The First Monday in May

source: The First Monday in May

ANDREW BOLTON!!! Rules = grace under pressure + he hit the High Note w/o making anyone feel unimportant in the 'process' Props to Kar-Wai Wong + the Mets' Asian Curator for keeping it 'real' BIG props for Baz Luhrmann & his vision = less Dragons? More Bamboo? & calming Anna W. D o w n = Never let the 'Party Planner' get in Your way.. she's just selling tables LOL BIG shout-out for Bill Cunningham (gone, but not forgotten) reminding us Diana Vreeland WAS genesis of the "Met Costume Institute" / although AndreLeonTalley seemed to forget his 'muse' while sucking-up to 'Celebrities' (quickly gone / now forgotten) tho Anna w o u l d make a good Wedding Coordinator... IF she could work w/o sucking java in her face repeatedly.

Now, the only reason I saw this documentary, given the fact that I am not interested in fashion at all, is that I was forced to because of my job. Not that I am complaining, though. Even if I don't care about the movie's subject matter, I still think the behind-the-scenes look at the effort put in organizing such a huge event is quite fascinating. What also is quite fascinating is something that I've suspected for many years already, but this movie showed it do me clearly - way too many of the people in the fashion industry are staggeringly uneducated when it comes to anything that's not fashion. I mean, yeah, you see, they know how to dress, how to talk, how to write in a way that makes them appear intelligent, they use "big" words like "soigne", they constantly talk about the aesthetic qualities of this or that, but underneath all posturing they are, well... A few spoilers here. Anna Wintour, probably the most famous fashion magazine editor in the world, literally, and I mean literally, can't differentiate a piece of furniture from a work of art. Seriously, she is a trustee at the biggest art museum in the world, she organizes huge events in the said museum every year, and yet... Well, see the movie and decide for yourselves. And there are worse examples. Although the theme of the exhibition the documentary is about is China, we hear people talking about Kabuki, Geisha, etc. One of the people organizing the exhibition literally suggests that Mao Zedong be depicted as some sort of a deity to Chinese people, equal to Buddha or something like that. To give credit where credit is due, I must say that the makers of the movie did not try to hide what the Chinese thought about the West interpreting their culture. Needless to say, they didn't like it very much. (On a side note, this movie was quite the eye opener for me when it came to things like cultural appropriation - because now I know why so many people frown upon it. Because when you take something from a culture you don't know and understand, and you twist it and pervert it without even realizing what you're doing... Well, some people will get offended - and rightfully so.) Luckily, the art director of the exhibition was Wong Kar-Wai - and he, at least in this movie, seemed to know what he was doing. I'm not much of a fan of his, but he was there to tell the fashion men and women running amok to stop, to consider the possibility that what they're doing is not going to give them the results they are after... And, well, at the end, the exhibition, from what I saw, the exhibition turned out pretty beautiful - which is what is important. And don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that Wong alone made it beautiful - many people worked hard on this, and I can only praise them for doing their job well enough. When it comes to the people shown in this movie... I am glad I don't know Anna Wintour. Seriously, she is horrible. Maybe her work for "Vogue" is exceptionally good, I don't know... I hope it is, because I can't think of any reason for anyone to tolerate such a rude, uneducated, pretentious snob. That being said, Andrew Bolton seems like a genuinely nice person, and someone who cares deeply about what he is doing. Wong Kar-Wai is cool - and, to me, at least, surprisingly rockstarish when it comes to attitude and confidence. The others... Well, they are colorful characters, to say the least. All in all, this is a nice documentary. Not the best, not the worst. I recommend it, even if you're not interested in fashion.

There were lots of editorial points-of-view that would have been worthy of an interesting documentary. Some of the dresses were fantastic. Even when I did not care for the style, I was impressed at the craftsmanship that went into them. I would have liked to hear more about the history and construction. Although I know little about her, Anna Wintour strikes me as someone whose life might be interesting to learn more about. We got a glimpse of that, but that would have been worthy of a documentary of its own. The Met Gala is an interesting social gathering. I had heard of it through mentions from people like Stephen Colbert, but knew little about it. It was that reasons that I watched this. We got some of that, too, but not in the way that was interesting in the least. What resulted is an epic failure of direction and having an editorial point-of-view. Much of the content that did make it into the documentary was not relevant - or its relevancy made unclear due to the poor story-telling. It bounced from topic to topic, missing context, and failing ultimately in telling any story.

The question is, is fashion art? No it is not, while some fashion is undoubtedly beautiful, rich in motif and symbolism and the result of genius creative imagination, fashion is toxic and art is not! The fashion industry is the third most toxic industry on the planet polluting the earth. Fashion is also responsible for child labour, cheap labour and poor working conditions in developing countries. Not forgetting how fashion influences a negative body image and anorexia and bulimia. Speaking of toxic, Anna Wintour comes across as arrogant, hyper critical, and extremely undermining of those around her. The devil does indeed wear Prada! She really does not like to be challenged by anyone as her ego cannot tolerate it. She reduces the critical thinking of others to them not getting it, like they are dumb! Andrew Bolton argued with Wong Kar-wai, an acclaimed Hong Kong Chinese filmmaker, about placing a statue of Chairman Mao in with a Buddhist display! Bolton couldn't seem to understand how inappropriate, offensive and culturally insensitive this would be! Baz Luhrmann asks 'how Chineseesy' Wintour wants a display to be!!! Good grief! And disgraced John Galliano features a lot in the documentry. It was culturally insensitive to have a rabid anti-semtie feature so prominently, and he is not particularly articulate either! I also question if the big deal they made of Rihanna's performance fee was meant to shame her publicly. A black Barbadian woman at the top of her game in the music, beauty and fashion industries. If you want to learn how not to be culturally insensitive then watch this documentary, and do the opposite of Wintour, Bolton and Luhrmann! I am a white Irish man who has taught 'Difference and Diversity' to postgraduate students for over two decades.

