De-Lovely Clothing

[Lauren]

They did, and it during the wedding scene. which she looked fabulous in.

More good Pics of costumes

 

[Wild Root]

OK, I remember now. But, still, all good costumes aside, the music was horrible and ill executed.

=WR=

 

[Lauren]

Not all the music. But most of it, yes.

I watch movies for the costumes so It's easy to ignore everything else

 

[Vanessa]

Trust me, you don't look like them! You two look BETTER!!! They could only dream and hope to look as period and classy as you and Dan, PERIOD!

Exactly. You two look vintage. They look like modern people trying to look vintage.

 

[Wild Root]

That's the way to put it!

Well said!

=WR=

 

[DanielJones]

Robbie Williams did his rendition of De-Lovely in the movie. I thought it was pretty good myself.
One thing that I point out to my girlfriend all the time is that people looked different back then. We of today visually wouldn't fit in back in the day even if we did dress like everyone else. Look at all the photographs, all the Petty & Vargas Girls. The facial structure was different, the type of makeup women used and how it was applied was different. How men wore their clothing & hats was different. And as hard as one tries to look vintage, we still don't fit the mould because we just plain look different. So it stands to reason that they don't look just right in these films, even if they were to get the costuming spot on. There is just something different that we can't match. We get darn close, but not spot on. So I try not to be too critical of how I view what others (in film or real life) dress vintage. It looks nice, even if it isn't spot on. They tried.
But hey, that's just my two cents.

Cheers!

 

[Wild Root]

Robbie Williams did his rendition of De-Lovely in the movie. I thought it was pretty good myself.
One thing that I point out to my girlfriend all the time is that people looked different back then. We of today visually wouldn't fit in back in the day even if we did dress like everyone else. Look at all the photographs, all the Petty & Vargas Girls. The facial structure was different, the type of makeup women used and how it was applied was different. How men wore their clothing & hats was different. And as hard as one tries to look vintage, we still don't fit the mould because we just plain look different. So it stands to reason that they don't look just right in these films, even if they were to get the costuming spot on. There is just something different that we can't match. We get darn close, but not spot on. So I try not to be too critical of how I view what others (in film or real life) dress vintage. It looks nice, even if it isn't spot on. They tried.
But hey, that's just my two cents.

Cheers!

Robbie Williams? I?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢m glad you liked it but as for me, it was like some one took Frank Sinatra from the Sands in Vegas 1961 and dropped him in the middle of the Great Depression! Didn?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢t work for me one iota! The way the band played that song just sounded very 60?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s Vegas. I?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢m sorry, if you ever listen to the original recording or any song from 1925-1935, you?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢ll know what I mean. He was the wrong man for the job in my opinion. Good singer, good performer, but the wrong style for a mid 1930?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s song.

You know, I agree with you on several points you made but, not 100%. I?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢ll tell you, maybe I?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢m lucky but, many have told me I have an old fashioned look about me. I wear my clothes (vintage as they are) I wear them the way they were most likely worn then. I comb my hair like they did, or as I would have done had I lived that time. That photo is of me from three years ago believe it or not. It was taken with a 1930?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s box camera with 120 film, my suit is vintage from the 40?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s with a 40?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s tie and such. The structure I?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢m standing next to is a 1939 Band shell in a park in International Falls Minnesota.

I have seen some try and pull of a vintage look but fail completely all because of the hair! Hair is what makes the look. Heck, I know some people that have dressed up and taken photos much like this and you wouldn?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢t know the difference if it was modern or a true vintage photo!

I do agree that most people back then did look some what different but, it?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s all because of the hair styles and clothes. Some people today put on 100% period clothes and when they wear them, it looks like a costume some times because they don?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢t feel confident in them. You must own the look to carry it off right. I have looked in many old High School year books from the 30?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s and 40?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s and have seen people that look exactly like some of my friends! It?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s spooky! There were all sorts of different faces and body shapes and sizes even back then, believe it! Not every man was a Bogart and not every woman back then was a Ginger Rogers. Heck, people with those styled facial structures today don?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢t get into movies because that?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s not what Hollywood wants any more!

It was only 60 years ago, not 6,000! I have shown this photo to friends and they have asked me if that is my grandfather. Maybe I?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢m gifted with capturing the vintage look but, it comes with wearing it 24-7, watching real old movies, not these modern period films only and hearing old radio shows and music.

