Anti-Fit

[Matt Deckard]

Anti fit The Levis commercial were out a few years back touting the new jans with the “anti fit. Well it’s not just jeans. It’s everything. Clothes today just don’t fit. The waistbands are low for sliding down, the thighs too tight. Jackets are either modeled as too big or too small… just look at the Polo website and tell me which guy has on the sport jacket that fits. The fitted look is fine though when you are going for the ill fitted look… well it’s ill fitted. Go to eBay and get an Esquire from the 1930’s and see how the wool was shaped to accentuate the body, no look as though it were tugging at a central fulcrum which looks like it may lose the battle at any moment. Anti fit. I can try on the vintage trousers from the 30’s and the waist is comfy and there is no razor with feel in the crotch. Even when the designers put in pleats nowadays it seems as though they have lost the idea behind the pleats as I see them worn by models with the low cut waistbands helping the pleating give the diaper flare that I’d think would make a tailor of the old guard cringe with fear. If Anti fit is cool then I’m totally uncool.

Thom Brown's style is being seen bright and clear,

 

[Serial Hero]

check out the guy on the right

http://www.jcrew.com/home.jhtml;jsessionid=S4Y3AZ2YIRIKOCTFEEHBX1QKMUQROGUG?_requestid=230860
nuff said

 

[Marc Chevalier]

J. Crew has broken my sartorial heart. In the early and mid '90s, they made wonderfully cut trousers in a terrific variety of fabrics and weaves. Outdid Ralph Lauren, outdid all the mass manufacturers. I still rejoice when I find a '90s pair in a thrift store.


What happened? The waist dipped, the thighs narrowed, the pockets slanted, the dream died. J. Crew, say it ain't so!

.

 

[Hemingway Jones]

Although I agree with your many points, Matt, fit is an interesting concept. The seemingly endless variations in the manner of draping cloth around a person astound me.

Think of the tight fit and high button stance of a suit from the 30s. In many cases, the jackets were short and very well fitted, and contrast that with a longer cut modern suit that may fit well, but will certainly look different. An inch here on the length, a different lapel width, a different button stance, and it all looks different.

Since studying suits from the Golden Era, modern suits have begun to look very very long to me. Am I the only one?

Also, have you ever noticed how terrible the suits of most news casters are?

It seems that over-sized suits are an epidemic to American men. It seems, perhaps for comfort's sake, men migrate their sizes larger and larger. An excellent example is TCM's Robert Osborn. His suits must be 2 sizes too large. Someone should write the old boy a letter.

So, yes, I think we are on a bit of a paradigm shift in regards to fit with the old guard wearing big and baggy and the new and trendy migrating towards ill-fitted and tight-in-all-the-wrong-places aesthetics. Perhaps we are destined toward men wearing Bolero jackets to work. [huh]

 

[Marc Chevalier]

An inch here on the length, a different lapel width, a different button stance, and it all looks different.

Hem, you have just graduated to the upper level of the Sartorial School. You clearly see why tailoring/design is an art form.

.

 

[Jay]

Good point on the Robert Osborn thing Hemingway. I always thought that, too. Seems rather odd that the man who introduces all these old movies to me dresses in clothes that are ill-fitting. Isn't he learning anything from all those movies?

 

[Hemingway Jones]

Hem, you have just graduated to the upper level of the Sartorial School. You clearly see why tailoring/design is an art form.

.

Thank you, Master Po.

 

[Marc Chevalier]

I very nearly typed "Grasshopper." Cross my heart!

 

[Hemingway Jones]

Good point on the Robert Osborn thing Hemingway. I always thought that, too. Seems rather odd that the man who introduces all these old movies to me dresses in clothes that are ill-fitting. Isn't he learning anything from all those movies?

Agreed, Jay. I yell at the screen. It's bad enough the fellow goes with the shiny fabrics.

I could be totally wrong, but I get the impression that because he is a bit overweight, he drapes himself in these large jackets, when in fact, a beautifully tailored suit along the lines of Sidney Greenstreet would look so much better on him, and much more apropos.

 

[Hemingway Jones]

I very nearly typed "Grasshopper." Cross my heart!

That is spooky.

 

[Marc Chevalier]

Agreed, Jay. I yell at the screen.

It's funny ... the host of AMC, Nick Clooney (George's dad), dresses much better than Robert Osborne. Wonder if it's in the Clooney family's blood?

.

 

[Matt Deckard]

The idea today is that you have to have your shoulders bigger than any other part. In Greenstreets day they were closer to the actual shoulder even if your waistband was much wider. The 40's big guys still kept with tighter shoulder because they just don't look good when their shoulders try to compete with the waist. Nowaday like with Osborns suits, the shoulders are always made to be bigger which make the man look twice as heavy.

 

[MrBern]

Matt, I noticed some Ralph Lauren B&W ads that all the serious young men were wearing shorts w/ their small blazers. A definite Thom Browne thing.

Even his military chinos are dealt in a thom browne outgrown manner:

I think its jsut shows that theres a younger thinner demographic emerging.

 

[Marc Chevalier]

The whole silly thing is a snowball zooming down a hill: larger and larger it gets, before hitting a rock or going off a cliff. Meanwhile, the designers are scrambling to keep up with its momentum.


In 10 --no, 5-- years, GQ magazine will be loudly trumpeting "What were we thinking?" in its pages ... and they know it. Meanwhile, the show goes on.

.

 

[Brooksie]

check out the guy on the right

http://www.jcrew.com/home.jhtml;jsessionid=S4Y3AZ2YIRIKOCTFEEHBX1QKMUQROGUG?_requestid=230860
nuff said

Ugggg this outfit is horrible! (Sorry to be so mean to jcrew and model but ....)
Actually, so far all of the outfits shown in this thread are painful look at even.

Brooksie

 

[Benny Holiday]

I'm sorry, but that just looks bloody ridiculous. Who the hell would wear that absurdity? These 'designers' have no touch with reality. Maybe they're all designing for next year's circus clowns' fashions?

 

[Feraud]

Think of the tight fit and high button stance of a suit from the 30s. In many cases, the jackets were short and very well fitted, and contrast that with a longer cut modern suit that may fit well, but will certainly look different. An inch here on the length, a different lapel width, a different button stance, and it all looks different.

Good point. I think your comments defines the difference between a well fitted suit and something that is just too small or "anti-fit", as Matt has noted.

What I do not like about the Thom Browne look are his clothes being too small and not necessarily well fitted.

 

[Jovan]

I don't see the beef with Thom Browne. Him and his models wear the jackets one size too small usually, and with the trousers hemmed up past the ankle. I have seen Thom Browne clothes done tastefully. A prime example is here. (Minus the bare ankles, but others have worn them with little or no break.)

The trousers don't look uncomfortably snug, nor does the jacket. In fact, the jacket looks perfect in fit and not tugging at the fulcrum button at all.

 

[Jay]

I'll agree with Jovan, that suit looks real nice. I've got a suit from the late 50s with similar cut, as a matter of fact it's in my avatar, and I kind of like the narrow style.

 

[Matt Deckard]

difference between the suit Jovan is wearing and the suit's that are being shown in the magsazines and the Polo website is that Jovan's suit fits.