Hemming vs. Frogley
urhash
USPosts: 984MI6 Agent
Just curious what everyone's thoughts are on the replacement of Lindy Hemming with Louise Frogley, and whether you guys would prefer to see Hemming return, Frogley continue, or a new direction altogether for Bond 23?
To sum up my feelings in short, I think the main difference was that Frogley had an approach to Bond's wardrobe - but Hemming had a vision. Hemming was heavily involved in all aspects of the wardrobe, from going down to Italy to work with Brioni on the cut, shape, and silhouette of the suits to choosing the fabrics from Dormeuil, designing the tie patterns for Turnbull & Asser to manufacture, so on and so forth. She didn't appear to be married to one brand name, and instead chose to marry together items that would create the right look and weight (I think T&A shirts look considerably better on the Brioni suits than Brioni shirts! Hemming deviated from this a little in DAD and CR, but I digress...)
I got the sense Frogley passed off much of the responsibility for the formalwear to Tom Ford (who decided on a sort of retro-Connery cut to the suits). Anything else that was deemed appropriate for the wardrobe was taken off the rack and repackaged as a Tom Ford item.
I think Hemming had a more enthusiastic approach to Bond's attire (heck, she did her thesis on Bond's wardrobe). On the other hand, it seems more like Frogley had a general brief - she wanted the "cutting edge in men's fashion" for the formalwear, hence her choice of current trendy big-name Ford, and it seems she had an aggressively casual approach for the non-formalwear (jeans, cardigans, etc).
I think the different styles is somewhat reflected in the collectors approaches as well. You can see the enthusiasm to acquire unique items like the Madagascar shirt, the Dupont cufflinks, and a lot of effort made to replicate other unique but unobtainable items (bahamas shirt, leather jacket, Brosnan-era ties). On the other hand, there's sort of a consensus that it's silly to try and get a Tom Ford cardigan, not just because its absurdly expensive but also the fact that it's not that particularly unique that it would be worth spending a significant amount to acquire something that is not a carefully crafted design (like say, the Madagascar shirt). Similarly, I think most don't have an interest in paying ~$250 for the Tom Ford champagne tie, which looks like plenty of ties you can find in Macy's. Which isn't to say they are unstylish items - they work pretty well in the film and look good on Craig... but for me they don't hit the high notes that Hemming was able to with her considerably more deliberate approach.
But that's just my opinion. :007)
To sum up my feelings in short, I think the main difference was that Frogley had an approach to Bond's wardrobe - but Hemming had a vision. Hemming was heavily involved in all aspects of the wardrobe, from going down to Italy to work with Brioni on the cut, shape, and silhouette of the suits to choosing the fabrics from Dormeuil, designing the tie patterns for Turnbull & Asser to manufacture, so on and so forth. She didn't appear to be married to one brand name, and instead chose to marry together items that would create the right look and weight (I think T&A shirts look considerably better on the Brioni suits than Brioni shirts! Hemming deviated from this a little in DAD and CR, but I digress...)
I got the sense Frogley passed off much of the responsibility for the formalwear to Tom Ford (who decided on a sort of retro-Connery cut to the suits). Anything else that was deemed appropriate for the wardrobe was taken off the rack and repackaged as a Tom Ford item.
I think Hemming had a more enthusiastic approach to Bond's attire (heck, she did her thesis on Bond's wardrobe). On the other hand, it seems more like Frogley had a general brief - she wanted the "cutting edge in men's fashion" for the formalwear, hence her choice of current trendy big-name Ford, and it seems she had an aggressively casual approach for the non-formalwear (jeans, cardigans, etc).
