If you were alive during the 90s – and old enough to actually remember it – you may recall the terrible trend for cartoon-print jeans. Or, of course, you may have successfully managed to erase this memory from your mind, due to the sheer trauma of it. God knows, we’ve tried to. We may even have succeeded, too, if it wasn’t for the appearance of these “hilarious” jeans on our radar early this week.
In addition to the high-waited style and dated stone wash, these also come with what looks like the words “BAM!” – although, honestly, it looks more like “PAM” to us. Who IS “Pam”? – and “WAOO!” printed on the leg. WE KNOW. Why would you want to walk around with the word “WAOO!” on your leg? What does it even mean?
We didn’t go back to 1992 to find these, you see. No, we just went to Yoox.com, where we found them hiding in the denim department. This is about as bad as it gets, folks. Seriously, your Chief of Police did a LOT of the bad 90s trends. A LOT of them. But even she wouldn’t touch the cartoon jeans if you’d paid her. And where The Fashion Police are from, the cartoon in question was normally The Flintstones. No, we’re not joking. You’d get Fred on one leg and Barney on the other, or some other nonsense. We have no idea why. What was it about The Flinstones that made some designer think, “OMG, they totes need to be on jeans!” We don’t know, but we do know we never looked at those wacky cavemen the same way again, and we never forgave them. Fred and Barney, you are DEAD TO US, seriously.
Anyway, like we said, these aren’t from the 90s, they’re from RIGHT NOW, which means you can rush out and buy them. You’ll need £49, and you’ll need to click here to do it. What are you waiting for?
This question isn’t quite as ridiculous as it sounds, because, of course, the leopard-print beauties on the right of the photo aren’t actually underwear, despite being described as “knickers”: no, they’re those teeny-tiny “shorts” that look great on female pop stars as they gyrate around the stage, but possibly won’t look quite as good on the rest of us.
Perhaps we’re just speaking for ourselves here, though? Perhaps you have both the booty and bravery to wear Miss Selfridge’s leopard-print pants in public, without batting an eyelid? If that’s the case, your choice today will be an easy one. If, however, you prefer NOT to look like you’re out in your undies, you may be forced to opt for Comme des Garcons’ inflatable brain shorts instead.
Which you will choose?
(Remember, the rules of the game are that you must choose one option… or DIE. Death is NOT an option. Neither is covering up with something else, or wearing the item in the privacy of your own home, where no one can hear you scream. You wear them in public, exactly as they’re shown, or YOU DIE. Simples.)
There’s only a few days left until voting closes in the Cosmopolitan Blog Awards: we were absolutely thrilled to be shortlisted in the Established Fashion Blog category but, of course, we’d be even more thrilled to win, so we have just two things to say before we head off for the weekend:
1. If you’ve already voted for us, THANK YOU. It means so much to us to have your support!
2. If you haven’t yet voted, please consider clicking here and voting for The Fashion Police: remember, a vote for TFP is a vote against harem pants, Crocs, and all of those other items of clothing that should never have seen the light of day. It’s a vote against leggings worn as pants, and God knows, we’d all like to see an end to THAT, wouldn’t we?
Finally, thanks again to everyone who nominated us: have a great weekend!
You all know the drill by now, we’re sure, but for those of you just joining us, this is a Fashion Police Checkpoint: before you can pass, you must stop collaborate and listen and provide us with an inventory of what you’re wearing right this very second: no cheating!
If you do a lot of shopping, read a lot of fashion magazines or just have eyes, you’ll probably have noticed that there’s a whole lot of leopard print goin’ on this winter. (If you failed to notice this, then we’re sorry to be the bearers of bad news.)
Of course, animal print in general, and leopard print in particular, is one of those things that never really go away, whether we want it to or not. Whatever the season, and whatever the year, there’s generally an animal print something-or-other to be found in the stores, and that’s not always a bad thing, either. This year, however, is different. This year, we’re looking at a head-to-toe animal print invasion. It’s on shoes. It’s on dresses. It’s on skirts. It’s on coats. It’s on…look, we could continue here, but we’re sure you can name clothing items yourself, yes?
