor is their a sense of bespoke that’s the best of Tom Ford’s namesake line. If I’m being generous, it's actually very Frida’s take on Tom’s Gucci, but ultimately more high-end department store’s design team take on Tom’s Gucci.

if you're thinking about snatching one of the coats but reluctant because of the gold buttons, just replace them with horn ones; they’ll instantly look better, I swear; I do it all he time. I’ve got my eyes on the leather jeans, such a great cut. One thing I’ll give Peter some creds for that unlike everyone else, Peter’s kept the men’s pant tailored slim but not ball-crushingly "skinny", while everyone else has gone so predictably loosey-goosey.

 

[Lola701]

Tom’s Gucci daywear/separates remain supreme. By the early-2000s, he would infuse a deconstructed element to his hi-iglam bourgeoise sensibility in such a sleek manner, that it’s only upon repeated inspection, that you’d be aware of just how much experimental he was than even Yohji/Margiela/Rei at the time. People often just dismiss Tom as the penultimate Hollywood tastemaker because those people were being dressed in his designs, but he had a lot more in common with the likes of Helmut/Ann D/Gaultier when you gave him a second glance— see his A/W 2003 and A/W 2004 shows. None of this sort of subversion is present in Peter’s take on Tom’s Gucci he’s doing for the Tom Ford label— nor is their a sense of bespoke that’s the best of Tom Ford’s namesake line. If I’m being generous, it's actually very Frida’s take on Tom’s Gucci, but ultimately more high-end department store’s design team take on Tom’s Gucci.

if you're thinking about snatching one of the coats but reluctant because of the gold buttons, just replace them with horn ones; they’ll instantly look better, I swear; I do it all he time. I’ve got my eyes on the leather jeans, such a great cut. One thing I’ll give Peter some creds for that unlike everyone else, Peter’s kept the men’s pant tailored slim but not ball-crushingly "skinny", while everyone else has gone so predictably loosey-goosey.

Yes it’s very Frida…
My favorite Gucci collections under Tom were Spring 2001 and Fall 2002. My least favorite are Fall 1995 and Fall 2004…
But the collection that had the most influence on my style is fall 2001. Even if I don’t wear baby doll dresses anymore, that collection is me…Even down to the no make up look.

And that collection was mostly daywear! That idea that you can be casual with a huge Mongolian fur coat!
So when I see those sheer numbers at the end that screams Hollywood in the worst possible (Tom always dressed actors more tastefully than singers ironically), I’m not sure it’s the representation of Tom I love. But people love it on social media. Because for them, Tom is sex. This is sex and party. But those people don’t buy the clothes…

I have the ultimate peacoat with gold buttons from the Paris in Rome Metiers d’arts collection and somewhere an old Balenciaga menswear by Barnabé Hardy so I might pass on those coats. I think the main pieces here are the dark pantsuits in wool.

I think if anyone is thinking about a classic peacoat with gold buttons and have the budget for HF, I would advise them to go to Celine rather than Tom Ford this time.

 

[LadyJunon]

While I'm aware that a good chunk of the reception here is negative, this is probably my favourite collection from the brand in a long time. The 00s c*nty vibes help a lot.

Hawkings really fixed the core issue I've had with the brand, which was the lack of women's daywear/workwear. With a brand at the scale of Tom Ford, eveningwear is usually just window dressing. I feel like that was probably a factor that affected the brand's ready-to-wear sales towards the end of Ford's tenure, which was a shame considering that Ford's Gucci had very strong daywear options.

The suiting and outerwear is the star of the show here. The feminised three-piece-suits were the epitome of chic and the semitransparent trench coats looked so cool. I didn't mind the buttons on the opening military-inspired pieces that much, but they looked better on the beige and gold than on the cool-toned black. I personally would've chosen silver for the black pieces.

The eveningwear was good too, despite the naked dress cliché. While I like a good naked dress, I've always appreciated how Ford was capable of fusing that same sex-appeal into a more "modest" design. The ruffled dresses, despite the raw hems, were much more on-brand as an offering.

