The James Bond Wardrobe/Style Thread

1222325272857

Comments

  • Posts: 802
    RogueAgent wrote: »
    AVB wrote: »
    I can't believe people think Craig's suits in SF were ill-fitting.

    images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRnGcwfJ-0hOXfOusEFJDd6oVpwr9JJXfysy7hEeqcns30DQsq4mA

    Clearly ridiculous.

    Where did that figure come from?
    Tom Ford?

  • MrcogginsMrcoggins Following in the footsteps of Quentin Quigley.
    Posts: 3,143
    It looks more like Tracey Island to me ;)
  • SirHilaryBraySirHilaryBray Scotland
    Posts: 2,138
    Villiers53 wrote: »
    Villiers53 wrote: »
    AVB wrote: »
    As for casual wear, I'd love more polos. Not a fan of Bond in t-shirt, but more of this, without the horrible wide chino however. Craig looks best with a slightly tapered leg.

    cr8-main1.jpg

    It's amazing how dated CR looks now. Of course if was 10 yrs ago, but still...

    Correct, the polo is by Sunspel - they are absolutely brilliant and worth every penny.
    As for the chinos, you are absolutely correct. Dunhill do one of the best tapered leg chinos they are a great width without descending into Pitti Uomo farce.

    Chinos are Levis Sta press they were a limited run.
    Thank God it was limited Sir Hilary.
    I wasn't suggesting they were Dunhill. Merely suggesting a suitable sartorial twin (Dunhill) for the Sunspel polo.

    I didn't suggest you were mate just stating what the ones worn were.
  • AVBAVB
    Posts: 97

    Chinos are Levis Sta press they were a limited run.

    Are you sure? My Levi Sta Press chino are much nicer than those. I have a pair and they are a slimfit, straight leg pant; NO flare!



  • Posts: 1,314
    The tight fitting look is a very London look for 2012. A contemporary cool.
  • Posts: 260
    Matt007 wrote: »
    The tight fitting look is a very London look for 2012. A contemporary cool.

    Accurate.
  • Posts: 11,425
    Yes I am perfectly aware of that. I personally prefer the fitted look, but there is a difference between a nice good fitting suit and one that appears to be about to burst at the seams. It's not the style of suit I'm commenting, just the fact that in SF they look really bad, particularly in the action sequences, as they don't appear to have been cut properly for Craig's figure and the nature of the scenes. It's a technical thing, not a comment on the style they've gone for.
  • Posts: 260
    Exactly
  • Posts: 11,425
    May be it's partly to do with Craig's physique? He is quite built these days and perhaps a bit too broad in the shoulders and torso? I imagine it makes it more difficult to keep the suits looking good at all times. As at @Villiers53 said , I think Ralph Fiennes may actually be the one cutting a sartorial dash in SP.
  • Posts: 1,068
    For me the tighter looking, about to burst at the seams, SF fit is even more exaggerated by the washed out colour palette compared to the navy / blacks which always seem the best look on Bond
  • Posts: 260
    Getafix wrote: »
    May be it's partly to do with Craig's physique? He is quite built these days and perhaps a bit too broad in the shoulders and torso? I imagine it makes it more difficult to keep the suits looking good at all times. As at @Villiers53 said , I think Ralph Fiennes may actually be the one cutting a sartorial dash in SP.

    There's no question about that, from Everest's bespoke work, to Fiennes frame.
  • Posts: 11,425
    andmcit wrote: »
    For me the tighter looking, about to burst at the seams, SF fit is even more exaggerated by the washed out colour palette compared to the navy / blacks which always seem the best look on Bond

    Totally agree. I think a mid or darker tone grey would also have been perfectly sensible. As someone else said , perhaps he should have been dressed a little more casually. Probably would have looked less conspicuous and worked better in the action sequences.
  • Posts: 802
    andmcit wrote: »
    For me the tighter looking, about to burst at the seams, SF fit is even more exaggerated by the washed out colour palette compared to the navy / blacks which always seem the best look on Bond

    The colour certainly accentuates the problem but IVNSHO the real issue is that they committed that unimaginable fopaux and followed street fashion.
    It always looks ridiculous, particularly two years later.
  • AVBAVB
    Posts: 97
    I happen to think the Istanbul suit looks fine. It's only the pinstripe one which looks terrible, and to a lesser degree the one he wears when meeting Mallory for the first time. Though I don't think we see a full body shot of Craig in that one so it looks ok. The suits themselves are lovely designs, fabrics and colors, but I can see why the tighty tight thing would appall - particularly the elder statesmen here.

