Let's compare the tailoring in two film scenes. Here is Fred Astaire dancing in Broadway Melody of 1940. Pay attention to how his clothing moves with him. 🧵
Here's the opening scene of Spectre. Daniel Craig is basically just walking in this scene.
Despite his more extreme movements (dancing vs walking), Astaire's tailoring moves with his body, rather than fighting against him. You can see this first with how Craig's jacket lifts off his neck when he raises his arm (collar gap). No lifting on Astaire.
Before someone suggests that Astaire's jacket collar may be pinned down, you can see it's not when he flies into the air. The jacket collar shifts up and down, but still stays glued to his neck throughout the scene. This is the result of high armholes and good tailoring.
Astaire's lapels always lay flat on his chest. Craig's lapels buckle away from his chest because his jacket is too small for him.
More of a stylistic matter, but Craig's shirt showing beneath his jacket's buttoning point ruins the visual fluidity of the suit, breaking things into distinct pieces. Astaire's high-rise pants and longer jacket achieve continuity.
Craig's jacket is too tight across the upper back. His sleeves are also too tight for his arms. As a result, the sleeveheads often have a divot. Astaire's sleeves don't have divots. They fall cleanly.
You can see the tightness towards the end of the scene. The side seams are straining on him. Whoever worked on this film tailored this suit within an inch of its life. The armholes are also quite low.
Since the suit is so shrunken, the scene opens with a collar gap and ends with a collar gap. The suit fights against Craig's body the whole time.
IMO, a lot of tailoring in films looks bad because:
1) Brand placement deals force actors into ready-made designer suits, rather than quality bespoke suits made for their body.
2) The trend towards shrunken silhouettes in the last 20 years. Does not work for everyone.
3) Questionable costume direction. A bespoke tailor told me that he made suits for a famous actor with a muscular build, but was told to keep taking in the seams because the costume dept wanted to show off the person's muscular figure. The result is bad from tailoring POV.
I would slim up Astaire's trousers just a tad in the original clip, but the quality of the tailoring is much better. Suit should allow for movement. At the very least, it should fall cleanly. This can be done even on muscular builds.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Someone asked if I could tell them where to buy a pair of good chinos. In this thread, I will tell you, but my answer is not simple. On the upside, I think this is a better approach when shopping for clothes and you can apply it to any kind of item. 🧵
A simple answer will go something like this: "Such-and-such makes the highest quality chinos." Or "this brand provides the best value." While potentially useful in some respects, I don't think this gives you the fullest picture.
Instead, let's start at the beginning.
During the 1898 Spanish-American War, US troops stationed in the Philippines wore sand-colored pants made from a heavy cotton twill woven in China. Since the Philippines had been under Spanish colonial rule at this time, the locals call these "pantalones chinos" (Chinese pants).
One day, "It" will happen, by which I mean sudden and unexpected news that you want to celebrate. In such cases, you will want the right outfit. 🧵
What do I mean by "It?" I mean that joyous moments are not always something you can plan for. Perhaps you received a pay raise or got accepted at a waitlisted school. Perhaps a loved one is now cancer-free. Such moments can be sudden and unexpected — and you want to be prepared.
Of course, you can always celebrate in the same clothes you wear to bed. But IMO, this diminishes the moment. Thus, it's nice to special outfits for "It," even if you don't wear them all the time. It's similar to toasting a special glass of champagne and drinking water.
In the 1950s, Irving Penn traveled across London, Paris, and NYC to take portraits of workers in their work clothes. These clothes at the time were not considered glamorous — they would not have shown up on fashion runways — but they demonstrate a simple aesthetic principle 🧵
Consider these outfits. How do you feel about them? Are they charming? Repulsive? Stylish?
If you consider them charming and stylish, as I do, then ask yourself: what makes them charming and stylish? Why are you drawn to the outfits?
As I've mentioned before, I think outfits look better when they have "shape and drape." By shape, I mean the outfit confers a distinctive silhouette. If these men took off their clothes, we can reliably guess their bodies would not be shaped like this:
If you're just dipping your toes into tailored clothing, start with a navy sport coat. This is something you can wear with a button-up shirt and pair of trousers, or something as casual as a t-shirt and some jeans. It's easily the most versatile jacket.
Key is to get something with texture so it doesn't look like an orphaned suit jacket. Spier & Mackay has great semi-affordable tailoring. Their navy hopsack Moro is made from pure wool and a half-canvas to give it shape. Classic proportions and soft natural shoulder
There's a pervasive belief that we no longer produce clothes in the United States. This is not true. In this thread, I will tell you about some great made-in-USA brands — some that run their own factories, while others are US brands contracting with US factories. 🧵
I should first note this thread focuses on well-made, stylish clothes produced in ethical conditions. For me, producing in the US is not enough. It means nothing if the clothes are ugly, crappy, or produced in sweatshop conditions. My article for The Nation below.
JEANS
Gustin produces MiUSA jeans using raw Japanese denim. "Raw" means the fabric hasn't been pre-distressed, allowing it to naturally fade with use, reflecting your actual body and lifestyle. I like their fuller 1968 Vintage Straight fit. They also do lots of other stuff.
Let's first establish good vs bad ways to think about style. The first pic is correct — style is a kind of social language and you have to figure out what type of person you are. The second pic is stupid bc it takes style as disconnected objects ("this is in" vs "this is out").
I should also note here that I'm only talking about style. I'm not here to argue with you about ergonomics, water bottle holders, or whether something accommodates your Dell laptop. I'm am talking about aesthetics.