scripsi: (Default)
Don’t mind me; I’m just going to obsess a bit more on the costumes of The Marvelous Mrs- Maisel. The costume designer is Donna Zakowska and she’s done a wonderful job! Costume design is close to my heart; at one point I considered it as a career choice and even though I didn’t go that path, I used to design costumes for amateur plays and operas. It was a lot of fun but also very hard work, and when the kid came along I decided I wanted to make clothes for me and got into historical re-enactment instead.

Good costume enhances characters and storylines. A super easy example is Darth Vader and Princess Leia who are introduced in black and white and you really don’t have to spend any time at all in wondering who is good and bad. When it comes to historical costumes the bit about historical accuracy is added. No movie ever is 100% historically accurate, and I don’t think that is what should be aimed at either. But I do feel it’s important to have respect for the source period and not just throw things together to look history-ish. You have to understand the period you are aiming for, and then add and subtract to please the storyline, directors, and producers. Hats, for example, are often discarded if the fashion was for wide brims because it limits the angles you can film in. Or, very common, women go bareheaded because the producers are afraid it will diminish the sex appeal.

I could go on and on, but I will limit myself to go on about Mrs. Masiel. The costumes are very 50s in cut and colours, but they are not necessarily the exact fashions of the year 1958 and 59 and they don’t need to be to set the tone. The same goes for hair and make-up. Midge, for example, favours a hairstyle that is more early 50s than late.

VERY picture heavy )

Timeless

Dec. 28th, 2018 06:43 pm
scripsi: (Default)
Husband and I have gone through Timeless these past two weeks and ended yesterday, and I have feels about it. Spoilers are placed below the cut.

I’ve known about the show since it started, but I need to overcome my inter fashion historian and decide to watch shows like this with forgiving goggles. I guess I was in the mood now, and I also learned that Paterson Joseph is in it, who I have had a mild crush on since he played the Marquis de Carabas in Neverwhere. I still think he would be a great Doctor.

See what I mean?



Parts of Timeless I liked a lot. I appreciate that the cast was multi-ethnic, and not all of them straight. The characters were mostly interesting and well-acted. I particularly enjoyed Paterson Joseph's genius who just don’t know how to relate to people, but who still have a lot of emotions. His love and care for Rufus were rather touching. I also developed a crush on Goran Višnjić, who is a new face for me, even though he has done a lot of stuff. I commented to my husband that I thought he is very good looking, and my husband said; “WEll, duh, when have you not liked a man who is tall and dark with a well-developed nose.” How well he knows me…

I repeat, see what I mean?





Overall I found the way the character’s relationships developed through the show nicely done. And I really liked the core cast with the exception of Wyatt. I think I may be rater alone in that dislike, though. I simply don’t find that type of character interesting, and I don’t go for bland pretty boys. I found a lot of his character traits grating.

I thought series 2 was a lot better than 1, and I enjoyed some of the time travels to persons I know little about like Harriet Tubman and Robert Johnson. It’s a show clearly developed for an American audience, so the theme “saving our country” didn’t particularly strike a chord- I would probably be more interested in a time travel show which doesn’t solely focus on the history of USA. But I realise I’m not the viewer this show caters for. What irked me a lot, however, was the rush of going back in time. It was always “quick, we need to travel back NOW; no need to prepare”, when the thing with going back in time is that you would get to the right point regardless of WHEN you start to travel back.

The costumes were actually better than I expected. Mostly the costumer seemed to have a good grasp of the various periods, but the extras generally looked better than the main cast. This is not unusual when it comes to historical shows. You want the audience to relate to the main characters and there is a fear that if they look too alien, people can't relate. Personally, I feel this is to underestimate the audience; if you tune in to watch a show about time-traveling through history you are interested in history, and would probably welcome accuracy. I know it can be argued that people traveling back in time would stand out, but the antagonists of the shows generally get more accurate clothes than the heroes. There were some lovely exceptions, though. I’m sure Lucy’s 1940’s party gown was vintage; it had elaborate and time-consuming beading I don’t think the show would have the budget for making a new one.

Lovely gold beading.



Mostly I succeeded in live and let live when it came to the costumes, with three exceptions. 1. Wyatt’s stubble. I get that it’s there to make his sexily rugged, but really; get a proper shave when you are attending a glamorous 1940’s Hollywood party. Or any other time period, basically. 2. Lucy’s hair. She sports a rather shaggy long hair-look, and her historical hairs are mostly bad to worse. Relatable or not; the other female characters all have classic long hairstyles in the present day, and she could have too. I got terribly distracted by asymmetrical buns in the 1910’s and similar oddities. 3. The lack of corsets! I know the popular opinion is that corsets were terrible instruments of torture and that every woman laced themselves within an inch of their life. The truth is that stays and corsets were integral parts of women’s clothes for 500 years, or so, and their basic function was to provide breast support (there were no bras) and give the body the fashionable silhouette. Speaking as someone who often wears corsets, you don’t really have to lace yourself tightly to get that silhouette, and that is women who lived and worked in them, usually did. The tiny waist was only partly due to the corset; it also relied on the optical illusion of wide hips enhance by paniers, crinolines, and padding.

No stays and hair parted in the middle on Lucy- so not a thing in the 18th century. But she is in good company as Wyatt sports a stubble and hair falling over his forehead.



Decent clothes for the 1910s and she did have an ugly but period-correct hat to begin with. But that bun is asymmetrical...



So, for the things, I really, really didn’t like. And some I liked. Which are also spoilery.

Read more... )
scripsi: (adult)
[livejournal.com profile] sallymn asked What are your favourite costumes in fantasy TV/film?

When it comes to the movies, I say Sleepy Hollow. I know it is set in 1799, but the costumes are largely 1770’s, with Lady Van Tassel’s clothes being pure fantasy. And Ichabod Crane’s mother wear a gown which is 1720’s, or so. Also, ghosts and witches. And it looks fantastic! So many lovely details and the costumes really enhances the story.

Read more... )
scripsi: (Default)
[personal profile] sallymn asked What are your favourite costumes in fantasy TV/film?

When it comes to the movies, I say Sleepy Hollow. I know it is set in 1799, but the costumes are largely 1770’s, with Lady Van Tassel’s clothes being pure fantasy. And Ichabod Crane’s mother wear a gown which is 1720’s, or so. Also, ghosts and witches. And it looks fantastic! So many lovely details and the costumes really enhances the story.

Read more... )

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags

Profile

scripsi: (Default)
scripsi

April 2019

S M T W T F S
  1 2 3 4 5 6
78910 111213
14 151617181920
21222324252627
282930    

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Style Credit

Page generated Apr. 18th, 2019 06:43 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios