Tan Suede Jacket from Matchless in Spectre

43

Spectre-Matchless-Jacket-Polo

When in Morocco in Spectre, Bond needs a cool jacket to conceal his firearm. For this purpose he wears a tan lightweight suede jacket from Matchless London. Matchless calls this jacket the “Craig Blouson”, but this is technically not a blouson since the waist is not drawn in. The jacket is longer than waist-length and sits over the top of the hips to cover the waistband of the low-rise trousers. The jacket has a zip front, side pockets and an ecru viscose rayon lining. The collar is two pieces and has a hook to close with. Bond wears the collar up in back to protect his neck from the sun but folded down a little in front to keep it away from his face. An unlined jacket would likely be a better choice for the hot weather in Morocco.

Under the suede jacket when Bond arrives in Morocco, Spectre brings a new take on a Bond staple: the navy polo. Bond’s polo from Tom Ford is made of a 57% cotton and 43% viscose rayon blend pique knit. Rayon makes the polo lighter than if it were just cotton, but cotton is stronger and more breathable. Instead of the usual buttoned placket, the shirt has an open V-neck. The collar and sleeve hems are a fine rib knit, and the shirt’s hem has a thick ribbed band like on a jumper. The polo has a close fit everywhere, and the mid-bicep-length sleeves perfectly curve around Bond’s shoulders and excellently show off his arms.

Spectre-Tom-Ford-Polo

Later in the film on the train across Morocco, Bond switches the polo for a blue and white end-on-end linen shirt. This shirt is mostly hidden under the jacket, but it has a short point collar that curls up. Medium blue buttons fasten down a plain placket, and there is no pocket on the front. There are darts down the front at the sides of the front panels for a very tapered waist. Front darts are usually only on women’s shirts, which help the shirts fit closely around their anatomy. Men do not need front darts in their shirts, and tapering at the sides with darts for the small of the back are enough to fit a shirt closely to a man’s physique. This shirt matches the “Morton” model from Orlebar Brown, who made the blue swimming trunks for Skyfall. The “Morton” has long sleeves with short, pointed cuffs that have two buttons around the circumference to fasten the cuff at different sizes.

Spectre-Matchless-Jacket-Blue-Shirt

The khaki cotton gabardine chinos from Brunello Cucinelli are the same trousers that Bond wears later with his light brown Brunello Cucinelli jacket. They have a flat front, a low rise and narrow straight legs. Bond wears the bottoms rolled up for a casual look. The chinos are pressed with a crease down each leg, but the crease is faded and hardly noticeable. Bond wears the chinos with a brown woven leather belt from Brunello Cucinelli. The belt has a solid brown leather tab at the end with holes for the buckle to feed through. It is not the type of belt where the whole piece is braided and the buckle feeds through the braid.

The sunglasses are the Tom Ford Henry model. Bond’s boots are the Kenton Suede Boots from J. Crew in a tan colour appropriately called “Sahara”. They have five pairs of eyelets and three pairs of speed hooks, a plain toe and red mini-lug soles. The boots were likely chosen because they closely match the jacket, but the match looks too forced. Oiled leather desert boots could have been a better choice.

Spectre-Matchless-Jacket-Polo-2

The outfit of a tan jacket, navy polo and khaki chinos pays homage to a similar outfit that James Bond wears on a previous trip to Tangier in The Living Daylights. Though Timothy Dalton’s outfit in The Living Daylights had the right idea—and the execution is fine for the 1980s—it’s not as unique as Craig’s similar outfit in Spectre is. The clothes in Spectre are much higher quality and more interesting. The return of the suede jacket in Spectre also recalls the numerous suede jackets Roger Moore wears in his 1980s James Bond films.

43 COMMENTS

  1. Although most that comment deride Craig for the fit and quality of his suits (the suiting of Tom Ford cannot be more superior and the fit, which can be attributed almost 100% to Craig based on what you see him wearing in interviews and on the streets, are not Tom Ford look; see at Tom Hanks at movie premieres or watch a “Single Man” for what most Tom Ford fits look like), it seems like most enjoy his causal clothes and I have to agree. Its dressy enough to be interesting to apparel hounds like all of us that come to this website on a regular basis and fits the character well enough to those who look forward to seeing a James Bond movie every few years

  2. It is a good look but I was kind of wondering why a suede jacket in the desert? I thought it was a missed opportunity to put Bond in a safari jacket as the movie sort of had homages to Roger Moore. It would have been interesting to see.

    • Forgive me for saying so but IMO all those safari outfits are better to be buried forever! RIP (for eternity, no less!)

    • Renard,

      I have travelled/led excursions in many tropical venues, and I can vouch for the fact that nothing is as useful and functional as a bush poplin safari shirt or jacket, even in these days of high-tech travel gear. And they look a lot better, too!

