For Skyfall, costume designer Jany Temime chose classic cloths that respect James Bond’s sartorial history, even if the fashionable cut of the suits does not. One of these cloths is a glen check in mid grey and black. Connery’s Bond wore a number of plaid suits in his Bond films, usually in a finer pattern. Craig’s suit in Skyfall is most similar to the classic black and white Glen Urquhart check Bond wore in From Russia With Love. Tom Ford calls this a “Prince of Wales check”, however the original and authentic Prince of Wales check is much larger design in rust-brown and white with a navy box of six ends around the four and four (large houndstooth) section. However, the term “Prince of Wales check” is very often used to refer to any check based on the Glen Urquhart check, often when it includes an overcheck. Whether the usage is correct or not is up to you.
The cut and style of this suit is exactly the same as the other Tom Ford suits in the film. The fit is skin-tight, with narrow, straight shoulders. The jacket buttons three and the narrow lapels roll at the top button, though the suit is so tight that the front pulls open at the top button. The flapped hip pockets are on a shallow slant, to hint at the classic English style but not to draw attention to it. The cuffs have three buttons and the last one is left open. There is a single vent at the rear, and the vent is cut with extra overlap as to prevent Bond’s rear from showing. The suit trousers have a flat front and are cut with a low rise and narrow leg. They have side adjusters and an extended waistband with hook closure.
Bond’s sky blue poplin shirt—also made by Tom Ford—has a soft tab collar, a placket down the front and double cuffs. A sky blue cotton handkerchief folded in the pocket matches the shirt. The tie from Tom Ford is a square check in blue and alternating black and light grey. The black and light grey in the tie complement the black and grey in the suit whilst the blue in the tie relates to the shirt.
The shoes are the black Crockett & Jones Highbury model, a three-eyelet derby with Dainite rubber studded soles. Dainite soles are not quite as elegant as the classic leather soles—and they can also feel very stiff in my experience—but they do provide Bond with the extra traction he needs. As far as rubber soles go on dress shoes, Dainite studded soles are amongst the best.
GREAT post Matt. Excellent details about this particular suit including references to “From Russia with Love.”
I thought Ford’s approach to Bond’s suits did appropriate justice to the British sartorial tradition, but overall were much too fashion-aware for my taste.
There are not too many men out there who would be able to wear such a form-fitting suit. Nor would I recommend it in any case.
As I stated in a Skyfall review on my blog (Tailored and Styled), a much better model for the vast majority of men are the suits that Ralph Fiennes wore as M. Squarely in the style of Savile Row.
Now that’s something I could recommend.
Keep up the great work.
Joe
Joe,
I’m not a dress up type of person. I own 1 suit, and have been looking to add another to my collection. My first was a basic black Calvin Klein, I really like the colors and pattern with the suit worn by Bond in this scene of Skyfall. Problem is, I’m 6’ft tall and walk around at about 195lbs, so anything that uses the words “skinny” really doesn’t appeal to me. My legs are bigger than normal for someone of similar height and weight. Is there a particular suit,cut etc I should get, that keeps it close to this particular style in which Bond is wearing?
Matt, Tom Ford claims that he designs classical cuts with a natural silhouette. What went so wrong in Skyfall? Why is Daniel craig dressed as if he were wearing jeans and a T shirt. Of course the cloths are beautiful but how tacky is it leaving the sleeve button undone to demonstrate that your suit is supposedly bespoke. I’m afraid it smacks of vulgarity all around. JB is dressed as an Ukrainian bouncer, not Britain’s top secret agent.
Allot of people do this it really isn’t a big deal also you could say a similar thing about the bottom button or a waist coat or even a suit jackets main buttons.
seb, it’s not the same thing. On some waistcoats (like on Sean Connery’s in Goldfinger) the bottom button does not line up with buttonhole, so it can’t be buttoned comfortably. Even when the button and buttonhole line up, fastening that bottom button would make sitting uncomfortable. The reason for not fastening the bottom button on a suit jacket is that the button and buttonhole do not line up. Unbuttoning a cuff button serves no purpose.
I can accept that the use of Tom Ford was to save money, but there were better models of suit they could have used. QoS’s suits had weird pagoda shoulders, but overall the silhouette was a lot better. Just fitted enough for 2008, nothing extreme.
I’m surprised Matt hasn’t commented on the collar gap of every suit in this movie (including the non-stunt costumes). Inexcusable since that’s a simple alteration.
