Showing posts with label "Project Runway". Show all posts
Showing posts with label "Project Runway". Show all posts

Friday, October 29, 2010

When "Project Runway" went from Bravo to Lifetime...

... this was all so predictable. Spoilers after the break and — presumably soon — in the comments.

I think the whole season has been soap opera. All dreams and journeys and men pushing back the strong woman and labeling her a bitch. You can see where the climax is on that story. It's a long hard struggle, but in the end, the climax belongs to the woman. On Lifetime. There were 3 gnomish little men and one giraffe-y woman, and the woman was stomped to the curb over and over. But in the end: Triumph!

But Tom And Lorenzo say it's about commerce:
[T]his was about Nina and Michael and in many ways that judging session was representative of an ongoing conversation in the fashion industry in light of the collapse of the economy. Namely, should the industry move away from a focus on theatrical high-priced luxury goods and fantasy clothes and should it embrace a more downscale, less complicated point of view? 
I wouldn't leave Heidi out of that. She may have taken Mondo's part in the big fight over who should win the show, but look at her line of women's clothing at Amazon. It could hardly be more "downscale" and utilitarian.
It's a discussion worth having and there are points to be made in favor of each side, but the bottom line is, this is a design competition and something of a game show. 
Yeah, Heidi kept saying it's a style show, but don't just hear what she says says. Look what she does. I'm talking about the oversized hooded ponchos she thinks will be snapped up by the Lifetime crowd.
... Despite the fact that they literally could not describe Mondo's collection without using the kind of language reserved for winning designers ("He's incredibly creative and talented.") the ONLY arguments made in support of Gretchen by Nina and Michael were "It's on trend" and "I can sell these garments." Pardon us for being purists, but what appalling arguments to be making. This is what happens when a show goes from ELLE Magazine and the Banana Republic accessories wall to Marie Claire and the Piperlime accessories wall. Project Runway was never cutting edge even on its best days, but the dumbing down of the brand has been a distressing thing to witness....
We think Gretchen is a talented designer and we think that there is a market and a customer for her work. We just don't think she'll be able to excite the public and interest the press the way that Mondo will....
I loved Mondo and assumed he would win, but in retrospect, I can see some problems. He was an extremely reserved person, and at the finale runway show, he seemed confused and close to breaking down. He seemed oddly numb. Also — I was willing to accept this particular man in shorts — but what sort of man wears shorts when he has big, scabby sores on his leg (as he did at the reunion session that preceded the judging)? Considering that he's HIV-positive, this was a disturbing showing of disrespect for other people. And listen to his confessionals: He was very self-absorbed. That was kind of endearing, but in the long run, you might not want that person to take on the work of carrying the banner of your brand name.

Finally, never forget that the show is edited to create a narrative and keep people watching. Gretchen won the first 2 competitions, and if that had kept going, the season would have been boring. The 3 guys — Michael, Andy, and Mondo — were selected as good foils for her, and the competitive tension was built around that. They pushed Gretchen around with criticisms and placement in the bottom 3 to wring melodrama out of her. They tried to make us love the 3 guys, and Mondo's rise to the presumed winner was the story they told as they beat Gretchen down. They put the reunion show before the final judging, which exaggerated her aloneness, while Mondo had his pals hugging him (despite his scabby leg). Gretchen got called a "bitch." Everyone out on the street, we were told, wants to know: Is Gretchen really a bitch? That was the narrative. And that narrative needs to end with victory for our heroine. Maybe it was too abrupt to be believable, but I think it was all in the script, perhaps from Day 1.

Monday, October 4, 2010

"We have our PhD's in Runwayology as well as our Master's in General Reality Television Studies and..."

"... reading between the lines and between the edits, we detect zero manipulation."

Did you think it was possible — 16 years after Pedro Zamora on "The Real World" — to wring intense pathos out of a reality show character's HIV-positive status? But that's what happened on "Project Runway," where perhaps there have already been HIV-positive contestants and the fact that a male contestant is gay is no revelation at all.

Anyway, I've loved Mondo Guerra all along, and Episode 10 made me cry. You can watch the whole thing here.

Monday, May 17, 2010

Colors that affected us recently.

