New York Collections: Project Runway #1

I'm not even going to bother. This collection was awful. Poorly made, terrible styling, with every piece smacking of H&M by way of an Olivia Newton-John music video. Mystery designer, I'm sure you're better than this! Unless you aren't. Oh, how I hate not knowing these people! 

See the rest here.

New York Collections: Project Runway #2

This collection probably had the most ease and the most fun, but it teetered the lines of "unsophisticated" and "derivative" quite often. What was interesting, though, was how frequently it took inspiration from past Project Runway designers. The styling was atrocious, to boot. 

It's all right. Kara Janx meets Rami Kashou. Not crazy about the hip-widening skirt drapes, or the ill-fitting bodice, but the colors and fabrics are nice.

This was probably my favorite in the collection, but it's an old, old look, and this doesn't bring anything new to the table. I hate how the fabrics play off each other. And that hair! Nevertheless, it's whimsical and slightly wearable, which is more than can be said for the rest of this collection. 

I go back and forth on this one. I don't like the color, only because it isn't fresh, but I'm undecided about the braiding. It has that fairy-tale sort of look the collection's going for, but it falls flat as the only interesting aspect of the outfit. 

I liked this, and the pictures don't do it justice. The different layers looked effortless and soft. The silhouette reminds me very much of Sweet P, however, and the top of the bodice has a horrible, horrible shape.

Is this Project Runway Canada? Is Marie Genevieve pulling a Daniel Franco and coming back for a second try?

Feh, it's ok. The hem is heavy and distracting, but the fabric has a pretty quality and..well...the detail is...it's something. 

I loved seeing this come down the runway, because I am always tickled when I see someone trying to move normally in something like that. Yes, it smacks of Kenley Collins and, while I liked her version better, this one is more tailored and, therefore, somewhat interesting. The top is poorly made and boring, though.

Ugh. That fabric is some weird faux-crocodile-vaguely-ostrich-silk that just looks cheap and miserable. And those shoes are stupid.

Rami Kashou! It even has his horrible sense of color, how adorable. 

Sort of looks like an old Chloe Dao bridesmaid dress, huh? The top doesn't fit, though, so I guess that's where the comparisons to the second-winner stop. At least she could sew something correctly, even if it was a terrible gold lame cocktail dress. 

I hate the outfit underneath, but something draws me to the cape. Not the color or the fabric, both of which are terrible and bland all at once, but it was kind of cute. 

Well, it pains me to say I liked this. It moved well on the runway, and I loved the color-shifting quality the fabric had. But, oy, look underneath! All that puckering!

Overworked, Kashouesque, but something saves it. Maybe the bland colors make it not-so-overwhelming. There's a lot of workmanship in it, so at least he/she tried. 

Well, it was a little too sweet, a little too fairy tale, and a lot too derivative for my taste, but it looks fun and there's actually color in it. I predict second place because, the first collection was just downright horrible. This at least had a few redeeming qualities.

New York Collections: Project Runway #3

Honestly, there's no question that this collection was the best out of the three. It was sophisticated, well-made, and had a great dystopian, futuristic theme that kept me interested the entire time. It wasn't the most original perspective, but measured along with the other collections, it was the most unique. The lack of color was a bit disappointing, but there's no denying that playing it safe with all black makes it very tasteful when it easily could've been ruined with garish colors or lame, as is often the case with futuristic lines. The styling was severe and striking, which played off the clothes really well. 

When this came out, I jumped out of my seat. It's not necessarily the greatest look, but compared with the other collections, I knew immediately the tone of the show when this came out, and I also knew it was going to be interesting. And, isn't that what the opening look is supposed to do? Very successful. 

Great coat, even greater from the back; very wearable, but also interesting. And fabulous accessories, even if that purse looks a little too precious compared to the rest of the look.

I liked this top, especially the neckline, but not with the ill-fitting leggings and leather opera-length gloves. The lattice work, though, was impeccable and striking. 