    I don't think Craig is the natural clothes horse. If you see him IRL then he's very sloppy, from the 'if I have a bunch of pricey, nice clothes and throw them together I should look good' school of thought, which is mistake numero uno in style. In his Bond tenure the wardobe can come across as contrived. He stands out in the wrong way, as opposed to seemlessley blending in with the film. I do get what Villiers means by 'dandified'. It's also inconsistent - why is he wearing that suit in the Istanbul mission? Given the extremity of Bonds action sequences, I'm of the opinion that these suits should not be part of the action sequences, unless they follow on from a scene(s) where he would ordinarily be wearing a suit. I want to see the man move in a suit, not only see it ripped to shreds. That said I can see why they wanted to introduce Bond in a suit with Skyfall.
  • MrcogginsMrcoggins Following in the footsteps of Quentin Quigley.
    Posts: 3,143
    By putting Dan in a tight suit all they are doing is bringing the thuggish aspect out not so much
    Her Majesty's Loyal Terrier More of a Rottweiler in a suit so to speak.
  • Posts: 260
    AVB wrote: »

    I don't think Craig is the natural clothes horse.

    That is a huge part of it, but not an insurmountable problem. And I think he does well to play the part but is not getting the support from his costume department. Lindy Hemming did a better job, though I wasn't really in her agreement on using Brioni (I understand why though).
  • Posts: 11,425
    Wasn't the Brioni thing partly about money?
  • Posts: 260
    Getafix wrote: »
    Wasn't the Brioni thing partly about money?

    Supply. They were the only one to commit to the volume. They didn't pay for the privilege.
  • Posts: 802
    doghouse wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    Wasn't the Brioni thing partly about money?

    Supply. They were the only one to commit to the volume. They didn't pay for the privilege.

    Yes, the reason the factory producers got the gig instead of bespoke was really the lack of forward planning.
    If you suddenly decide that you need six suits of the same style, bespoke would need two or three months to turn that around. Every suit is hand made and the process isn't scalable, it is directly dependant on the number of artisans schooled in that tailor's house style and who can work to that house's quality standards.
    Brioni and the other designer brands - Boss, Armani, Zegna, Tom Ford etc.. offer a 'made to measure' service that adjusts an existing model to better suit a client. Consequently, if you have influence and eon clearly have, you can literally get them to stop the factory and prioritise yours.
    Don't get me wrong, the quality from some of these designers is pretty damn good and many of them started out as cloth houses so their cloths can be great. I've had A&S cut me a couple of suits with Zegna fabric over the years.
    But, at the end of the day, you can't beat bespoke from a good tailor. The minute you find the right house for you, it's addictive because the suit or jacket is built around you and takes account of every idiosyncrasy.
    Somewhat incredibly, I've been at cocktail parties where people have said to me; ' A&S isn't it?'. The same used to be said of the late, great Dougie Hayward.
    For 007 they should plan ahead and go bespoke!
  • Posts: 6,601

    There were 85 versions of James Bond's Tom Ford suit tailor-made for the opening chase sequence. Thirty were made for actor Daniel Craig and thirty for his double and stunt-double. Each version of the suit was made specifically for a particular scene of the opening sequence. For example, when Craig was riding the motor-bike, a suit with longer sleeves was worn so that it wouldn't raise up over his forearms. Costume Designer Jany Temime has said: "Each suit had three fittings, like a real traditional Saville Row suit. It was very high class tailoring. The first suit was mohair, very lightweight, woolen silk. The tuxedo is woolen silk. They were all [made of] beautiful fabric. He [would be] jumping and fighting, and then he would stand up, and the suit would be perfect." Moreover, Craig's tie had to be weighted for the motorbike section of the chase. The weight kept the tie from flying around when he rode at high speeds.

    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1074638/trivia

    We had three fittings for each suit. Tom Ford sent his tailor, and the suits were made for Daniel, in a very traditional, old-fashioned way. They were the same sort of quality that you can find on Savile Row: hand-made, hand-finished. And the quantity was gigantic. For the opening sequence, with the light gray suit, we had sixty of them.
    We had thirty for Daniel and thirty for the stunts. Some suits were new, but some had blood on them, or were dirty. And we had extra length in the arms for the motorcycle sequence. We also had extra length in the trousers, because you see the ankle if not. We had some reinforced trousers for the train sequence. Each suit has a little history — that's why we need so many of them.

    http://www.esquire.com/style/interviews/a16531/james-bond-skyfall-suits-14339345/
  • Posts: 260
    Villiers53 wrote: »
    If you suddenly decide that you need six suits of the same style, bespoke would need two or three months to turn that around.

    Most Row houses could do six in a couple weeks fairly easily. It's doing 60 that are a problem.

  • Posts: 6,601
    doghouse wrote: »
    Villiers53 wrote: »
    If you suddenly decide that you need six suits of the same style, bespoke would need two or three months to turn that around.

    Most Row houses could do six in a couple weeks fairly easily. It's doing 60 that are a problem.

    That's why I posted above.