I think the different styles is somewhat reflected in the collectors approaches as well. You can see the enthusiasm to acquire unique items like the Madagascar shirt, the Dupont cufflinks, and a lot of effort made to replicate other unique but unobtainable items (bahamas shirt, leather jacket, Brosnan-era ties). On the other hand, there's sort of a consensus that it's silly to try and get a Tom Ford cardigan, not just because its absurdly expensive but also the fact that it's not that particularly unique that it would be worth spending a significant amount to acquire something that is not a carefully crafted design (like say, the Madagascar shirt). Similarly, I think most don't have an interest in paying ~$250 for the Tom Ford champagne tie, which looks like plenty of ties you can find in Macy's. Which isn't to say they are unstylish items - they work pretty well in the film and look good on Craig... but for me they don't hit the high notes that Hemming was able to with her considerably more deliberate approach.
But that's just my opinion. :007)
Comments
If I could afford Tom Ford, I'd follow Frogley's example.
I agree some of Brosnan's attire is a little 90's... mainly the stuff from Goldeneye. On the other hand, she did have a tough responsibility in updating the wardrobe after years of Bond's absence and a sartorially weak interpretation by Dalton (and to an extent, Moore). Also at question was Bond's relevance as a cultural and style icon. She seemed a little overly cautious and self-conscious in GE (e.g. the excessive use of the pocket handkerchiefs on ALL suits). I think she really started to hit her stride with TWINE.
I like the casual clothes in QoS but I've got pics of McQueen in clothes identical(probably a little cheaper) to the Y-3 outfit and the cardigan outfit. We get it, he's very McQueen. I've thought so since Layer Cake, so has Esquire. Get over it. The casual clothes in CR were much more creative from the GP trunks to the tropical shirt to the Armani jacket. Just more detailed and thought out. More real world with patterns and details, good or bad.
The whole sunglass situation ticks me off, same with the Sunspel thing. I don't know how much control Frogley had over that but it really cheapens the TF name for me, not that that makes any difference in the world.
I kinda look at Frogley like Deborah Nadoolman, the costume designer from Raiders of the Lost Ark. Very successful in a hands off way. Bond in a suit is much better in QoS, but casual Bond is much better in CR.
However, I think Brosnan in Brioni looks better than Craig in TF. I find most of TF's work a little funky with the five buttons sleeves and overly wide lapels (see: Brad Pitt on red carpet). Although TF had a 60's era cut for the Bond suits I find it looks a little off, but that's just me.
Good discussion guys, I'm interested to hear all your thoughts.
http://s274.photobucket.com/albums/jj258/monza860/
I understand what you're saying, but I just think that it's the whole Brosnan, pretty boy, fashion plate thing. I don't think it's possible for Craig to look as good in a suit as Brosnan. Then again, he looked pretty rough in The Matador.
As far as TF, yeah he can get pretty out there, and the wide lapels aren't my thing either, but the suits for Bond just worked perfectly for me. I did notice the five button cuffs but honestly they had slipped my mind. I've been wearing two button tipover suits since I started having suits made to measure. I also like the ticket pocket and double vent but those are pretty standard now. I really wish I could find or explain that suppressed waist/narrow shoulder look.
Craig in Brioni(except for the last shot, which wasn't bad) just seemed like something from Men's Wearhouse. The scene that bothered me the most was at the outside table with Mathis when the suit and shirt were riding so high that his neck disappeared.
I just looked through screencaps from that scene and I don't see what you mean. His neck is there, clear and visible from what little neck he has.
http://s274.photobucket.com/albums/jj258/monza860/
What I mean is when the camera in on Mathis and it's showing the back of Bond's head, his hairline is all the way down under his shirt collar. Looks like he's hiding an awesome mullet under there.
http://s274.photobucket.com/albums/jj258/monza860/
http://s274.photobucket.com/albums/jj258/monza860/
The casual clothes are not even close. Only the outfit seen when Bond visits Mathis stand out to me. The rest can be summed up as a polo shirt, chinos and a light jacket. On the other hand, so much of the casual clothes of CR were memorable, M's apartment, the Ocean Club gambling scene, etc. In CR, Bond seemed appropriately dressed in every scene. Has anyone figured out why Bond was wearing a suit on the flight with Mathis? Can we say overdressed? This was at night and the next morning we see Bond in the same suit. Are we to believe Bond slept in his suit? And don't even get me started on the sunglasses. Yes, let's make a cheaper, lower quality copy of an OP design and give them to Craig to wear. How very Bond 8-).
