or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › The Name's Ford, Tom Ford
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Name's Ford, Tom Ford - Page 2

post #16 of 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by in stitches View Post


how many is too many?
smile.gif

Can you find a few more with leo and different animals. Not crazy about spider monkeys like that. Can you have them back to me asap??

Thanks.
post #17 of 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by NotoriousMarquis View Post

Can you find a few more with leo and different animals. Not crazy about spider monkeys like that. Can you have them back to me asap??
Thanks.

2 of each should be good, any more and the thread would be ruined.

233
258
265
233
post #18 of 158
seriously I just saw the shining last week and I am in the library working on a paper on aristotle. When I saw that first one I burst out laughing.
post #19 of 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by NotoriousMarquis View Post

seriously I just saw the shining last week and I am in the library working on a paper on aristotle. When I saw that first one I burst out laughing.

cheers.gif

glad you enjoyed.
post #20 of 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by NotoriousMarquis View Post

I have seen a single man, and I actually thought (all pseudo-intellectuality and emotional vapidity aside) that the clothes looked too fussy and showy. I saw quantum and thought the lapels were too wide, and that the movie was crap. Brosnan at least was cool, and funny, and even though his suits have a certain showy-ness, he still looks like he knows what hes doing and there isnt a single ripple on his whole outfit —every time i walk into a TF store or past the TF boutique, i just see wrinkles and more wrinkles and it just looks sloppy. Its like bad dolce and gabbana.
So yeah, maybe for daniel craig TF is appropriate. He looks absurd or like hes going to go clubbing in dubai. But this isnt james bond.

I love how:

a) a leather jacket and shirt is apparently an absurd outfit

b) James Bond has apparently become known for sophistication ever since Pierce Brosnan was forced to turn him into a walking parody of himself


Contrary to common "style not fashion" blogger musings, James Bond movies have usually been a good reflection of the fashions of their times. Wide lapels are not only "in" right now, but also suit Daniel Craig very well IMO.

IMO Sean Connery and Daniel Craig are the best Bonds, and Tom Ford is probably the most qualified person in the world to be dressing Bond. Simon Spurr would be a good low-budget alternative.
post #21 of 158
I don't think they're necessarily indicative of the fashion of the era at all. I think the suits connery and brosnan wear are pertty timeless, and I think rodger moore's wide lapel lesure suit 1970's nonsense is pretty terrible.

Brosnan was a great bond, he was funny, suave, he looked the part. If you read the books bond is coy, and only connery and brosnan have been able to pull that off to such a degree.

But what about better tailors. I'd take a bond in corneliani or brioni over TF any day. Fuck Isaia would even be great. But if we're going to be traditional about it, why not dunhill, aquascutum, or any of the numbers on saville row who can piece together a pretty sharp suit on request. Or if we're going to be innovative about it, Gieves and Hawkes. But tom ford looks silly, and its bad, and its over priced, and colin firth too looks totally ridiculous.

I'm sorry but I think that almost everything with tom ford is loud and not in a way that attractive, but in a way that offensive.
post #22 of 158
Poor Tom Ford, a hater exists here. Persecute, condemn the heretic laugh.gif
Quote:
Originally Posted by NotoriousMarquis View Post

seriously I just saw the shining last week and I am in the library working on a paper on aristotle. When I saw that first one I burst out laughing.

I did not understand the Shining puzzled.gif

The Kubrick surrealism made the film hard to understand, was Jack a reincarnation or something? He has always been the caretaker, I mean WTF ???? Whats up with that photo in the end of the film? Even if the film is about "cabin fever", it is clear his wierdo wife and kid could see the same spooky stuff he did, i.e. the guy in the bear suit doing wierd things in the room with another guy etc ....

Film does not make sense, it makes even less sense than Twin Peaks or Mulholland Drive!

Shining is a great film anyway, possibly a classic. Must watch again.

I did feel sorry for Tony, when Danny gets older and starts to masturbate, what will Tony do?
post #23 of 158

The thing that needs to be understood about James Bond, or at least the cinematic version, is that each iteration of the character must fit into the time period of the film.

Connery's Bond, for example, wore slim, understated suits and dark knit ties because that was what blended in during the 1960's.

Tom Ford would not, probably, not have been appropriate for the versions of James Bond that came before Daniel Craig's, but the style works well with modern tastes as well as with the way Craig portrays the character.

 

I don't think the literary Bond would ever wear a Tom Ford suit, but he was somewhat of a minimalist in both emotional expression and personal habit.

People will tend to remember that he enjoyed champagne and caviar, but not necessarily that he used both as an accompaniment to a big plate of plain scrambled eggs, and that that could just as easily have been dinner or breakfast for him.

He chose simple, good things that he liked, and distributed them uniformly throughout his life so he didn't have to think so much about them.