I'm not a fan of the extended sleeves, or the drop waist on a coat that length, but the knits were a highlight in this collection. The collar could've been a little bit smaller, though. Actually, everything could have been a bit smaller. 

Urban, chic, with a vaguely Inuit undertone, which I found fantastic. I love the buckle and the graphic t-shirt, but she has a bit of a spare-tire from all the bulk. 

Still rocking the "Eskimo of the Future" look, and kudos. It's great and wearable. I just hope that fur is faux. 

The asymmetry on this looks like a mistake in the picture, but on the runway it created a very dynamic shape from the side. I'm not super-crazy about the leather bodice or the sort of imbalance with the skirt since it looks a little bottom-heavy, but it's cool and almost gets the point. 

I still like collars to, you know, be collars and not huge caplets but the jacket is pretty nice. However, for me, the best part of this look is  the t-shirt. I would buy that in a heartbeat.

Classic and simple, which is exactly what this collection had been lacking thus far. It's still a little bulky, though.

The shirt, again, is fabulous. Very Stephen Sprouse-y and uber-urban-chic. The sweater's ok, but the tights...annoy me. The whole layering lattice motif ran the risk throughout the whole collection of making it looked overworked, and this is one instance where it's noticeable. 

This, however, I loved, despite all the aspects competing with one another. Very detailed and interesting, and, combined with the overall styling, made a great look. Very editorial. I wish the sweater-y thing was a bit more refined and focused, but still it's striking.  

Hate the gloves with that tank dress and, ultimately, this was not a very memorable piece. I felt that I had already seen this.

It's kind of gorgeous, but to me, this looks like student work. It just seems like something a senior in a fashion design program slaves over for months, trying to whip out every technique he's good at into one overworked dress to get the attention of his professors. The layering gets really sloppy in the midsection and the top, and the one strap looks like an afterthought. The bottom, however, is breathtaking, and I guess the dress does a pretty good job of anchoring the collection.

Ultimately, it was a good collection that balanced "wearable" with "editorial", was (for the most part) well-executed and had the most distinct point of view out of all of the others. And that equals "winner" in Project Runway land. 

A Chilly Morning at Bryant Park

Before I share my fabulous experience at the Project Runway 6 Finale Show, I would just like to (again!) thank my favorite fags on Project Rungay for the invitation. I was touched! 

I arrived at Bryant Park at around 8. They didn't let us in until 8:30. It was 25 degrees. 

But, I got to see Chris March amid the freezing weather, and later I got to tell him how much I loved his hair (in his collection, not on his head). 

The tent was amazing, and even though I was in the back row, I saw everything pretty well.

There's Chris again, with Carmen Webber, who was sporting a fabulous coif with a pheasant feather. She's phenomenal. 

Jay McCarroll, looking deliciously like a Caribbean housewife, with Kara Janx (is she pregnant again?), Kevin Christiana and Malan Breton.

 

Heidi Klum and Michael Kors, who looks pissed off for some reason. 

Heidi and Ms. Gunn, who was just adorable! I don't know why Heidi chose the magic marker lipstick, though. She looked freaky.

And, of course, the fiercest fag in the tent, Christian Siriano and his boyfriend, Brad Walsh.

I took some runway shots, but none of them did justice to the clothes except this one. I want to post all about the collections later (with help from Getty Images!) but for what it's worth I liked the third collection the best. 

It was just such a monumental experience, I'm so glad I had the opportunity to go! I know it won't be my last fashion show.  

Inked.

After two years of mulling and procrastinating about the idea of body art, I finally succumbed to the temptation. A facsimile of Milton Glaser's logo for Tony Kushner's epic Angels in America, this icon represents a lot of things; first and foremost, my adoration of the play, and the unbelievable amount of inspiration it has given to me. An event and work which garnered numerous praise and accolades, including the 1993 Pulitzer Prize for Drama, and two consecutive Tony Awards, I am inclined to believe that it is truly one of the most important works of the 20th Century. Aside from that, this tattoo represents my interest in literature, drama and cinema (it was made into an impressive television miniseries in 2004), my homosexuality, my insanity and my political nature. 