On the other hand, I applaud Tamime for dressing him in greys instead of all the blacks and near-blacks of the last movie. Much more flattering with his complexion and hair.
Ah, I just noticed he said something in the caption. Sorry!
There’s no escaping it but no matter how often you look at them, these suits are awful. It even looks as if the trousers are even too short from the 2nd photo of him (though this may be just the photo). The attempts to mirror the Connery era suits is ridiculous. For me, these suits look juvenile; like something only to be worn by a boy band. For a contrasting view of Ford’s tailoring, a British colour supplement recently featured a cover photograph of the actor Colin Firth in Ford suits (single breasted with wider peak lapels, a more 1970’s look but much, much better tailored) which looked much better than these ones. These would much better suit Craig whilst being fashionable and would certainly give him more authority and gravitas which should, after all, be the hallmark of the Bond character.
I looked up the photograph of Colin Firth and I agree with you. While I could do without the wide peak lapels, I think the cut is on point.
When Matt takes on Mallory’s clothing, I will be very intrigued to see who made those suits.
Mallory’s wardrobe were tailored by Timothy Everest, although I can’t remember if he provided everything or suits only. They look absolutely terrific, and I can’t help being reminded of Fiennes interpretation of John Steed every time Mallory is on screen.
As soon as I got the Blu-ray I went straight to look at Mallory’s cloths. I have an article on Mallory prepared to go up in a couple days.
Great post Matt.
I love the colours and fabrics, but as you and others have said it is completely ruined by the cut. How could no one see the collar standing away from his neck and think that was a good idea? Or how it makes him shorter and narrower than he is? Surely the point of being in good shape and having a bespoke suit is that it shows off the care and effort you’ve put it?
“They’re making his clothes tighter, which is more fashionable. But in making him tighter… he looks like he’s being contained in his clothes” Lindy Hemming on Craig’s Ford suits
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/skyfall-james-bonds-latest-tight-384002
You’re right. There is no excuse for a Bond collar gap. Why bother making a custom suit for Craig if there not going to fit it right?
Probably MTM rather than bespoke (only thing that could possibly account for the size tag on the inside)… but yes, that should have been fixed pretty early on in the fitting process. There are a couple of times where his collar doesn’t gap (quite as much), such as when he and M overlook the Scottish countryside, but my bet is that the wardrobe people fixed him before every take — and he’s standing still anyway.
Odd thing is, the suits were designed especially for Skyfall. You’d think they would have fit better. The best explanation would be that he bulked up a lot after the suits were fitted. The jackets would still be too short, but the rest would fit better if he wasn’t nearly as muscular.
I thought they were the Falconer model? So named after the main character in “A Single Man” which Tom Ford directed. I don’t think it’s very period accurate to wear such tight clothes, but I heard the movie is good.
In any case, if the tailors at Black Lapel can fit the collar to my posture just going on pictures, surely they could have done better here! And we’re talking about clothes worth several thousand each as opposed to $600.
No, they developed a new model called the O’Connor. Going by images online, Firth looked much better in A Single Man in the Falconer suit. His clothes weren’t as tight. I’ll have to check out the movie.
I’m quite interested in seeing that now, myself. Surprised they didn’t use that suit instead, given the movie takes place in 1962 — same year as Dr. No released. Would have been a nice bit of reverence to the 50th anniversary.
I really love this suit’s fabric, it is my favorite in Skyfall, but I like many of my fellow readers do not care for the ill-fitting cut. If anything, judging by the narrative, Craig’s suits in Skyfall should be a size too big rather than a size too small, as he’s been out of shape for several months and wouldn’t be as muscular as he presumably had been when fitted for these clothes. Maybe I’m looking at this a bit too closely.
I’d love to have a suit made in this fabric but in the Quantum of Solace cut, I think that would be a perfect choice for Mr. Bond.
No worries, you’re not looking at it too closely — it is clear that Temime didn’t look closely /enough/ at the story elements! I respect her work in other movies and some of the other choices made in this one, but Bond’s suits were a blunder.
My preference would have been for him to wear the Falconer (which as Matt pointed out is a more sensible fit) or have the same model of suit as in QoS, but with the unpadded shoulders of these. When you’re athletic like Craig or Connery, it makes sense to have a natural shoulder jacket.
Jovan, while I agree with many of your criticisms, I don’t believe Craig’s suits in Skyfall have unpadded shoulders. They look like moderately padded straight shoulders, which I believe Matt mentioned in the entry.