There was that acorn that made you want to repaint biggest room in the house...

DSC09928

There was this...

DSC09883

... which made me fantasize that I was a contestant on "Project Runway" and the challenge was to design a dress it inspired...

And this...

DSC09880

... which made me think of the old days when I painted with real paint on canvas. What was that red? Alizarin?

Friday, September 18, 2009

Instead of shouting "You lie," try: "I’m incredulous at that utterly preposterous spewing of fiction."

That is: talk like Tim Gunn.

(Commenting, last night on "Project Runway," about Johnny's story about the spluttering iron ruining the newspaper dress.)

Yes, the task last night was to make something out of newspapers — the L.A. Times to be specific. And you thought the L.A. Times had become useless.

Thursday, August 27, 2009

"Towards the end I realized: it would be one thing to have a career that I could be great at..."

"... but it was another thing to have a career that I could be passionate about."

That's what Ra'Mon said about leaving medical school and the study of neurosurgery to become a fashion designer.
Forgive me, but did brother just say he left med school towards the END? To make clothes? If he wins this thing, I guess he'll be using the money to pay off the loans he took out to learn how to save people's lives from debilitating brain disorders.
Yeah, what's the whole story on why Ra'Mon walked away from a career in neurosurgery at the last minute? I'm thinking he must have screwed up somehow, or do you think he's a brilliant artist who simply must follow his passion? And by the way, if you needed brain surgery, would you trust a doctor who said he was passionate about neurosurgery?

So, to review. The questions are:

1. Did Ram'on really leave medical school at the end of the study of neurosurgery?

2. Do you think a background in neurosurgery would help in the design and construction of clothing? Be specific.

3. Should we abandon careers into which we have poured our time, effort, and money when we detect that we lack passion, assuming there is something else about which we do feel passion?

4. When do you want the provider of goods or services to be passionate about what he or she is doing and when do you see passion as a warning sign?

Bonus topic: Is leaving neurosurgery for fashion analogous to being married and having an affair, and does that suggest that Ra'Mon has made a mistake?

Saturday, August 22, 2009

"Bringing up the subject of the current first lady's shorts — indeed even admitting to noticing them — already has people booting up their laptops..."

"... and taking big, gulping swigs of self-righteousness before firing off e-mails and tweets declaring the whole discussion pointless."

Robin Givhan wants to talk about Michelle Obama's shorts. She's a fashion writer, okay? Deal with it!

And fashion is important. ("[C]lothes are part of our broader aesthetic obligation to each other.")

By the way, did you watch the first episode of the new season of "Project Runway"? On — ugh! — Lifetime now, instead of Bravo.

Thursday, October 2, 2008

Tantrums and tulle-fights.

I'm thinking about the big VP debate tonight -- and I will be live-blogging it -- but first, I just have to bitch about "Project Runway." Last night's episode was soooo annoying.

[Spoiler alert.]

They got to do evening gowns, inspired by flowers and foliage. That gives them the most possible room to show whatever brilliance they've got in them. And what did we get? Nothing but junk... and -- off the runway -- tantrums and tulle-fights. And after all that, no one is eliminated!

Thursday, February 21, 2008

"I hope you die in an organza accident, you preening little cockatoo."

I love this dramatization of last night's episode of "Project Runway."

I haven't been blogging episodes of the show this season, but this has been a great season, with excellent work and incredibly amusing characters, especially the adorable — and fierce — Christian Siriano.

Thursday, January 3, 2008

That was twizzled.

Everything was a little off last night on "Project Runway." It was obvious to anyone with experience scrutinizing reality show editing that Jillian — the designer who made a bodice and skirt out of Twizzlers — was not in danger of losing — as they tried to make you think — but that she was going to end up triumphing. (It was just like Austin and the corn husks in Season 1.) But then she didn't win. Using materials scavenged from the Hershey store, she was the only one who saw fit to make her clothes out of food. Yet she came in second. At least first went to one of the designers who used candy wrappers as fabric and not one of the many idiots who tried to make it easy by using cloth (disgusting cloth ripped from novelty pillows). And then they kicked out Elisa and not Sweet P. Why? Because she turned the candy theme macabre. But you could her demise coming — you who have experience scrutinizing reality show editing — because they chose this episode to let us in on her tragic background — a Porsche crashed into her head and split it open 4 inches (which may explain a good bit of her elfin eccentricity).