  3. The casual wear of Spectre a highlight for sure, perfectly fitting slim cuts, a lot better fitted than his suits and with perfect homages to Bond’s casual wear if the past. I’ll have to get a tan suede jacket to go with my numerous navy polo’s.

  4. This is another sylish casual look for Craig’s Bond.

    As an aside, I’m still a bit baffled by those who have opined that Craig looked bloated and overweight in SPECTRE.

    • He looks very fit (as always), but this picture epitomizes his sour, angsty demeanor. How I long for the self-confidence of Connery and Moore, or even the cockiness of Lazenby!

  5. “I have travelled/led excursions in many tropical venues, and I can vouch for the fact that nothing is as useful and functional as a bush poplin safari shirt or jacket, even in these days of high-tech travel gear. And they look a lot better, too!”
    -Bond is not on a safari and he isn’t making any bush tours. So I don’t see why a safari shirt should be appropriate. He would make a fool of himself by wearing one.

    “He looks very fit (as always), but this picture epitomizes his sour, angsty demeanor. How I long for the self-confidence of Connery and Moore, or even the cockiness of Lazenby!”
    -What are you trying to make up? He is as self-confident as ever. Craig’s acting is about depicting Bond as a human being and not as cartoon character. I you want the latter you should watch Superman instead.

    • Renard, “Bond is not on a safari and he isn’t making any bush tours. So I don’t see why a safari shirt should be appropriate” – so you are at least indirectly conceding that safari wear is still appropriate in some circumstances! BTW, is it any less appropriate than the cargo pants young men wear in all circumstances, including paired with sport coats and blazers? Is it the aesthetics or the colonial associations of safari wear that you resent so deeply? If the latter, I am beginning to see why Craig’s more “blue collar” interpretation of Bond resonates with you.

    • “Craig’s acting is about depicting Bond as a human being and not as cartoon character.” What Renard calls a cartoon character, I call an aspirational figure. Movie-Bond used to be immaculately tailored, infinitely knowledgeable, and devilishly handsome. The tag line used to be”Every woman wants him, every man wants to be him”. I understand that women seem to like Craig, but I doubt very many men want to be him. Let’s be honest – if it’s true that every man in the Western hemisphere has, at some point in his life, stood in front of a mirror and mouthed “My name is Bond, James Bond”, which actor/portrayal is that man envisioning?

    • There are a lot of things at play here in this exchange.

      First, I don’t think anyone would dispute that a safari jacket/shirt is appropriate for an actual safari.

      Second, Renard is correct that Craig plays Bond as more of a human being than a caricature. Yet, this is not unprecedented for the series. Goldeneye, LTK, TLD, OP, FYEO, OHMSS, FRWL, and DN are all examples of the less cartoonish, more human Bond, and it’s no coincidence that many of those are the finest films of the series. Craig’s films have been wildly successful with audiences for the same reason.

      Third, whike I don’t think it’s relevant to anything, I completely disagree that Craig takes a “blue collar” approach to the character. You are conflating “more realistic” with “blue collar.” Craig’s Bond wears the most expensive and luxurious clothing money can buy, drinks the best champagne, drives the nicest cars, stays in the most elaborate hotels, etc. His performance in SPECTRE is filled with swagger and self-assurance. You might not like the way Bond’s suits fit in 2015 (neither do I!), but at least he’s still wearing them, which encourages others to do the same.

    • First. I will dispute. Poplin is not a great choice while out on any “expedition”. cotton is very hydrophilic which means it will soak up your sweat and hold on to it next to your skin. Wet clothes will also collect more dirt. Now in the super dry heat of the desert it might not be so bad because evaporation happens so much faster (high humidity climate you’re staying wet) but then you have the problem of no uv protection. not only will you still get burnt from the sun you’ll also get dehydrated much faster. uv rays go right through cotton. a little golden age fallacy going on.

      so no i don’t think a poplin would be any better than what he’s wearing. however the jacket looks out of place to me too. i know that many deserts cools off at night so its probably not a bad idea to have one but its the middle of the day if i remember correctly.

      second. i really like Craig’s Bond. He has plenty of self confidence. And there’s a knife’s edge they have to walk to make Bond a Bond film and not be a cartoon. I think they have achieved that quite well. Of course I wish I could have another Connery Bond, but only Connery can do Connery Bond. NO one could replace him.

    • “You are conflating “more realistic” with “blue collar.” Craig’s Bond wears the most expensive and luxurious clothing money can buy, drinks the best champagne, drives the nicest cars, stays in the most elaborate hotels, etc.” FS, wearing expensive clothes and driving expensive cars is not synonymous with sophistication. We have yet to see Craig display any knowledge of clarets, butterflies, rare orchids, or the appropriate temperature at which to serve sake. Yes, I realize all those are anachronistic bits of knowledge, but the ability to come up with esoteric knowledge about anything and everything was part of what made Bond FUN.