Also, ironically, I believe it would be more accurate to describe the so-called “strange” Pagoda shoulders from QoS natural shoulders since I believe Matt mentioned that Tom Ford constructs its Pagodas without padding. To be honest, I quite liked the Pagoda shoulder on Craig since the suit shoulders accentuated his athletic physique, in particular his well built shoulders. Along with the Regency’s wider lapels, it created a a nice V-shape..
I suspect that as with other Tom Ford shoulders, these are constructed without padding but with four layers of canvassing for the straighter line.
Are you referring to Skyfall or QoS here?
I thought the pagoda shoulders, whether padded or not, looked rather odd on his physique — made him look almost robotic.
I was talking about the Skyfall shoulder. The Pagoda shoulder doesn’t really work for Craig (but it’s not bad on Brosnan in some Remington Steele suits) and the Skyfall shoulder is much better, though a bit too narrow.
Like almost every clothing item in Skyfall, the pictures speak louder than words… I won’t say a thing about the terrible cut, since I would be the 19th person to criticize it… I am just disappointed by the fact of wearing a pocket square of the same colour of the shirt. To me, it’s a sartorial faux pas, it does look too matchy-matchy. The only exception being the classic association of a white shirt and a white hanky, of course. I am not mad at all of these rubber soles either. Bond should wear leather soles shoes. It’s a pitty because some of the C&J models worn in the film are really nice (the boots in Turkey for example), but rubber soles with shoes that are made of black calf just won’t do. If that’s what the “modern Bond” is, no thanks.
It’s a shame because the Tom Ford suits of A Single Man mentionned were a very good reinterpretation of the 60s style. Not at all like Skyfall’s disaster. I remenber a brown two-button suit, with narrow lapels, two-button sleeves, white pocket square and white shirt with single button cuffs and a tab collar, worn with a dark tie, that looked terrific on Colin Firth. The cut was just right : some shape but not tight at all.
At least Craig did wore something nice in Skyfall : the brown leather jacket… Even if a leather jacket is not a “Bondian” item at all !
While they aren’t necessary with this particular suit, I do see the rationale for putting Bond in rubber-soled shoes with the other two suits, the sharkskin and the pinstripe, in Skyfall, for the simple reason that those two suits are worn during action scenes that require a lot of running and jumping. Classic leather soles would look much more elegant but wouldn’t be as practical.
Actually though we all seem to be in agreement that the suits in Skyfall leave something to be desired, I think Temime nailed it with the shoes, credit is given where it is due.
I understand your point of view. But isn’t Bond supposed to be different, and, well, away from all those “material” aspects ? Because if he, or the costume team, do make him wear shoes with rubber soles for that matter, then he is not Bond, he is like everybody. Most of the audience won’t remark such details, but the people checking this blog will. Well, for example, if I remenber well, Brosnan wore Church’s with leather soles in the Goldeneye tank (and “before tank”) scene. Allright, it’s not very convenient for all the jumping and moving around, but that’s normal, because it’s 007 ! If we expect him to make only rational and logical decisions in term of clothing, then the 007 we like will disappear.
At least I admit it’s better than in QOS, where there were some screenshots where we could clearly see that he wore black baskets with his pinstriped suit… Anyway, I do respect your point of view. It’s just that for me, Bond has to make us dream a little ! Would you imagine him with a dinner jacket and rubber soles oxfords, even if it’s for an action scene ?
That’s a fair point, part of what makes Bond such a special character is his identity as a gentleman.
And I would never advocate for rubber soles with a dinner suit, that would be a disaster! Thankfully that line has never been crossed in the Bond series, at least to my knowledge.
Matt (+ Kyle & Le Chiffre) you’re quite right that rubber soled shoes are not as elegant as leather soled shoes but there is a stealth aspect. I’ve owned Churchs and Loakes. Beautiful shoes, impeccably crafted but on surfaces such as tile or parquetry the footstep reports sounded like pistol shots! Also, they were very heavy. Running more than a few paces in them would be exhausting.
Maybe this has been clarified before but why did lindy hemming stop being the costume designer after CR? Or why didn’t they keep Louise Frogley? They both dressed Craig in a way we all loved… The cloths in skyfall are fantastic but the cut is extremely tight. That is not Bond. QoS cut was a more established Bond.
I do not know why.
Isn’t he committing a faux-pas by matching his (non-white) pocket square to his shirt?