 

[Alquimista]

I can't say I don't love it, but the problem is that many pieces are dated, straight from a 2005 closet, very elegant closet but not the one to wear now. That being said, the TF look is as powerful and seductive as ever, it just needs better pieces to embody it.

 

[tricotineacetat]

Tom’s Gucci daywear/separates remain supreme. By the early-2000s, he would infuse a deconstructed element to his hi-iglam bourgeoise sensibility in such a sleek manner, that it’s only upon repeated inspection, that you’d be aware of just how much experimental he was than even Yohji/Margiela/Rei at the time. People often just dismiss Tom as the penultimate Hollywood tastemaker because those people were being dressed in his designs, but he had a lot more in common with the likes of Helmut/Ann D/Gaultier when you gave him a second glance— see his A/W 2003 and A/W 2004 shows. None of this sort of subversion is present in Peter’s take on Tom’s Gucci he’s doing for the Tom Ford label— nor is their a sense of bespoke that’s the best of Tom Ford’s namesake line. If I’m being generous, it's actually very Frida’s take on Tom’s Gucci, but ultimately more high-end department store’s design team take on Tom’s Gucci.

if you're thinking about snatching one of the coats but reluctant because of the gold buttons, just replace them with horn ones; they’ll instantly look better, I swear; I do it all he time. I’ve got my eyes on the leather jeans, such a great cut. One thing I’ll give Peter some creds for that unlike everyone else, Peter’s kept the men’s pant tailored slim but not ball-crushingly "skinny", while everyone else has gone so predictably loosey-goosey.

By all fairness, perhaps it would be good to remember that Tom Ford himself never returned to designing womenswear clothes that 'designed-looking' in his own brand and I'm afraid it was really a matter of the early 2000s where high-creativity and conceptuality in fashion was much more common sight in fashion - It was the heydays of European designers like Chalayan, Viktor & Rolf, McQueen, Kokosalaki, Theyskens, Slimane and many more who really outdid themselves every season putting hyper-creative shows on - People would flock into stores like Colette or Maria Luisa in Paris to check the most directional selections from those collections.

Now that we are past a long decade of streetwear, I get the feeling that what's happening right now is an age of 'neo-classicism' - The overused word of quiet luxury indicates that but also when we look at what people like Hedi Slimane is doing now at Celine, which is also a lot more classical and conservative than what Dior Homme or even his Saint Laurent looked like. I feel like Tom Ford went into that direction himself, emphasizing on classical clothes and now that Hawking designs it all and there is no more LA women's studio, it's clear to me that was what the brand would be consolidated into.

If Hawking's vision of Tom Ford would in a few seasons indeed have a hint of Christopher Bailey's best times at Burberry, I believe that would make it incredibly successful. I would much rather that than him going a Decarnin / early Rousteing kind of way, riffing too much on the raunchy aspect of Tom Ford.

 

[Nimsay]

this collection punctuates the problem with TF. The TF look is pretty dated. Only because the 00s are having a retro moment is this seeming fresh. TF has fallen into a bad territory for such a new house.

 

[Creative]

Not that I love it, but why does it look more Tom Ford than what Tom Ford did for his own brand? lol

 

[Lola701]

Not that I love it, but why does it look more Tom Ford than what Tom Ford did for his own brand? lol

Because people loves the past of Tom Ford and what it represented rather than the reality it was. And probably because Tom Ford womenswear was insanely American. It was American Sportswear to it core…
Whereas Tom Ford for Gucci and YSL was an American POV of European style.

Tom Ford by Peter Hawkings is very European, so European that it can very on eurotrash.

Tom was multilayered. A bit of Saint Laurent, a bit of Halston, a bit of masters of Haute Couture and American fashion.

This maybe lacks in terms of lineage. It’s sexy dresses, amazing suits with a louche, dark allure we associate with Tom Ford. Hard to see a personality, an influence in that…

 

[LadyJunon]

We finally have a director's cut of the show:

I hope they reupload it in a horizontal format soon...