Thursday, November 15, 2007

The Democratic Debate/"Project Runway."

I haven't been watching much TV lately, and I don't following any show as it airs. I bought the season of "Survivor: China" to download and watch it on my iPhone when I'm traveling. I love "Curb Your Enthusiasm," but I catch up with it on HBO on Demand when I'm back in Madison. And I like the TV pastime. I want to watch maybe an hour or 2 of television in the evening. I don't get around to it here in NYC, mostly because the TV is small and un-flat. (How did the bulge of a picture tube become so distractingly unaesthetic that I'd prefer not to watch at all?)

But now, tonight, we've got another Democratic Debate, and it looks like a hot one (unless Wolf Blitzer makes it cold). Simultaneously, "Project Runway" is back. Robin Givhan reviews:
Most problematic... is that by the first episode, too many of the competitors have settled into well-worn archetypes. Were these 15 men and women chosen because they have such instantly familiar personalities? When the cameras are off, does Siriano really embody every single fashion cliche? Or do these players adjust their personalities to fit a preconceived ideal? In short, who exactly is having a crisis of authenticity: the show's producers or the cast?...

Siriano will be playing the role of the effete and sarcastic wunderkind. Webber stars as the overly confident fashion victim who thinks her experience as a model will serve as her secret weapon for winning the competition. Ricky Lizalde promises to be the contestant most prone to spontaneous weeping. And within the first 15 minutes, Elisa Jimenez, who makes giant marionettes, establishes herself as the avant-garde head case who describes her clothes as "mythical" and, for the first challenge, grinds grass stains into silk chiffon to "imbue it with a natural element."
Reality TV is a subtle mix of real and fiction. The players are themselves and they create themselves. That's part of what is so fascinating. Are we seeing what really happened or what was edited into existence? Endless layers of complexity to gaze into. Deep and frivolous.
Tim Gunn is back as the design-room mentor. And so are judges Michael Kors and Nina Garcia.
Plus Heidi. How perfect! But the first challenge is horrifically unfair, as Givhan describes in a spoiler I won't copy. That's just one more thing to talk about.

Life is unfair, fashion contests are unfair.

But it's the debate that I've got to make time for tonight. It's a long ordeal, and I'm going to preserve my stamina today so I can live-blog it — energetically, I hope. Last time, I fell asleep, and I missed the whole driver's license interchange. I didn't come away with an opinion about whether "the boys" — as Bill Clinton called them — ganged up on Hillary and whether Hillary showed her vulnerability. So it will be interesting — I've got to find it interesting — to see if Wolf is tame — did they get to him? — and whether Obama can take advantage of any cracks in Hillary's once-impervious facade.

Life is unfair, fashion contests are unfair, debates are unfair.

ADDED: I now realize I could have watched "Project Runway" last night. I adore the show, but not enough to keep track of when it's on.

Friday, September 7, 2007

Watching a bit of TV.

I keep forgetting to blog about TV. Am I watching anything (aside from that debate the other night)? Well, I'm still following "Top Chef," and, being a "Project Runway" fan, I had to check out "Tim Gunn's Guide to Style."

Speaking of style, Tim Gunn may have style sense when it comes to fashion, but a TV show needs some style too. He's great on "Project Runway," where he's offset by lots of other characters, but look how they built a show around him! They paired him up with Veronica Webb, who is incredibly stiff and dull. And there are no contestants, just a makeover target. On the show I watched, this unbelievably uninteresting woman was shown over and over doing one of two things: acting demure and modest or getting excited about all the fabulous stuff they were giving her. Here she is failing to project her essential femininity and here she squealing and clapping and saying things like "wow."

The worst part was in the end, when our made-over darling performed a fashion show in her living room for her family and friends. Her husband presented her with a new engagement ring -- something the show gave him to replace the crappy engagement ring that was all he could afford when they actually got engaged. He couldn't get insulted when they displaced the ring he bought for her. He had to be all sobby and grateful and then do a little re-proposal at the end of the fashion show, blabbing irrelevantly about how much he loved her, which he obviously did -- whether she was wearing jeans and T-shirts or the little dresses that the show insisted she wear to highlight her feminity.