In and of the image itself, several meanings are present; for one, the letter "A" obviously has great significance to me, and it also represents a beginning, the "alpha" as it were. The logo is described as "an elegant synthesis of the mechanical and organic" and this dichotomy is something I live with every day; this Apollonian/Dionysian philosophy is one that drives us all.  

After having popped my inky cherry, and in a sense triumphing over symbolizing my entire life concept, I wonder if I will get another...

Pics of the actual tattoo will come soon, when my skin is not bright cherry red.

This Movie Will Make You Want to Impale Yourself on a Picket Fence

I've been mulling around this review for a while (re: a week) and finally decided that Joe Neumaier of the New York Daily News summed it up exactly as I would have:

"...[the film] comes close but falls short of capturing Richard Yates' terrific novel... the movie — two-thirds Mad Men, one-third American Beauty, with a John Cheever chaser — works best when focusing on the personal. Thankfully, it's there that Mendes and screenwriter Justin Haythe catch some of Yates' weighty ideas, and where Leonardo DiCaprio and Kate Winslet succeed in doing the heavy lifting... DiCaprio, round-shouldered and sleepy-eyed, and Winslet, watchful and alert, raise up each other and everything around them. Never once shadowed by Titanic, they suggest, often wordlessly, the box the Wheelers have found themselves in. Whereas the novel is told mostly from Frank's viewpoint, the movie is just as much April's, and Winslet, whether fighting back or fighting back tears, is sensational."

It's like American Beauty on downers, basically, with lots of 50's flair. I enjoyed it, but it is hardly revolutionary (pun intended) for Mendes. 

Why So Serious?

This past summer I, like millions of other hopeless sheep, paid $9.50 to see The Dark Knight. I never bothered to review it (did I? no, I didn't) because it wasn't worth it. It was okay. Nothing spectacular, despite what everyone has been saying (and the horrible buzz of getting a Best Picture nom; bitch, please). Anyway, I felt today, the anniversary of Heath Ledger's tragic passing, was the time for me to address an issue: the pity praise. Now I know I'm a cynical little bitch, but I want everyone to be honest with themselves: if Heath hadn't died, would we all think the movie, and in particular his acting, would have been praised so heavily? Would it have been such a box-office smash? Perhaps, but I'm inclined to believe what I believe, namely that because of the horrifying events we the people are elevating the movie to a level it never reached on screen.

I say this because Heath was nominated, quite expectedly, for an Oscar this morning. Now. Not to intentionally criticize his performance, but there is little precedent to have an actor from a comic book movie be nominated for such an award. I can't remember any actor within the past 20 years who starred in a comic book-based movie be nominated for an Oscar. But, there's a first time for everything, right? I suppose. But let's just call a spade a spade: it's a little too coincidental that no role like this was ever recognized before by the Academy, and all of the sudden they found one to be worthy of a nomination just when said actor happened to die. 

Personally, I find it a tad insulting to almost all parties involved, and I'm pained to remember other posthumous  awards, such as the Tony and Pulitzer to Jonathan Larson for Rent, and posthumous nominations, like James Dean for East of Eden. Look. Everyone should realize that, whether by right or not, these accolades have some level of pity within them, and even if the greatest actor or writer or whatever does the best job, if he dies, that's always a fact you can't ignore. What's worse, people will probably get insulted if you don't award them and deem it "insensitive". Remember when everyone stood at the Golden Globes for Heath? What if it had gone to Ralph Fiennes? Would anyone stand for that? No. They'd be cursing under their breaths that Heath didn't win. It's ridiculous.

Is it a big deal? No, maybe not. But awards should be given to those who did the best job, and sometimes, it's hard to decide that with such extenuating circumstances. The solution? Special awards. They should just do it. That way, the dead can be honored for their performance without the academy feeling obligated to give it to the dead guy.

RIP Heath Ledger.

Oh, and THIS doesn't help anyone's case.