 

[pvtrickng]

i see what he's trying to do but it comes off dated, repetitive/referential, and random to me. a bit turbulent as in some designs should not have been included due to looking unfinished or too predictable.

yes, reference tom, but also set yourself apart. it's like his head is still in the books instead of being fully in the moment of praxis. there unrealized potential here. i hope peter pushes himself to use the archive as inspiration or launchboard, not as a crutch or a ball and chain holding him back.

I think it’s important to give Peter some time to establish his own creative identity. Making drastic changes may not be the best approach, especially considering that this is only his second collection for the brand.

 

[Phuel]

Yes it’s very Frida…
My favorite Gucci collections under Tom were Spring 2001 and Fall 2002. My least favorite are Fall 1995 and Fall 2004…

Interesting you’ve favoured A/W 2002. Conceptually— and the hair and makeup that just is too blatantly Carine of that time, was always a huge turnoff. Tom’s outright tributes to a certain woman, whether that was Carine or Joan Jett for his namesake label, always left a bad taste, as far as I’m concerned. That particular A/W 2002 offering looked so hard to wear, with the slinky, flowing fabric, the flowing asymmetry that’s still bodycon; that woman would need to have a lithe, serpentine body. And at the same time and also because of this fact reason; the shine, the asymmetry, and the boxy, oversized outerwear would also be so ideal to be reintroduced to current-era Tom Ford. But Peter clearly lacks the creative talent and technical skills to accomplish this revision. …Maybe LaQuan could do it LOL

By all fairness, perhaps it would be good to remember that Tom Ford himself never returned to designing womenswear clothes that 'designed-looking' in his own brand and I'm afraid it was really a matter of the early 2000s where high-creativity and conceptuality in fashion was much more common sight in fashion - It was the heydays of European designers like Chalayan, Viktor & Rolf, McQueen, Kokosalaki, Theyskens, Slimane and many more who really outdid themselves every season putting hyper-creative shows on - People would flock into stores like Colette or Maria Luisa in Paris to check the most directional selections from those collections.

Now that we are past a long decade of streetwear, I get the feeling that what's happening right now is an age of 'neo-classicism' - The overused word of quiet luxury indicates that but also when we look at what people like Hedi Slimane is doing now at Celine, which is also a lot more classical and conservative than what Dior Homme or even his Saint Laurent looked like. I feel like Tom Ford went into that direction himself, emphasizing on classical clothes and now that Hawking designs it all and there is no more LA women's studio, it's clear to me that was what the brand would be consolidated into.

If Hawking's vision of Tom Ford would in a few seasons indeed have a hint of Christopher Bailey's best times at Burberry, I believe that would make it incredibly successful. I would much rather that than him going a Decarnin / early Rousteing kind of way, riffing too much on the raunchy aspect of Tom Ford.

Tom having never revisited his highest creative Gucci attempts for his own label— but instead, veered in the direction of a more personal bespoke, with an even more pragmatic sensibility, was an extremely admirable move (and strategically smart one, since he knew that he didn’t have the commercial support of the Gucci’s more profitable fragrance/eyewear/accessories for his own namesake). His debut offering was the best under the Tom Ford label. Every other offerings afterwards never quite established the personal sensibility and confidence of evolution away from his Gucci glory the way that that debut did. The label moving forward under Peter’s lead will be in the same trajectory as Ralph Lauren: Same old same old staples in terms of design vocabulary (…that damn velvet tuxedo, the sequinned column dresses and croc(-stamped) leathers…). And frankly, I’m fine with that, because the very solid merchandise in the racks are all that will matter. It’s just the presentations, the campaigns, the branding that’s sodespetely groping for Tom’s Gucci nostalgia that’s also so horrendously lackluster, when it doesn’t have to be. Peter is a follower and not a leader, who when he does attempt to inject his own sensibility into the Tom Ford lexicon… it’s giving Kim Jones cheapness. And people like Peter, Kim, Virginie and Edward, prove that you can spend your entire professional life as the righthand men/women to the greatest of talents— surrounded by the greatest of talents, but if you don’t have that natural-born talent to begin with, then you’ll never have it.