=WR=

 

[Lauren]

Robbie Williams did his rendition of De-Lovely in the movie. I thought it was pretty good myself.
One thing that I point out to my girlfriend all the time is that people looked different back then. We of today visually wouldn't fit in back in the day even if we did dress like everyone else. Look at all the photographs, all the Petty & Vargas Girls. The facial structure was different, the type of makeup women used and how it was applied was different. How men wore their clothing & hats was different. And as hard as one tries to look vintage, we still don't fit the mould because we just plain look different. So it stands to reason that they don't look just right in these films, even if they were to get the costuming spot on. There is just something different that we can't match. We get darn close, but not spot on. So I try not to be too critical of how I view what others (in film or real life) dress vintage. It looks nice, even if it isn't spot on. They tried.
But hey, that's just my two cents.

Cheers!

I agree for the most part. There's a few people that can pull off the period look very well. But then, we will never have the complete aura simply because our thinking structure and the world we lived in is not the same. And it never will be. What we are inside and what we are surrounded with so deeply deals with our outward appearance! And we try to take the vintage clothing and suit them to modern ideals of what vintage should look like- we have to really be following periodicals and movies of the period to truly "get it". We simply can't expect people who make their living doing costuming for period movies to be able to make it wholly vintage. In the first place, they're working on anything from modern to sci-fi to elizabethan to 70's to 40's in a year. In the second- the studios that have to money to do the period pieces are making them for modern audiences, who want the actors or actresses to look good by their standards. So what is authentic is not the highest regard IN MOST CASES. We're getting a lot better as time goes on.

 

[ITG]

I personally liked most of the music (I could do without that "Be a Clown" song). The music was done on purpose to have a modern flair to it, which is why I like it...it's something different. The whole movie was done up artistically and as a result so was the music. Those were two things I appreciated about the movie:
1. the modern flair to the music
2. the way the story was told with Gabriel as a type of host to Cole Porter's story...having a bit of a "It's a Wonderful Life" retrospective feel.

 

[DanielJones]

WR: I would have to agree with you sir. There are those, like yourself, who can pull off the look spot on, no doubt. But there are those, like some of the cast of De-Lovely, that look like modern folks playing dress up. I think that Lauren is correct in her point as well, that it comes from the inside and how one carries themself and what they suround themselves with. So, a modern person can pull off the vintage persona if their mindset is vintage as well.
As far as the music is concerned I own several original records of Cole Porter's music and enjoy it very much. But I also enjoyed the little modern twist to his music as well. I agree that it wouldn't fit in with a 1930's audience, but it has probably found its place with a modern one.
I've watched 'Anything Goes' several time and love their renditions of Porter's & Cahn's Music. But I also enjoyed the new flair too. I just look at music as a living evolvable thing. Able to take on many interpritations. What works for some just doesn't fly for others, and that is all well and fine. I thoroughly enjoy Bing Crosby's version of White Christmas. No one can croon like DerBingle. But I'm sure that someone new can pull off a rendition that would be acceptable to the ear. It may not be Bing, but no one is.
Thank you for such a lively debate WildRoot, how refreshing. I've enjoyed this. We will agree to disagree and have fun doing it. It gives my mind a little more to chew on. Have a great evening.

Cheers!

Dan

 

[Vladimir Berkov]

One thing I have noticed is that I never think I look "vintage" regardless of what I am wearing because I always just see "me." I can look at a friend standing there next to me wearing similar clothes and think how cool he looks but I will never think that I look right.

 

[DanielJones]

Almost forgot, WR, in this photo you posted you look like the actor David Tomlinson (Mr. Emelius Browne from Bedknobs and Broomsticks). Very slick. All you need is the little moustache.

Cheers!

Dan

 

[Wild Root]

Thank you very much!

Well, this is interesting to say the least. I have been told by many that I?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢m not of this time! I surround my self with vintage items. In fact, I made some great milk shakes with my 1938 Waring blender this week! Yep, only thing new was the ice cream and strawberries!

I don't want to sound like an 80 year old but, I like the music the way it was. It's plenty different and beautiful apposed to what they're making today! They had such better phrasing and arrangements when this music was first recorded. Cole Porter?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s music was great and I feel with these modern twists, people today are gypped the pleasure to hear how Porter intended it to sound and to hear the original bands to perform them that made these songs popular to begin with. The spot where that kid couldn't understand how to sing "Night and Day" is one case. That song is so hard to do, and I will have to say that Fred Astaire sang it the best.