As LeChiffe mentioned above, yes it is. But it’s not awful either. You may have noticed that in the film Temime always matched pinstripes to the shirt. Never does she match a blue shirt to the standard white pinstripe. Everyone who wears a blue shirt wears blue pinstripes. The matching is excessive.
So do you think his pocket square should’ve been white? Connery wore blue shirts with white pocket squares. I do the same and it still looks sophisticated.
Indeed I do think it should have been white.
I occasionally match a pale blue pocket square with a blue shirt when I dress. Faux-pas or not, I don’t think it’s a bad look.
FS – There’s nothing wrong with a blue pocket square and a blue shirt, in my view. The issue is surely wearing a pocket square of exactly the same shade of blue as your shirt – which looks rather too considered and mannered – as Craig does here.
That said, I don’t find this an offensive example of matching colours.
But simply,why the production don’t back to Anthony Sinclair?
The reproduction of “Goldinger suit”is stunning,and is better of these Tom Ford stuff.
Why don’t back to Sinclair?
Too much expansive for the budget of a Bond movie????
They didn’t go back to Anthony Sinclair because of that very reason, even though stylistically and anniversary-wise it would have made sense. Additionally, they are a relatively small operation in comparison and cannot make suits in the large numbers needed for the action scenes. IIRC, in action movies there are “hero” costumes for low action or non-action, stunt costumes, and a few replacements for those should something get damaged. You’ll note that the early Bond movies had a relatively small number of suits made up and there wasn’t quite as much rough-and-tumble action. The production team back then could only afford a few in “Dr. No”. As the action has ramped up in movies, so too have the demands of the production team.
Tom Ford was willing to handle these demands for free in exchange for film/red carpet exposure and a “wardrobe provided by” credit, much the same as Giorgio Armani and Ralph Lauren have done. As Matt stated, they even developed a new suit pattern for the movie, the O’Connor. (Alternately known as the “O’God-it-chafes”.) Craig has been pictured wearing O’Connor suits and tuxedos at events. It’s good promotion for Tom Ford and a win-win situation for both parties.
That said, within the scope of Tom Ford there are better options. The Falconer, for one, as well as the various two button suits with double vents they sell. Both are stylish, classic, and just fitted enough. Still confused why the Falconer wasn’t chosen — it was made for a film that takes place in 1962 (same year as “Dr. No” released, would have been a nice bit of reverence) and it’s still quite rakish looking for today’s fashion.
Yes,maybe they cannot make suits in the large numbers needed for the action scenes (but “From Russia with love”, “Goldfinger” and “Thunderball”had a lot of action scenes) ,but could make only the main Bond wardrobe.
For stuntmen and battle scenes you can use copies make by a costumer.
Also Lazemby and Moore had bespoke suits,and were not problems for action scenes.
More,in ourdays Bond use a lot of casual clothes for action, so Sinclair’s bespoke suit can be reserved to not much violent scenes.
Just going by what I’ve been told.
Finally watched Skyfall on BluRay – regardless of the merits of the film (I enjoyed it), they badly need to change costume designer on the next one. The suits simply don’t fit and the shirts are too tight (see the train fight) – all the tonal matching makes him look like a bank clerk.
Any MTM outfit could produce suit numbers in quantities similar to Tom Ford – and would work their butts off for the exposure. In the old days tailors such as Hayward made multiple suits for stuntmen, just not in the huge numbers – but the suits in these films are not bespoke, they are factory produced. As stated elsewhere, Fiennes was much better dressed than Craig (and damn near stole the movie).
I hate that there’s a generation of Bond fans growing up buying suits that are two sizes too small for them because this damned woman who designs the clothes doesn’t understand the basics of tailoring and fit.
I generally agree with the dissatisfaction over the cut of this otherwise beautiful suit. However, I do not think it is any different than Roger Moore’s late 1970’s clothing. The fact is, suits at this moment (though the moment may be passing) are cut this way, if not a lot tighter. This suit manages to reflect today’s unfortunate fashions while actually not going to their extreme. And it does justice to the character’s heritage, though I know some like more color. And while I agree that leather soled shoes are preferable, almost every shoemaker uses rubber soles for good reasons. Overall, I do not share the dissatisfaction with this suit and am pleased that Bond does not look anachronistic, like I think he would were he dressed like Mallory. In fact, I think Bond’s suits are fine in this movie given the 2012 timeframe.