 

The version Daniel Craig plays is far more suited to costumes by Ford, as there is a much stronger kinetic and emotional component present. He uses parkour maneuvers and blows things up whenever he can. Quantum of Solace and a good portion of Casino Royale were based on Bond's Vesper-related emotional trauma and the revenge he sought because of it. With that in mind, a more indulgent and expressive mode of dress seems reasonable. Tom Ford's pieces are also arguably some of the more subtly iconoclastic men's clothes around today, and with the James Bond franchise having had a "gritty reboot" in the last few installments (and, inconsequential as it may seem, the casting of a blond actor in a the role of a historically dark-haired character) it all seems reasonable enough to me.

 

-Von Franz


Edited by Von Franz - 11/7/11 at 9:18pm
post #24 of 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by NotoriousMarquis View Post

I don't think they're necessarily indicative of the fashion of the era at all. I think the suits connery and brosnan wear are pertty timeless, and I think rodger moore's wide lapel lesure suit 1970's nonsense is pretty terrible.
Brosnan was a great bond, he was funny, suave, he looked the part. If you read the books bond is coy, and only connery and brosnan have been able to pull that off to such a degree.
But what about better tailors. I'd take a bond in corneliani or brioni over TF any day. Fuck Isaia would even be great. But if we're going to be traditional about it, why not dunhill, aquascutum, or any of the numbers on saville row who can piece together a pretty sharp suit on request. Or if we're going to be innovative about it, Gieves and Hawkes. But tom ford looks silly, and its bad, and its over priced, and colin firth too looks totally ridiculous.
I'm sorry but I think that almost everything with tom ford is loud and not in a way that attractive, but in a way that offensive.

You seem to not know what you're talking about.
post #25 of 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by NotoriousMarquis View Post

I think the suits connery and brosnan wear are pertty timeless

About as timeless as Craig's TF.

You can clearly see the the suits Connery and Brosnan were related to the period of the films, dunno how you could miss that.

282

401


Agree with Von Franz.
post #26 of 158
As is expected, Tom Ford now defines the style of Daniel Craig's Bond. Which is fine, i do not have a problem with the styling at all (in fact i'm a huge Tom Ford fan). It is a mutual symbiotic relationship of exposure and contemporary flair, for both franchise and fashion house.

In regards to Bonds of old being better. Old James Bond was comic book sensationalism, new Bond is realistic grittiness, which i also have no problem with.
post #27 of 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by Klobber View Post

Poor Tom Ford, a hater exists here. Persecute, condemn the heretic laugh.gif
I did not understand the Shining puzzled.gif
The Kubrick surrealism made the film hard to understand, was Jack a reincarnation or something? He has always been the caretaker, I mean WTF ???? Whats up with that photo in the end of the film? Even if the film is about "cabin fever", it is clear his wierdo wife and kid could see the same spooky stuff he did, i.e. the guy in the bear suit doing wierd things in the room with another guy etc ....
Film does not make sense, it makes even less sense than Twin Peaks or Mulholland Drive!
Shining is a great film anyway, possibly a classic. Must watch again.
I did feel sorry for Tony, when Danny gets older and starts to masturbate, what will Tony do?

No I totally agree the movie is asinine. it's over hyped, its got very little fear aside from the moments of mundane things happening over scary music. it makes no sense—jack nicholson is an asshoe from the beginning so the jump from asshole to psycho isnt so big. But to be fair, it was right before halloween festivities at school and it was showing for free and they had candy. I really take any opportunity to go to the movies with a girl i like, and to sit in our gorgeous performance hall. School events are fun.
post #28 of 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by NotoriousMarquis View Post

Can you find a few more with leo and different animals. Not crazy about spider monkeys like that. Can you have them back to me asap??
Thanks.

That's not a spider monkey....that's a snowboarding lemur....
post #29 of 158
I think von franz articulated it well. Maybe tf is appropriate for craig, but i think quantum of solace was complete crap (both as a part of the bond series, and as a movie on its own), and I think daniel craig is too moody and too brutish to be james bond. So for this non james bond who is hardly refined, sure, tom ford might fit.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hendrix View Post

About as timeless as Craig's TF.
You can clearly see the the suits Connery and Brosnan were related to the period of the films, dunno how you could miss that.
282
401
Agree with Von Franz.

And no, to be perfectly honest I could wear either of those suits today. The former looks like my grandfather's suits from the 50's, and like my uncle's british suits made today. The latter image looks almost like a suit from any film by fellini, and yet it was made for a 90's movie. Neither of these suits would be inappropriate at any point in time, whereas put TF in the 60's, or 90s, or even 10 years from now and it will look, as i said before, quite garish.
post #30 of 158
The only thing worse than people promoting "timeless" items is people who don't understand that what works for one person may not work for another.

The right person could definitely wear TF in 20 years, just as some people pull off the 60s style suits today (but most don't).
Being able to tell when something was made doesn't mean it's dated and can't be worn in other periods.
It depends on your taste and what works for you.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › The Name's Ford, Tom Ford