    • So now the key to a proper portrayal of Bond is demonstration of arcane knowledge? I agree that there’s more to sophistication than expensive goods, but there’s more to James Bond than flippant snobbery.

      Craig plays Bond, first and foremost, as the killer that he is. This is much truer to Fleming’s version than the lighter, sillier incarnations of the character. In my opinion, there’s nothing wrong with the lighter version version. I don’t view one version as more or less valid than the other, as they are both part of the combined literary/cinematic heritage of Bond. But beyond your preference for the lighthearted, “fun” version of Bond, you consider Craig’s version to be invalid, and I think that’s where we disagree.

    • FS,

      I don’t consider Craig’s characterization of Bond to be invalid, I just don’t think it’s very much fun. And why is the demonstration of arcane knowledge tantamount to “flippant snobbery”? The first three incarnations of Bond were as much charming polymaths as they were bare-knuckled brawlers. Movie-Bond was never meant to be realistic, and the fact that he could discourse on the 19th century vintage from which M’s “indifferent sherry” was blended, or on the unusually small size of M’s Nymphella polychlora, much to M’s exasperation, just contributed to the fun.

    • Dan, I appreciate those bits as well, and would be happy to see them return. But I can still have fun watching a Bond film without them – I do not view it as essential to the character or the experience.

      In any event, we have diverted too far from a discussion of Bond’s clothing, and for that I apologize.

  6. ” so you are at least indirectly conceding that safari wear is still appropriate in some circumstances! ”
    -See https://www.bondsuits.com/a-well-cut-suit-from-a-cut-scene/#comments
    Yes, IMO only a safari would be the right frame for that. But today it would look a trifle ridiculous anyway.

    “BTW, is it any less appropriate than the cargo pants young men wear in all circumstances, including paired with sport coats and blazers? Is it the aesthetics or the colonial associations of safari wear that you resent so deeply? If the latter, I am beginning to see why Craig’s more “blue collar” interpretation of Bond resonates with you.”
    -No cheap polemics please! Craig’s Marocco outfit is very far away from any cargo pants look. And I don’t have anything against colonial style – if it isn’t anachronistic (i.e. something that makes you think of f.i. “Out of Africa”). A cream linen / silk suit or jacket is a very nice colonial style inspired garment and also very aesthetic. IMO the same cannot be said of a safari outfit which looks rather garish.

    • Renard,

      This will be my last posting on this subject. For a long time, there has been a sociocultural and political subtext to our sartorial discussions. I was merely pointing something I thought was obvious. You may, of course, choose to view that as a cheap polemic. I can only think of two reasons for your blanket hatred of safari wear: (1) you associate it with the tacky leisure suits of the 70’s (a socio-cultural consideration) or (2) you associate it with the politically incorrect colonial era (a political consideration). On a different note, the fear of appearing anachronistic (just like the fear of being spoofed) may denote a certain sartorial insecurity. Lazenby’s riding outfit in OHMSS was certainly anachronistic in 1969, but he wore it with style and panache, those very qualities, incidentally, that Craig’s Bourne-Bond is sorely lacking, in spite of his expensive suits, cars, etc.

  7. “What Renard calls a cartoon character, I call an aspirational figure. Movie-Bond used to be immaculately tailored, infinitely knowledgeable, and devilishly handsome. The tag line used to be”Every woman wants him, every man wants to be him.”
    -Do you really want to be spoofed?! I certainly don’t. The description you give reminds me more of an introduction to an Austin Powers movie.

  8. @Nick: “What a discussion I sparked!”
    -Yes, indeed you did. “You are a kite dancing in a hurricane” 😉

    @Dan Ippolito: “For a long time, there has been a sociocultural and political subtext to our sartorial discussions.”
    -From such remarks you can see that this is turning more and more into some kind of pseudo-lecture with a strong elitist touch to it. I am not here to participate in that but rather to discuss Bond’s clothes.

  9. Because a person’s personal prejudice against an actor makes them view a particular garment as “garish”, “ridiculous” or “inappropriate” doesn’t mean anything objective except it reflects this prejudice. This can apply to a bias against any actor who’s played the role.

    Incidentally, I find this jacket to be one of the most appealing which Craig has worn, albeit a little warm, for daytime in Morocco but It’s Bond so that’s not important. The turned up trousers and the train shirt aren’t so appealing. The other suggestion would have been also appropriate and would likely wear cooler. I’ve nothing further to add to this either!

  10. Sorry but that’s not right: As far as the safari suit is concerned it’s the garment itself which I find “garish”, “ridiculous” or “inappropriate”. It’s just that Moore was the only one to wear and introduce it in the series.