I agree and if anything I think that these suits will age even better than some of those worn by Roger Moore. It seems that it would be better to look back and complain about the too tight cut versus looking back and complaining about the general style of the suit. In ten years it will be easier to date a Roger Moore casual suit to the late 70’s than it will be to date a Craig suit to the early 2010’s (in my VERY humble opinion).
In response to Christian’s post
Even though I much prefer Roger Moore’s 70’s suits, I have to agree. Roger Moore’s late 70s suits are dated by style—wide lapels and flared trousers—but are still very well-fitting and flattering. They are very good examples considering what some other people were wearing at the time. Moore’s style was often restrained compared to other characters, especially in Live and Let Die. However, Daniel Craig is the only person in Skyfall wearing a suit that is too small. When the too-tight trend passes I think Daniel Craig’s suits will just look poorly-fitted rather than dated. It’s the same way we look at the Licence to Kill suits now. Even though the trend 24 years ago was for baggy cuts, the suits look more poorly-fitted than anything.
Yes Matt. They constantly miss the point. Comparing now with Moore’s 1970’s suits makes no sense as, as you constantly point out, the real differential is quality of tailoring. (But then Moore critics just have an aesthetic predisposition against his image which they like to “back up” using spurious comparisons). There is NO valid, objective comparison between 1979 and 2012. The Angelo suits may have been Moore’s most fashionable for his Bond tenure but they were exquisitely tailored and that is the key point here. Ford’s “Skyfall” suits are certainly NOT. As we have both pointed out ad infinitum, and which you now reiterate, a far better comparison would be Dalton’s lousy suits in “Licence to Kill” which echoed Craig’s current dross as in both cases there was high fashion + an absence of good tailoring. So what if Bond looks slightly “anachronistic”. He’s generally looked so but it didn’t stop good box office returns so it’s what people expect to some degree. Of course, the majority of Bond’s suits from 1962 – will look somewhat “dated” after a certain passage of time but some more than most and some will just look more admirably elegant rather than excessively fashionable.
Furthermore, there is no respect for the character in these Ford suits as there is no verifiable reference point to traditional London tailoring (a signature of all the Bond movies, barring Dalton’s, up to Craig now).
I also don’t get this other chestnut about Tom Ford being the only provider who was able to produce suits in such quantity to be practicable. This is obvious nonsense and it’s down to Craig, Ford and this costume designer who knows nothing about men’s tailoring. As other contributors correctly pointed out, Connery, Lazenby, Moore and Brosnan all had varying degrees of action in their movies. Lazenby, for example, was beautifully tailored and managed the action with aplomb. Moore had about 7 versions of the “Moonraker” silk suit produced and all but the last one got ruined when he kept falling into the water during Venice stunt scenes.
I second everything David has said; furthermore, for many years now, a classically well-dressed man in any setting, whether real or cinematic, is a bit of an anachronism. That’s just the way it is, unfortunately.
… I was only repeating their justification for it, I didn’t say I approved.
A few, somewhat contradictory, follow-up thoughts:
I actually do not the miss point at all – I agree with much of the dissatisfaction over the suits, though I don’t care for the “too-tight” look at all (mainly I don’t care for the “too short” aspect of “too-tight”). But at this blog, there seems to be a resistance (if not hostility) to accepting current looks. I personally look at some lawyers I work with and observe an early 1990s era suits with puzzlement because a 20 year old suit is not well-dressed to me – it is careless and has not aged well.
Craig is not as fashion forward as he could be and I am pleased that Bond does look like he belongs in 2012 and not stuck in some other era. Part of Bond’s appeal is that he is adaptable over six decades without looking out of place in any (an appeal almost missed, in my opinion, in Goldeneye). Bond must thread a needle between traditional and also looking modern – and Bond was never a throwback, not even in 1962.
I hesitate to say these suits are poorly tailored because the current look is just this. The suits do not look like Dalton’s cheap looking suits from ’89.
I agree with the sentiments that these suits will not age well. But they are what they are. I think in the context of 2012 and Skyfall, which is a terrific movie, they work just fine. And the general color scheme is very much a throwback to early Connery and the literary Bond.
I would be more pleased with a Saville Row tailor that better combined today’s slim fashions with a classic look and better tailoring. But the money that Tom Ford (and Omega, BMW, etc.) can provide talks now. Unfortunately.