That's just it he doesn't sleep.
http://s274.photobucket.com/albums/jj258/monza860/
Oh wait, wrong movie.
In QoS, Bond goes to Haiti wearing white jeans and a polo... and later goes to equally run down Bolivia wearing a bespoke suit. ?:) Then later when attacking the hotel he switches to blue jeans and a blue jacket.
I never got the sense Frogley ever really knew where she wanted to go with the clothing, aside from (as I said before) her general brief about the formal clothing being done by the cutting edge in menswear and the casual clothes to have a McQueen-esque style.
On an aside, I think it will be interesting to see how well the formalwear in QoS holds up in 10-15 years. Currently skinny lapels and thin ties are "in" (just open any fashion magazine), which perhaps makes the retro-Connery cut appropriate. I think Hemming was smart to avoid these trends though...
Regardless of manufacturer, if you put Brosnan in his Bond prime up against Craig, Brosnan will look the better of the two in a suit because the clothes drape well on him because of his body type.
But which body type would you rather have? Craig's of course.
The thing I liked about both designers is that we don't find Bond constantly living in a suit. Bond is appropriately dressed for the occasion. I think the whole Tom Ford selection is pretty ridiculous but wasn't it Craig himself who insisted on this?
$250 is too much to pay for a tie. I have a few Turnbull and Asser ties which are quite nice at half the price but ties are not something I like to spend a lot on as a general rule. A friend of mine used to work as a tie salesman and he told me the same ties that you see many high end designers offer are offered by the bargain basement places but with different labels...exact same ties folks. So I would be much more inclined to buy a TJ Maxx sale tie that looks similar to a Tom Ford tie because I would be about $240 in the black on that one.
The Steve McQueen look that an earlier poster referenced was dead on. I have no problem with Ford channeling his 1960's Savile Row muse but I have to admit at being disappointed that many of the clothes...even the casual clothes ...especially the casual clothes - in QOS simply are cost prohibitive. However, as always our forum members have done a commendable job identifying viable alternatives.
I would like to see Bond back in Turnbull & Asser shirts and ties. At least that keeps a London connection with the character. For me the worst thing about Frogley is that she kicked Turnbull & Asser (who had an extensive history with the Bond series)to the curb. My dear girl, some things just aren't done. It's like listening to the Beatles without earmuffs!
Does anyone disagree on this point? I certainly don't!
Granted, T&A has had an on and off relationship with Bond over the years, and Hemming herself experimented in this area (GE shirts were by Sulka)... but T&A have certainly been a staple for Bond and always seem to work fabulously with the suits. The collar in particular always has a distinctively flared look that also flatters the tie knot. It's also a (seemingly) timeless look... if you compare them to the early Connery movies the collars look almost the same and even the stitching down the placket are identical to the shirts they produce today.
The James Bond Dossier | SPECTRE | Q-Branch James Bond Podcast
I think that was by design. A common theme in this thread is that Ford was trying to catch a Sean Connery 1960's look. Look at the cuts of the suits...hugging the body more closely; the thinner lapels; and I think the shorter trouser lengths on both the suits and casual clothes is very 60's as well. If the 1960's cuts were initiated by Ford it would have made sense for Frogley to follow suit with that theme into Bond's casual wear...just my opinion.
Just take a look at the Connery Bond films or any Steve McQueen film from that era and you will notice the same thing. Watch the original Thomas Crown Affair with McQueen (1968)and you will notice the same short trousers.
When I was in grade school in the 70's the kids would have called these "floods" (as in "I am ready for a flood because my pants won't get wet") but I do like the look.
http://s274.photobucket.com/albums/jj258/monza860/
YES!!! Bring back T&A.
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!