  11. One of the best casual jackets of the series, but as David said a little warm for Morroco during the day. A linen/cotton jacket or something unlined as Matt suggested would be more comfortable. A light weight cotton zip up jacket would be better against the heat and humidity. But as David said it’s Bond so it doesn’t matter, he can put on a suede jacket and look comfortable in the heat.

  12. Cary Grant looks great in safari wear, back then, but wearing it today would look very out of place and frankly stupid, like you’re wearing a costume. Textiles have changed a lot since then, and i promise you’ll be a lot more comfortable and protected from the elements.

  13. That’s what I am saying – we are now in 2016 and not in 1930-1950 anymore. I can’t help myself thinking that some people live in the past permanently and are far from reality.

  14. About this argument considering safari clothing.
    I think the keyword is moderation and having a sense of compromise.
    I agree with the arguments of Renard and FS, but also with some of Dan and David.

    @Renard : about your last remark, it is true : we are indeed in the XXIth century. That being said, it is certain our era is really one seeing the progressive disparition of good taste and good sense in term of tailoring, fit and quality.
    So for us on this blog who enjoy looking at and owning a well-cut garment, something made by a tailor or a shirtmaker can be the solution to achieve this need to be well-dressed -or even, I should say, to be dressed like a man, but it’s another debate.
    I think the key is dealing with your personal tastes but also take into account the period we live in. And until recently, I had a different point of view though.
    Of course, it can then depend of two factors : the importance you put on the look of others, and the sociocutural context we live in, which is often related to our financial situation.

    @ David : personally, safari clothing is something I would definitely wear if I were in the jungle or hunting in Africa, and that’s it. Otherwise, it’s of course completely out of place. But in an appropriate context -and being able to be in such a context is becoming even more rare today, of course, which is maybe why it is more and more seen as costumey, or ridiculous, etc…-, fine with me !
    And Gable’s version is, to me, the best example of a safari jacket ever. Period.

    @ Dan : I understand your point of view about how most of the current young people dress, and I share it sometimes, but please, be less hard-or at least, don’t extrapolate too much- in your comments.
    As a young man myself, cargo pants isn’t really my everyday outfit.

    Anyway, back to the topic -Sorry about this Matt, but I wanted to have some points made- : in my humble opinion, safari clothing could perhaps be appropriate here, because of the country and temperature, but since Bond is just walking in a city, resting in a hotel room and travelling in a train, there is no need for safari clothing.
    About the real outfit, the ensemble is nice, but the suede jacket looks way too hot for the climate, comparing to the way Madeleine is dressed. It’s a beautiful item, but as often now with Craig, the costume designer seems to prefer to overdress him to make him more of a fashion icon than to put him in simple and appropriate clothes, like the Bond character would do !

    And enough with those pricey and precious sunglasses, please. They should have kept the Persol he wore in Casino Royale : a classic and simple look.

  15. @Le Chiffre: “it is certain our era is really one s2eeing the progressive disparition of good taste and good sense in term of tailoring, fit and quality.”

    -Quite frankly I don’t see any need to be overmuch worried. There were times when good taste was even more lost than today. As I have already pointed out: Since some time ago bespoke and made-to-measure tailoring are in high esteem again. The thing with the “sausage-tight”-cut suits is perhaps over in a few years. Hopefully we will experience a return to the well-balanced cut then.
    Therefore I find that over-the-top nostalgia which often shows in the comments quite pointless. Old is not always better – that’s too simple an approach.

  16. Safari jackets (or perhaps safari inspired jackets) can still be current. In fact you see them a fair amount. Manufacturers often call them ‘field jackets’ (avoiding the 70s leisure suit connotations that still dog the term safari jacket) but they are basically the same beast – here’s some examples in SS 15 (http://www.fashionbeans.com/2015/key-spring-jackets-men-how-to-wear/) and the same site is recommneding basically the same look with the term field jacket a year later.

  17. @Hal:
    -Well, to me those jackets labelled “Safari jackets” look more like fisherman’s waistcoats with sleeves. In comparison Craig’s suede jacket looks much finer.

    @David Marlborough:
    -I didn’t say that those don’t exist anymore today – I just said that it would not look right on Craig (too stiff). It just doesn’t match his type.

  18. Nothing quite divides this blog and its insightful and usually civilized discussion than safari wear, the 1970s, and Daniel Craig. But rather than debate what one would have dressed Craig in and looking at what he was dressed in, I think this just about nails a perfect look. The jacket seems a little warm and I completely agree about the fashion sunglasses (of which Bond wears 2-3 different ones in each new movie), but this is overall a cool, simple and terrific look that works.

  19. Speaking of “collar,” is this collar we see on this polo a “Johnny collar”? It’s obviously different to the typical Sunspel we Bond fans are accustomed to.

    • Yes, I have seen some brands call this a ‘Johnny collar’. This is different to both the Sunspel and previous Tom Ford polos that Craig wore, which have a mesh collar and ordinary button placket.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.