I typically do not like press photos. I think they lack artistic authority. I also hate the idea of a “red carpet” because typically celebrities wear a diluted version of the more editorial pieces seen on the runway and at times it comes off as miscalculated attempt and then designer or the house is blamed. Also I think many celebrities are deficient in the flair of fashion and it is unnerving how invulnerable some of the displays of dress are. It is like they are taking caution for fear of being torn apart by critics and press which indicates a characterless human unwilling to take chances in the category of dress. I say, go for it, try one’s hand at being phenomenal and alluring. Part of fashion is being ridiculed and deemed outlandish by the “unwashed” as I impolitely say. When a celebrity goes the more unpredictable, more glamorous path, they will be canonized and held in incredible esteem by the people who appreciate and care about that sort of thing.
The Metropolitan Museum’s Costume Institute Gala is a “red carpet” that stands apart from the “red carpets” of film premiers, award broadcasts, ballet galas, et cetera. The other “red carpet” occasions that I can stand occurs during the Cannes Film Festival where there is so much phenomena occurring in the sector of beauty and elegance it cannot be contained. However back to this gala, the Costume Institute which raises funds for the organization also celebrates the opening of a rather interesting exhibition which is impossible tête-à-tête between designers Miuccia Prada and Elsa Schiaparelli. This gala also cements the opportunity for designers to promote their most stimulating work. It is an opportunity to advertise their perspective in a quasi-relevant manner, away from the runway which has the obstacle of being deemed too irrational and misappropriated for physical existence. There was no short of Prada, which had me delighted because there is nothing I love more (besides Marni) than the intellect and perspective of Prada.
As always I wish the attendees dressed more surreal, in keeping with the tune of the exhibit. Frustratingly, you still get columns of monochrome, fluorescents, and plenty of reworked and expected number from the unexciting designers. Despite that, there were obviously individuals dressed better than some but I don’t believe in best dressed since that title is so subjective. So my preferred are as follows.
Christina Ricci was stunning and all sorts of majestic in Thakoon. It was a blush silk organza tea length skirt with guipure and a matching bandeau with guipure and lace accompanied with an oversized floor-length bow was all the more sensational. There was a blink of midriff. Black patent pumps on the feet. Hair shining, slicked back. It was altogether splendiferous.
Miuccia Prada in Prada. I am very fond of the outfit, surprised she she didn’t wear a skirt. That is all.
Caroline Sieber wore a custom, full-length, full sleeved dress by Christopher Kane. The tulle dress was exquisite done in pale cornflower encrusted and embroidered in floral jewels on both the frontside and backside. Sieber’s dark brunette tresses contrasted harmoniously with the luminosity, ornamentation, and divinity of the dress. I must admit, I adore almost everything the Scottish designer does so this dress was one of my crystal clear favorites but Seiber comes off polished and beatific in the dress.
Ivanka Trump looked very modern in a imprinted velvet Peter Pilotto dress. The navy dress attenuated Ivanka’s figure, embracing her already ideal frame even further. I would have liked to see this dress in person since the press photographs do not do the garment any service because it is hard to detect the highly engineered impression on the velvet that gives the garment dimensionality. The haltered bodice with the crisscrosses at the neckline suggests bondage which indicates a flair of irreverence, even if it wasn’t intended. She looked rather seductive which is not to say in unexpected because she is a beautiful woman but between her hair with these Bardot-esque bangs, the form-fitting dress, the unlit hue of the dress, the unconventional examination of velvet, and the crimson nails it was all very enticing. Ivanka most certainly carried over a provocative and modernist feeling from Peter Pilotto and Christopher De Vos Spring 2012 collection from which the dress was adapted from.
Elizabeth Banks wore print-heavy, structured dress by British designer Mary Katranzou. There was a peplum with substance, a strong sash, a strictly-corseted bodice, a long skirt with slit up to the thigh making for a slightly difficult contour to achieve on the body but here it was done in an enthusiastic and polished manner. This was a brazen choice for the actress and when the risk taken in such a difficult dress especially by young, independent designer I appreciate it. Further, when the result is triumphant and everything is composed in itself, I become ecstatic. It is important that independent designers get their clothing worn by celebrities, and it is even more important when it is done so victoriously.
Leslie Bibb wore a strapless brocaded Zac Posen ball gown. The prussian blue and black was an subtle but exquisite contrast for such a gown with such a voluminous skirt. The bodice of the dress gown cinched in her waist make the silhouette between ball skirt and sculptural bodice that much more severe. Lorraine Schwartz did the earring. Neck was naked which I tend to prefer with a strapless to feature a prominent clavicle. The dress was monumental and Bibb carried it with such poise.
Others that I felt were equally stunning was Astrid Bergès-Frisbey, in Chanel Couture, Gary Oldman and Alexandra Edenborough, both in Prada, Anna Wintour, in Prada, Amber Heard in Zac Posen. Two of my favorites that I hold in great regard are Marc Jacobs in Comme Des Garçons and Mary-Kate Olsen in The Row.