Then, predictably after much foreshadowing, they made a big deal of her mother showing up. That part was almost funny, because obviously they knew the mother was on her way, but they put on the fashion show without her, and then they made a big deal about the big surprise they were about to reveal, and I really think the woman thought she was going to get more material goods. Then, the doors flew open and it was just mom. It's not as if she hadn't seen mom in ages. Mom had just had "an operation." Yeah? For what? You know if it was cancer, they'd have said. It was probably something entirely undangerous. But it wasn't funny, because it was idiotic manipulation, trying to make us cry over absolutely nothing.

And I adore Tim Gunn. I can't watch his horrible show. I await the new season of "Project Runway," but it will be "Project Runway" without Tim Gunn. Oh, the tragedy of TV spinoffs.

Thursday, May 24, 2007

Two new books about Hillary Clinton.

Anything new?
"A Woman in Charge: The Life of Hillary Rodham Clinton," by Carl Bernstein, reports that Clinton as first lady was terrified she would be prosecuted, took over her own legal and political defense, and decided not to be forthcoming with investigators because she was convinced she was unfairly targeted. While in Arkansas, according to Bernstein, she personally interviewed one woman alleged to have had an affair with her husband, contemplated divorce and thought about running for governor out of anger at her husband's indiscretions.

"Her Way: The Hopes and Ambitions of Hillary Rodham Clinton," by Jeff Gerth and Don Van Natta Jr., reports that during her husband's 1992 campaign, a team she oversaw hired a private investigator to undermine Gennifer Flowers "until she is destroyed."...

According to Gerth and Van Natta, even before the Clintons were married they formulated a "secret pact of ambition" aimed at reinventing the Democratic Party and getting to the White House. The authors cite a former Bill Clinton girlfriend, Marla Crider, who said she saw a letter on his desk written by Hillary Clinton, outlining the couple's long-term ambitions, which they called their "twenty-year project."...

The authors report that the Clintons updated their plan after the 1992 election, determining that Hillary would run when Bill left office. They cite two people, Ann Crittenden and John Henry, who said Taylor Branch, the Pulitzer prize-winning historian and close Clinton friend, told them that the Clintons "still planned two terms in the White House for Bill and, later, two for Hillary."
I'm not troubled that a husband and wife would discuss their shared ambitions, but putting a "secret pact of ambition" in writing seems really disturbing. But is it true? Unless I see the document, I'm not going to get any more exercised over it than I already am about the prospect of a President who's already had his two terms getting back into the White House through his wife.

There's some interesting material at the link about Bill Clinton's affairs, which you'd think would be a very tired subject by now. Bernstein writes about Marilyn Jo Jenkins, "a power company executive he fell in love with and almost left his wife over":
Jenkins ... was spirited into the governor's mansion at 5:15 a.m. for a final, furtive meeting with him the day he left for Washington to assume the presidency -- [and] Bernstein's account makes clear her pivotal role.

Bill Clinton wanted to divorce his wife to be with Jenkins in 1989, Bernstein reports, but Hillary Clinton refused. "There are worse things than infidelity," she told Betsey Wright, the governor's chief of staff.
The key question now is what these things about Bill mean about Hillary. It's not a hard question to answer, though, it seems. The narrative is ambition, and Bill Clinton is what he is. On balance, he's quite useful to an ambitious plan. But who knows the real truth? Who knows what the two of them have said to each other? We can't know, and yet we must form opinions about her.

Thursday, May 3, 2007

Obama gets MySpace to give him control of a fan's webpage.

AP reports:
For the past two and a half years, the page has been run by an Obama supporter from Los Angeles named Joe Anthony. At first, that arrangement was fine with the Obama team, which worked with Anthony on the content and even had the password to make changes themselves.

But as the site exploded in popularity in recent months, the campaign became concerned about an outsider having control of the content and responses going out under Obama's name and told Anthony they wanted him to turn it over.

In this new frontier of online campaigning, it's hard to determine the value of 160,000 MySpace friends—about four times what any other official campaign MySpace page has amassed. But the Obama campaign decided they wouldn't pay $39,000, which is what Anthony said he proposed for his extensive work on the site, plus some additional fees up to $10,000.

MySpace reluctantly stepped in to settle the dispute and decided that Obama should have the rights to control http://www.myspace.com/barackobama as of Monday night, while Anthony had the right to take the contact information for all the friends who signed up while he was in control. That includes the right to tell them exactly how he feels about the Obama campaign.
There is a bundle of questions here. Is it acceptable for a someone to use someone else's name for their URL? Should MySpace have done Obama's bidding or protected the individual user? Should someone who claims to be a candidate's supporter try to extract money from the campaign? If the effort to extract the money fails, should the erstwhile supporter denounce the candidate on line? What will happen in the next instance, as candidates and individual users see how this little drama plays out?

Here's Anthony's blog, where he tells the world how he feels:
I did want to be paid, if we were to continue working together . This was not an attempt to use this profile for commercial purposes. This was an attempt to keep working my ass off on this profile, for Barack Obama, and for the enormous community of supporters on Myspace....

The campaign got involved in February and although at first it was very exciting, it quickly became clear that they just had no interest in me or my involvement. They only wanted to take control of the profile and get on with it. I bit the bullet for a while and kept working for the good of the campaign, but they quickly went from passive aggressive, to aggressive, and then eventually just rotten and dishonest....

Apparently the message here is, as an individual, if you have too big of an impact, you're just a liability.

This is how Obama lost my vote, and one of his strongest supporters....

... I'm passionate about this right now. All this work, all this progress is down the drain, and I'm absolutely heart-broken.
Read the whole thing for Anthony's details of how the campaign treated him. It's notable that Anthony had worked on the profile since 2004. There are tons of comments to his blog post, presumably many of them from the people Anthony had previously inspired to support Obama. Sample comments:
HAHA this is funny stuff. This is the first thing I know of that obama has accomplished....

This is so not cool... I've disassociated myself with the Obama campaign and will seriously question if I'll do anything to help him get elected. He seemed better than this, but it is all about his 'managers' and from what I can see, they bite. Honestly, is Bush the problem, or is it his managers? This smacks of the kind of thing Karl Rove would embrace... not good Mr Obama, not good at all....

I was considering to vote for obama, but not anymore. If this is how his lackeys act in the shadows it may be the way that he would run the government.
But the comments over here take a different tack. Sample:
the fact that there was an unofficial fan page out there with an official-sounding URL and 160,000 friends that could potentially misrepresent Obama....

Cry me a river you leach. You don't volunteer to help a candidate then turn around and demand $39,000 for something thats not even yours to begin with(according to Myspace EULA)....

Guys ... if this guy was doing all this web-work out of the goodness of his heart, and truly unconditionally supported Barak, why didnt he just offer up the page for free?...

This guy was asking for way to much for a page that wasn't rightfully his to begin with, and I sure wouldn't want my donation to Obama's campaign to go to paying off some guy on Myspace....
And now the bloggers will talk about this. And the blogger's commenters. What do you think? What do I think? It's really bad to destroy someone else's work, and really stupid when that person was your supporter -- your influential supporter. What could they have thought made it worth making this ugly, conspicuous power play? The fear of losing control of your message? But expressing that fear also makes you look bad! You don't like people independently expressing political messages, and you want to control things? That's bad enough, but you didn't succeed in controlling him -- he seems to have a bigger audience right now -- and you've converted his message from a positive one to a negative one.

UPDATE: Here's the response from the Obama campaign. It contains too many excuses about how hard it is to run a political campaign and relies too heavily on their sense of entitlement to Anthony's website. There are vague references to their "arrangement" with Anthony, but it looks as though they never came to terms about it. Why did they wait so long to put something in writing? Were they naive and incompetent or did they mean to get their foot in the door by being low key and, over time, to make Anthony feel that he owed them the site?
At the end of the day, this is all new for everyone -- this Joe, that Joe, and everyone participating or commenting on it. We're flying by the seat of our pants, and establishing new ways of doing things every day. We're going to try new things, and sometimes it's going to work, and sometimes it's not going to work. That's the cost and that's the risk of experimenting.
You might want to try to project an image of competence if you want to be President.