I'm happy some of you find this movie entertaining and fun but as for I, I was this [ ] close to walking out on it. How they wanted to focus on Porter as a bi-sexual was also not sitting with me very well.

I'm going to keep kicking this like a dead horse but, come on, Robbie singing De Lovely looking the part, with a band that looked 100% 1930's but the sound was that of a Los Vegas show from the 60's? That is not a modern twist, that's just cruel!

This movie had good intentions but was not right in many ways as I see it. I say this because; the average Joe that sees this movie thinks that it?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s a movie for males who chose alternate life stiles if you know what I mean. So, when I dress period and go out, I hear: Hey, Cole Porter! Then laughter erupts. So, you can see where I get some of my distaste for this film. I?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢m not big on the Broadway style. It was good up till 1940 then became some what corny after that. Just me I guess.

Signed your bitter stubborn vintage perfectionist! With love.

=WR=

PS. Vlad ol' friend, I know just how you feel! I used to feel that way too believe it or not!

 

[Daniel Riser]

Let's also remember that there was a significant difference between 1930's America and 1930's Hollywood.

I see simple differences that really give a period feel. As far as non-Hollywoodian vintage... things like the tie being slightly crooked, a handkerchief sticking out more than what would be aesthetically sound, a collar bar loose, the part in a hair style just off, bad big grinning teeth, suits that DON'T FIT! and a beat up hat crowning a really nice suit.

Whereas the Hollywood look was perfect because they had stylists, tailors and personal costumers that knew their stuff! Not to mention great photographers with quintessential lighting techniques.

I think if you pose like you know what you're wearing you'll come off Hollywoodian, iconoclasm at its most ruthless, but to really get a normal 1930's America pose I think you almost have to completely disregard what you'r wearing mentally.

Ok no more typing when I'm tired... too much rambling. So sorry.

 

[Wild Root]

No, no, that's ok Dan, you type great wile tired. Now, get to bed young man!

I agree with ya! Good point made! Now, there are differences in this as well! Some well off "Non Hollywood" people did wear their clothes with pride too. They had a confidence about them that just said: I'm sharp and you know it!

Some others were like this guy, Sorry to do this to ya but, I must!

I call this guy, ugly vintage guy

Ok, now back on subject!

=WR=

 

[Daniel Riser]

OHHHHH MY MAC HAS A NEW WALLPAPER!

 

[DanielJones]

WR: I agree with you whole heartedly that the general public is being gyped. But as a very good friend of mine once said, "99% of the world is asleep 99% of the time." Most folks wouldn't know good clothing and music if it was laid right in front of them. Of course, even back then there was no accounting for some peoples taste. You're right about the music too, Der Bingle was born to burble "Blow, Gabriel, Blow".
Also, I hate to disappoint you, but Cole Porter was gay. She was the only woman he was ever in love with, but he had numerous affairs with men. There were quite a few actors & entertainers that either batted for the other team or swung both ways because it was the fad of the time. There's a reason they called it the Gay 20's. Not everyone, but there were a handful of the high profile folks that played that tune. But that was the way of the world back then and that was part of Porters life that they showed instead of hiding from it. I think they touched on that portions of his life gracefully without throwing it in your face.

Ok, it's getting late and I can't type coherently anymore. Night!

Cheers!

Dan

 

[Wild Root]

OHHHHH MY MAC HAS A NEW WALLPAPER!

HAHAHAHA, Really? That's classic! Happy "Ugly vintage guy" has a new home!

Ah, such good talks and chats we have here! I knew Cole was gay; just never really enjoy seeing it I guess. Not really a "Home-a-phoebe" but, you know, rather not see it. I'll have to correct ya on something ol' friend, the term is the "Gay 90's". the 20's were the Roaring 20's. Homosexuality was not an unknown thing back in those days but, it was kept in the closet 95% of the time. The word gay in those days meant happy and it wasn't till the 60's and 70's that the word gay took on a new meaning.

Have a good night every one in Fedora land!

=WR=

 

[Lauren]

That's not entirely true. In the big cities it was more known, mostly in Hollywood and among the artists and designers. People just looked the other way, rather than broadcasting it.

 

[DanielJones]

Ah! Thank you for the correction. Hate it when I get it wrong. Oh well.
And I'd have to agree with Lauren in that point. Most Gays didn't broadcast their preference to the general public. But it was more open on the big cities like Hollywood & New York. In the films we have to take the bad with thegood I guess. But all of that is a subject for another thread.

Cheers!

Dan