It’s no secret that Kristen Stewart has been getting paid by Chanel for several years now. They keep renewing her contract, even though I’ve never been 100% sure that this is a good brand-fit for either party. Kristen is less of a slumpy hipster these days, but is she really “on brand” with Chanel’s customer base? And is Chanel too stuffy for Kristen’s rock/hipster/bisexual brand? I don’t know the answer. But I do enjoy Kristen’s sullen-fashion appearances at Chanel shows.
Kristen made an appearance at Thursday’s Chanel Cruise show. She didn’t look happy, but she’s didn’t look unhappy either. She has Resting Sullen Face (RSF), I believe. Perhaps her ambivalence had something to do with the outfit? The thing is, I actually think this one-piece jacket-dress is super-cute. It actually suits her. Her hair is a good length these days too.
As for the Chanel Cruise show… the “Cruise” collection is just the Resort collection, which – IMO – is not as important as the big spring and fall collections. But Karl Lagerfeld still spent so much money on a HUGE fake cruise ship for the show. He named the fake cruise ship La Pausa after Coco Chanel’s French country villa, and the whole monstrosity was set up in Paris’s Grand Palais. Here’s a look at the big boat:
Photos courtesy of Backgrid.
She should shower
If I had a chance in hell of looking that hot if I didn’t shower I’d never do again.
She often looks like a party girl who did one party too many and missed out on more than one night of sleep let alone a few showers. Models do look like that during fashion week because they literally run from one show to the next without resting inbetween. They often still got the make up from their last catwalk walk on their faces when they arrive for the next show.
Paris. Chanel. Fashion editorials. Runway shows. Being paid. Beats working.
Bisexuality as a brand? Just… no. It’s a marginalized identity. Despite the progress we’ve made as a society, it’s still a huge risk to be out and open. Especially on a world-stage level.
Of course nome of the pictures of her smiling are shown, typical. Carl L. must not mind, he gives her campaign after campaign. And do models walk around smiling ? Why is Kristen required to smile?
I actually think she looks happy for being her. But I hate that dress or whatever it is. Makes her thighs look really unappealing even though she’s in such good shape. If that dress can’t make young and genetically blessed KS look good it’s really a big fail.
This!
I agree. That dress somehow manages to look frumpy to me, despite the fact that it doesn’t allow any range of motion whatsoever without threatening to show some lady bits.
I hate any women’s fashions that don’t allow for even the most simple movements like: sitting, walking, or bending the torso ever so slightly. For me those kind of clothes are like 21st century hobble skirts.
I think Chanel is trying to appeal to US-American customers.
I still think that Kristen doesn’t really transport that Chanel massage well in the USA.
Yep, Kristen is fit and she is beautiful but she just doesn’t embody Chanel to me. And I really wonder how she is supposed to embody the message of Chanel’s haughty slightly edgy elegance to an US audience who seems to associate Kristen not with haughty elegance but something sullen and slouchy?
She’s always so sullen and also plays every role the same!
I think she is beautiful but she looks exhausted and sickly here. And I agree with the other posters that if she can’t pull off this jacket as a dress look, there is no hope for the rest of us.
‘Sullen and sickly’ is right. Never understood the appeal.
Kristen’s face is that hauthy Chanel elegance.
Kristen’s attitude is no chanel more slouchy sweatpants chav.