If Tom Ford had his way, Bond would not be wearing “slim” suits. Maybe he has changed his mind, but he used to hate short jackets and narrow lapels (to him it looks like they don’t have enough cloth for a decent lapel). I could put up with Bond wearing a short, close-fitting suit to accommodate current fashions, but his suits are a mess in Skyfall. Suits can be closely fitted without pulling when standing still. The trendy aspects of the suits that go against proper fit are the short jacket and low-rise trousers. The rest of the suit is just poorly fitted. Like I’ve said before, if the suits were fitted before Daniel Craig bulked up, that would explain why the suit doesn’t fit well. He looks much better in the slightly larger suits made for action shots.
All very good points, Matt.
Personally, I like the thinner lapels, but the short jackets just look bad too.
So do we know why the suits are so slim in Skyfall? And I mean, actually know rather than conjecture. I recall someone saying the designer wanted an “iconic for 2012 look.” And if the suits were fitted before Craig got in shape, that is just bad planning on the production team’s part.
Temime said she wanted an “iconic for 2012 look” and said she wanted a suit that fits close to the body and moves with Craig. The suits really don’t move with him very well. I would assume that Craig was working out after he was measured and before filming started. If the suits were made in a month, Craig could have built enough muscle tone in between to change the fit a little. When the suits fit so closely, small imperfections really show.
Notice the continuity error regarding the tie dimple. It’s an easy mistake to avoid in a film.
Christian,
Your “contradictory” comments are well made and certainly reasonable but I can’t help feeling that they could make Bond modern in his tailoring without throwing the baby out with the bathwater or dressing him in a style from 20 or 30 years ago. Other options, without being “throwback” in style, are quite possible and wouldn’t compromise their intention. As I said, it’s down to Craig and the costume designer. I don’t think that Fiennes’s suits look anachronistic and neither, it seems, do many others. I don’t think Dalton’s suits were cheap either; just very fashionable for the time and not well tailored. Hence my comparison. I’m curious though; what was it about Brosnan’s debut which you found questionable? I don’t think his style changed too much during the course of his run
David,
I completely agree with your sentiment that, “they could make Bond modern in his tailoring without throwing the baby out with the bathwater or dressing him in a style from 20 or 30 years ago. Other options, without being “throwback” in style, are quite possible and wouldn’t compromise their intention.”
Perhaps it is the money that big designers can offer, or just the vision of the designer and the lead actor. But for such thought that went into the little things in Skyfall, you would think they could come up with some compromise.
As for GoldenEye, I think Pierce’s clothes are very well-made and fitted. But, I find them just a bit fussy by a degree for the most part. The tuxedo is overdone compared to Bond’s prior tuxedos, and the ascot is just un-Bond like to me. The two MI6 suits are beautiful but again, a bit too much – very G.Q. like without the subtle elegance of, say, 1983 Hayward. It could be the way Brosnan wears the clothes too – he looks great in a suit, but there is always some element of self-consciousness to my eye, like he would freak out if a food stain landed on the jacket while I imagine the other actors would just shrug. I do like the later Birdseye blue suit, tie notwithstanding. The clothes in GoldenEye seem to be done with the intent of reasserting Bond’s Englishness following the Dalton era. To me, it represents all that is wrong with the Brosnan era – namely that the films and the actor are almost caricatures, trying too hard to meet everyone’s expectations of a stereotypical Bond look, action scene, movie, drink, etc. The scripts suffered mightily under this weight, ultimately leading to Die Another Day.
Which is why I give full props to the production team for throwing it all out and starting fresh and new with Casino Royale. You can only do You Only Live Twice/The Spy Who Loved Me so many times – i.e., there was no need for Tomorrow Never Dies, which copies those films, or GoldenEye, which copied Diamonds Are Forever. The Brosnan films I thought were a huge missed opportunity, and suffered from bad scripts and the acting limitations of the leading actor whom I thought painful in dramatic scenes when he had to emote. Sorry for going off-topic a bit….
It takes a lot of panache to wear an ascot these days, but Bond should have panache in spades. Lazenby and Moore also wore ascots (or cravats) – it seems to be the trademark of the “fashionable Bonds” (Lazenby, Moore, Brosnan) as opposed to the “rugged Bonds”.
Christian,
While it’s a little off the remit of this blog, I agree that the movies Brosnan starred in were some of the weakest of the series, plot wise, which is a pity because, overall, I liked his casting as Bond, especially after the low point of Dalton’s last outing. In fact, and this is just a personal opinion, I think “Octopussy” was the last decent, entertaining, classic Bond movie and what followed was diminishing returns overall.
In relation to his wardrobe, yes, Brosnan did sometimes seem a little self conscious (but then I understand he’s very reserved as a person) in his clothing and that other Bond’s looked more relaxed in their respective tailoring. And I agree with the “reasserting Bond’s Englishnesss”, after Licence to Kill’s shabby wardrobe. They needed to! The producers no doubt wanted to introduce a more polished, classic Bond which suited the new incumbent’s persona. I didn’t mind Brosnan’s dinner suit and as for the ascot, while it may be a somewhat controversial choice for some, it is a classic item to be found in a traditional British gentleman’s wardrobe and therefore, fitting, in my view, for 007 in a certain context. I have to say that Brosnan’s suits still far outclass Craig’s current style in that, to my eye, they simply look more in keeping with Bond’s image overall.
I actually found it a pity that they ditched Brosnan when they did as he had at least two more Bond’s in him and, in fact, he still looks great. I’m not sure that the movies you instanced “copied” any previous ones but they certainly did adopt elements of them. Anyway, “Tomorrow Never Dies” was a poor movie in its own right (a rush job like DAF or TMWTGG) and not a patch on the two you compare it to, that’s for sure. “Casino Royale”, I think we will both agree, had the best script in years but we will, no doubt, disagree in my contention that it would have been Brosnan’s best Bond had he been still at the helm in 2006.
Also, I notice from Matt’s next post that you admire Fiennes’ suits which only show that subtle crafted British tailoring can juxtapose modernity and classicism without looking, as you say, “anachronistic”.
All well said, David. While we will agree to disagree over the Craig era and Brosnan’s suitability for it, I concur with a lot of what you said, particularly Octopussy being the last great Bond (Tarzan yell notwithstanding) until (for me) Casino Royale.
On a note back to the topic of this blog and post, the Oscars featured generally dreadful men’s tuxedos (Hugh Jackman excepted), very tight, very short, and with half inch lapels. Steven Spielberg looked particulary odd. Actually made Craig’s Skyfall suits look conservative. This current fashion needs to end.
I can’t say that I agree regarding Brosnan’s wardrobe being more reflective of Bond as a character or that the suits reasserted Bond’s Englishness. While well-tailored, Brosnan’s suits looked extremely un-English and that was the point. Hemming wanted Bond to look less stodgy, old-fashioned, and English, so she dressed him in Italian tailoring to make him look more international and European. Moreover, she dandy-fied Bond in a way that was completely not in keeping with Fleming’s description of the character or the archetype established by Connery. Brosnan always looked expensively dressed, rather than well dressed. As such, the much lamented suiting trends of Craig’s tenure can be traced to the Brosnan era. At least, Craig’s Bond finally tends to often dress casually when appropriate rather than always sticking out as excessively well-dressed all the time like Brosnan did.
The main reason Hemming used Brioni was their capability to make a large quantity of suit, not their style. Hemming said she wanted to use an English maker but none could comply. She had Brioni make the suits in a rather English style, with hacking pockets and double vents instead of the then-trendy and continental jetted pockets and no vents. If she wanted a truly continental look she could have used Canali or Armani, but Brioni, like some other Roman tailors, is very influenced by Savile Row in its cut. Brosnan’s Brioni suits were mostly different in that they had very little waist suppression, the fashionable, continental aspect of the suits.
Hemming did not have Brioni make the suits in an English style, since the suits Brosnan wears are the model Nomentano without any changes, which is offered by Brioni since 1945.
She chose English details for the suits, like hacking pockets, ticket pockets and double vents. Those are not typical for Brioni, but the silhouette is still Brioni.
Amen and amen!
If the article reaches 100 comments, I guess the costume designer of the next Bond movie will have to deal with the thesuitsofjamesbond lobby :)
Unpopular opinion but I like slim fitting suits.While these suits may not be right for all men Craig has the body for them and they fit with the look they are trying to achieve for the character.
I love the suit–I agree with most comments about the fit, but it somehow works for DC’s 007…In fact, DC looks like he borrowed his older/bigger brothers suits in “Casino Royale”–so he can pull off the shrunken Thom Browne suit look. From a story perspective, I think it conveys a certain rebellion against the stodgy Saville Row traditions, while still conforming to them; this Bond follows the rules, but breaks them as needed.