"Are clothes Art?" This film addresses this question. A documentary about organising the Metropolitan Museum of Art annual fashion exhibition and dinner for celebrities and rich people that occurs on the night before the exhibition opens. The exhibition is organised by the so called "Costume Insitute", the department at the museum that collects clothes. The department clearly feels that it is considered a second class citizen at this museum, as we hear many, many, many times from all of the main players in this documentary, that the Costume Institute is part of making a modern Museum that "does not have the traditional C19th view of art". However, what these people forget is that the Metropolitan Museum of Art is already very far from that. Indeed their stereotypical image of "what Art is", namely 'paintings and sculpture' was never true of many Americans museums, let alone this museum. Such American museums collected "non-Western" art from the beginning of the C20th. Thus, collecting "clothes as Art" not radical as Anna Wintour (editor of US Vogue) and the Costume Institute (lead by Bolton and Koda) suggest. However, what is confusing is the blurring the line between curatorial scholarship, and commercial sponsorship which the Costume Institute often proposes. (This is far from unique, as many museums in the Western world now suffer from this dilemma.) Thus, the exhibition organiser Andrew Bolton wears the clothes designed by his husband in at least half the film (this is not revealed, but the designs are very distinctive). The tension between scholarship and fashion is also featured in the film. A curator in the Asian Dept at the museum (who speaks Chinese to the Chinese designer of the exhibition) is always worried that the gloss of the high fashion will over shadow his galleries. Frankly, what did he really expect?! As viewers will see, for this exhibition the museum decided to put half the clothes in the Asian gallery space, and not in normal exhibition gallery space. I saw the exhibition and have to say this unique design ploy was very nice to see. So what is lacking is this documentary? Any serious discussion of the important intellectual issues. Any real attempt to edit idiosyncratic details from an objective account how to to mount a scholarly exhibition at the best museum in America. For example, why does Andre Leon Talley feature so strongly in this documentary? What do we have to see a photo of Bolton as 19 year old and vintage footage of London fashion in the 1980s and Bolton ruminating on the "bravery of new Romantics"? Nothing to do with China or the exhibition. Who comes off well? Karl Lagerfeld: "We make clothes, not art." Jean-Paul Gaultier, who knows the history of fashion. He walks around the opening and knows about cabinets' contents and artists - amazing! Weird facts: if you are a "special" museum trustee (Wintour) you can walk around the museum with cup of coffee whenever you want! For those who do not no visit museums, this is strictly forbidden for the rest of the world. The gala raises "$12,500,000" for a museum that requires $390,000,000 annual, OK every dolla 'elps, but all da hoopla fir … waah? Would I recommend this film? Not really, as we learn nothing new about fashion, fund raising, or mounting museums exhibitions.

"It's quite easy to dismiss a fashion designer's engagement with China as being inauthentic." Andrew Bolton The First Monday in May sumptuously depicts the activity surrounding the 2015 China Through The Looking Glass exhibit at The Metropolitan Museum of Art. The star is Bolton, curator of the museum's Costume Institute, who engineers everything from costume production to how wide the train on a gown should be displayed. In addition to that micromanagement, he has to deal daily with trustee and fashion icon, Anna Wintour, who seems blessedly serene and helpful with suggestions. In other words, everyone defers to Bolton, a genius in whom anyone would trust for the right taste and talk. The show itself seems more interested in catching celebs (Justin Bieber appears more than once) than deconstructing the cross cultural richness implied by the title. In fact, I couldn't find many Asians around any of the events or work. "appropriating Chinese symbols" is the point made by a Wintour questioner. But then, execs must have been more worried about the outlandish sum they paid to Rihanna to perform. BTW, her costume took two years to make, and it's a true spectacle. Kim K's butt is also generously displayed. Any cultural inauthenticity didn't seem to hamper the spectacular displays, right down to a dress covered with dishes. As one of the thousands who saw the Alexander McQueen retrospective in 2011, I commend the museum for the splendor of which it is capable.

What I like about this documentary is that it unabashedly shows Anna Wintour and her colleagues express their perceptions of what is fashion, what is art and what is important in their lives. We observe Wintour's meetings with trembling underlings pushing endless cups of coffee at her, waiting to hear her snide comments about who is important and who is not and what will be done that day according to what she wants. Its hard to take Anna and her withering looks and Bolton's ill-fitted Thom Browne suits seriously. However, every industry is like this -- you could have a documentary about the New York Yankees, and everyone there would be just as serious about winning the pennant as these people are about creating a blockbuster exhibition. Questions are raised from watching this film that make you think: Is fashion an art form? Does art have to be relevant to be taken seriously? Is it fine art or is it a commercial product?

A very good documentary that perhaps unwittingly reveals the shallowness of the participants. To me, Andrew Bolton is the only person who appears to have any substance at all. Watching Justin Bieber screeching in the hallway, people sniping at each other, sycophants gurgling over Rihanna's bizarre outfit which she caresses like some exotic animal and proudly announces that it took two years to make. What for? The dominant feeling of the entire movie was displacement and, for me, depression. I don't think one person laughed, took a walk, relaxed, or expressed an original thought in the whole movie. All this effort, all this tension, for what? To pay Rihanna twice the amount that any other celebrity has ever asked for? Why not just make a contribution to the Met? It was really an eye opener into excess, narcissism and a kind of professional, daily misery. I felt a little ill after watching it. The excesses of preening, posturing and vanity were all too much to bear. But the strangest thing is not one of these people except for Mr. Bolton, had anything remotely interesting to say.

Trailer—The First Monday in May