The London Lounge

I saw the Skyfall movie yesterday and thoroughly enjoyed it. It is an exceptional Bond film. The one item that didn't work for me was the Tom Ford suits worn by Bond. The jackets were very short- Italian like- and the trousers more like skinny jeans. Contrast this with the exceptional suits worn by Ralph Fiennes which gave a much better silhouette. Fiennes wore Timothy Everest made from Scabal cloth to the UK premier. I don't know whether Everest dressed him for the film but the Ford suits seemed very out of place for a British spy. Any thoughts?

Even though I haven't seen the movie yet, only a lot of advertisement, I definitely agree that the JB's suits look quite horrible. I've always found that Tom Ford's suits have something very attractive to them, but the collection for this movie has disappointed me. Not only are the jackets too short and the pants too tight – as you mention – but they are made from some lightweight, shiny fabric. The fit appears not only tight, but more like the fashion forward (fashion two years back, that is) snug fit. But on the flip side he's using Crockett & Jones One thing I do like, though, is the pin collar of his shirt, which I find quite interesting.

Cheers,
Soren

I don´t particularly like these Tom Ford suits: way too form-fitting and tight all over. But I believe that -beyond the "fashion" statement- they match the current JB film persona (rugged, humorless, etc.) very well.
The Highbury C&J´s (or the chukka boots) are good elegant choices to follow his “action” suits. At least he is wearing whole-cuts and not Derbys with his dinner suit.

I agree fully with the comments about his lounge suits being too tight, and the coats too short. The dinner suit was better proportioned, but did not sit up well on the neck, which is a sure sign of a poor fit.

Have yet to see the film, but I do agree with the comments here judging by what I've seen in trailers.

In my opinion, Tom Ford suits are most attractive in its most traditional cut, elegant with a bigger lapel, good length, well proportioned (although a few years back, they shortened the jacket a bit, which I don't like).

The James Bond of years back was a man of resplendent taste. Breakfast was his favorite meal, he wore a bespoke Chesterfield, and only the woman who kissed him could sense the Floris 89. Today, James travels in a track suit and sneakers. He has no time for breakfast and owns no overcoat. He shops at J Crew and sports designer cologne. The latest Bond girl has to buy his dinner jacket for him because he came to Monte Carlo without one. Does anyone really believe that he can tie his own bow tie? All this is rather sad. After all, how hard could it have been to make Daniel Craig look good?

rodes wrote:The James Bond of years back was a man of resplendent taste. Breakfast was his favorite meal, he wore a bespoke Chesterfield, and only the woman who kissed him could sense the Floris 89. Today, James travels in a track suit and sneakers. He has no time for breakfast and owns no overcoat. He shops at J Crew and sports designer cologne. The latest Bond girl has to buy his dinner jacket for him because he came to Monte Carlo without one. Does anyone really believe that he can tie his own bow tie? All this is rather sad. After all, how hard could it have been to make Daniel Craig look good?

That is true, but is it conceivable that a secret agent, who has undergone intensive military training and have had to rough it out with KGB spies, would look quite as immaculate as the Bond of yesteryear? I think that if JB were more than a mere fictional character, he'd probably resemble Craig, than, say, the polished looks of Pierre Brosman, Roger Moore or a young Sean Connery. Not that I'm disagreeing on the problems with Tom Ford's suits on Craig, but merely pointing out that the portrayal of Bond by Craig is in all likelihood more realistic.

marburyvmadison wrote:the portrayal of Bond by Craig is in all likelihood more realistic.

And realism, after all, is what we cherish in Bond films.

Edward Bainbridge wrote:

marburyvmadison wrote:the portrayal of Bond by Craig is in all likelihood more realistic.

And realism, after all, is what we cherish in Bond films.

We do?!
I always thought things were rather far-fetched in Bond movies. Enjoyably so, but realism was the last thing that occurred to me while watching them.

Then again, maybe I wasn't entirely serious.

That's more realistic now

Costi wrote: I always thought things were rather far-fetched in Bond movies. Enjoyably so, but realism was the last thing that occurred to me while watching them.

One of the things I loved about Sean Connery's Bond was the fact that although what was going on the screen was pretty outrageous, he managed through his acting -showing humor and certain human vulnerabilities- to put fantasy into perspective and to keep at least one foot (maybe just a toe) on the ground of reality. A perfect combination. No longer the case, sadly, with the dry Mr. Craig.

The problem with Daniel Craig playing James Bond is two-fold: he's diminutive in stature, pugnacious, and cannot read a funny line for a laugh if his life depended on it. Humor eludes him. Regarding Tom
Ford's tailoring, the less said the better. His style always looks like he's peaking over the shoulders of a good cutter and tailor, but hasn't the faintest idea of being able to actually do the work himself. A
stylist does not a good tailor necessarily make!

You're better off feeding your Blu-ray player with Sean Connery playing Bond.

JMB

I think that selecting 'the best' Bond actor and films is largely determined by one's age. Some of us saw out first Bond (Goldfinger in my case in the Autumn of 1964, indeed one of the first films that I ever saw), on one of Oscar Deutsch's (largely lost) great big, Odeon screens. We were just four or five, and first heard the theme tune and recall the bronze DB5 and its gadgets, the gun silencer, Bond's roll in the hay with Honor Blackman and the banter between Bond and Goldfinger, as a laser threatens to slice Bond in two; the bomb detonator stopped at 007 seconds, and realize that it all made quite an impact. Later on, we read the books. For me, anyway, the idea ofJames Bond lies is somewhere between the sketch that Fleming himself drew, the descriptions of his appearance and his ideas in the books, and Sean Connery's light-hearted portrayal on screen. Bond will never be for me a hybrid between a humourless, thuggish, muscle-bound, postprandial Popeye, and a hiphop star, with the movements of a computer action game animation - in suits that are tailored for him without his knowledge! But my daughter (who is 23) likes Craig and there we are. I've never asked her whether she prefers Connery but I suspect that, secretly, she might.

I thought that Casino Royale was rather dull; Quantum of Solace was lacking any discernible plot and was just all blood and guts and, as for Skyfall, I'll just wait until it's to rent in the local video shop; I'll watch it - but there's no rush.
NJS