  • Posts: 260
    Germanlady wrote: »
    doghouse wrote: »
    Villiers53 wrote: »
    If you suddenly decide that you need six suits of the same style, bespoke would need two or three months to turn that around.

    Most Row houses could do six in a couple weeks fairly easily. It's doing 60 that are a problem.

    That's why I posted above.

    Yes, I saw. Personally I think that 60+ suits is ridiculous overkill and makes no sense. Connery did his movies with just a few and looked way better.
  • Posts: 802
    doghouse wrote: »
    Germanlady wrote: »
    doghouse wrote: »
    Villiers53 wrote: »
    If you suddenly decide that you need six suits of the same style, bespoke would need two or three months to turn that around.

    Most Row houses could do six in a couple weeks fairly easily. It's doing 60 that are a problem.

    That's why I posted above.

    Yes, I saw. Personally I think that 60+ suits is ridiculous overkill and makes no sense. Connery did his movies with just a few and looked way better.

    Absolutely.

  • SarkSark Guangdong, PRC
    Posts: 1,138
    I'm of the opinion that these suits should not be part of the action sequences, unless they follow on from a scene(s) where he would ordinarily be wearing a suit.

    Right. People shouldn't be saying "why in the world his he wearing a suit?"

    Re: the 60 suits for one sequence thing. Just goes to show that big budgets don't equal quality film-making.
  • Posts: 11,425
    doghouse wrote: »
    Germanlady wrote: »
    doghouse wrote: »
    Villiers53 wrote: »
    If you suddenly decide that you need six suits of the same style, bespoke would need two or three months to turn that around.

    Most Row houses could do six in a couple weeks fairly easily. It's doing 60 that are a problem.

    That's why I posted above.

    Yes, I saw. Personally I think that 60+ suits is ridiculous overkill and makes no sense. Connery did his movies with just a few and looked way better.

    Well said.
  • SirHilaryBraySirHilaryBray Scotland
    Posts: 2,138
    AVB wrote: »

    Chinos are Levis Sta press they were a limited run.

    Are you sure? My Levi Sta Press chino are much nicer than those. I have a pair and they are a slimfit, straight leg pant; NO flare!



    Beg your forgiveness he wears Sta Press in QOS when in Haiti. Casino flare Chinos were by Tee Baker who also did the linen trousers for Ocean club/Miami airport scene.
  • Posts: 802
    doghouse wrote: »
    Villiers53 wrote: »
    If you suddenly decide that you need six suits of the same style, bespoke would need two or three months to turn that around.

    Most Row houses could do six in a couple weeks fairly easily. It's doing 60 that are a problem.
    Sorry doghouse but I don't know anybody on the row that could turn around six in a couple of weeks. A show business friend of mine who is a staunch regular at a particular house orders a few of the same model when he tours and credits the house in his PR and tour materials - price, the same as everybody else. Lead time, six weeks to two months.
  • Posts: 802
    Germanlady wrote: »


    We had three fittings for each suit. Tom Ford sent his tailor, and the suits were made for Daniel, in a very traditional, old-fashioned way. They were the same sort of quality that you can find on Savile Row: hand-made, hand-finished. And the quantity was gigantic.

    http://www.esquire.com/style/interviews/a16531/james-bond-skyfall-suits-14339345/

    Sorry @Germanlady. We were talking about Brioni but frankly this is just PR. The fact of the matter is that Tom Ford's suits are made at the Zegna factories in Switzerland and Italy. This is mass production and is not at all the bespoke process.
    Nothing wrong with it but this is certainly not 'a very traditional old fashioned way'.

  • Posts: 6,601
    doghouse wrote: »
    Germanlady wrote: »
    doghouse wrote: »
    Villiers53 wrote: »
    If you suddenly decide that you need six suits of the same style, bespoke would need two or three months to turn that around.

    Most Row houses could do six in a couple weeks fairly easily. It's doing 60 that are a problem.

    That's why I posted above.

    Yes, I saw. Personally I think that 60+ suits is ridiculous overkill and makes no sense. Connery did his movies with just a few and looked way better.

    I am sure, he would be the first to admit, that his action scenes were a walk in the park compared to todays. Its 30 for DC and 30 for the stunt man. You may dislike, what you see, but the effort they discussed in the two quotes I posted, surely makes sense, if you try to achieve the best result. Sure, those who are still here, find, that the result is not satisfying, but fact is, they give it their all to produce quality. In their eyes it was, in others not. The fact remains and I am grateful they put so much thought in it. Like others, I have said many posts ago, that Lindy Hemmings for QOS did it best and they should have kept her, but a new game is on and I liked, what I saw so far. What is Dandyish for some, is chic for others. I am looking forward to whats next. He wears a Tux in the Comic Relief, so that could be it.



Sign In or Register to comment.