When it comes to animal print, our personal – and note the word “personal” here – rule of thumb has always been that it’s an “accessories only” kind of print. On a belt, or a hat, or a pair or shoes, say, a bit of animal print can add something to an outfit: a GOOD something. Especially in the case of leopard print shoes, which we LOVE. On clothes, though? On clothes, this is a print which has to be approached with caution, lest you end up looking like a middle-aged barmaid in a northern soap opera. Or worse. So while we’re not totally opposed to the concept – we could possibly imagine wearing the pencil skirt show in the image above, for instance – we do worry about the liberal application of animal print to ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING.
Animal print, you see is just not an ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING kind of thing. That stretchy mini skirt, for instance, will give us nightmares now. The dress with the mesh panel is just one can of spray tan and a set of gigantic false eyelashes away from being too tacky to live.
It is The Fashion Police’s belief that the words “leopard print” and “jumpsuit” should never appear in the same product, for when they do, a fashion crime will surely follow.
So, what do you think of animal print? Is it OK in moderation, a comlpete no-no at any time, or are you happy to clothe yourself in it from head to toe?
We weren’t quite sure whether the following items were arrest-worthy, or simply due an eye-roll or two, so we asked our Facebook followers, and the answer came back loud and clear: ARREST! ARREST!
You can, therefore, blame them for the fact that we’re about to show you these:
£15 in the River Island sale. Why these didn’t sell out at full-price, we will never know, except we totally will.
Also from River Island:
Last year, as you may remember, River Island were responsible for the creation of a selection of animal hats, which everyone went crazy for. Some days we couldn’t even leave the HQ without being confronted with hordes of people, all wearing exactly the same, cutesy animal hat from River Island. This year, however, they’ve changed things up a bit, and brought out this mowhawk hat instead. We know you all loved the animal heads, but will you love this one just as much, we wonder? It’s on sale for £10 if so.
If you’re a regular reader, you’ll know that not a month goes by without us having to take the folks at Maison Martin Margiela to task for some hideous Crime of Fashion or other. Margiela himself doesn’t design for the brand any more, but his influence lives on, and we view him as a kind of Evil Overlord of the fashion world: kind of like the Joker, only with weirder outfits.
Anyway, so great is MMM’c occupancy of our cells that we decided to give the brand a monthly slot here. And what do they have in store for us this month, we hear you ask? Oh, just this:
OH GOD. It’s no use, we were trying to be blasé about it, but this? This makes us wish we hadn’t bothered getting out of bed this morning. Look:
(Does this photo make anyone else fall off their seat laughing, or is it just us? Why is that one model knocking herself on the head? Is the one in red trying to grope her?)
The whole designer capsule collection is something The Fashion Police have never really been able to fake a lot of enthusiasm over. Honestly, we get exhausted just thinking about them: all of that frenzied shopping, the getting up at the crack o’dawn to line up outside H&M, or wherever, just so you can buy exactly the same items as the hundreds of other girls all lined up outside H&M and type the word “SQUEEE!” a few dozen times on Twitter when you finally manage to get your hands on something that is OMGDESIGNER: exhausting. And the fact that the “hero” items (dontchya just hate that term?) sell on eBay for just as much as something from the designer’s main line? Madness. Utter, Fashion Victim madness.
Anyway, all of this is academic in the case of the Giambattista Valli for Macy’s collection, because we don’t have Macy’s here in the UK. This is a shame, because if we DID have easy access to this collection then we, too, would be able to dance on a table in head-to-toe leopard print:
It would allow us to put our hands in the air, like we just don’t care! In, er, MORE leopard print:
But, of course, we can’t do any of this, because we live in the UK, and will only be able to buy these pieces on eBay, for the price of a small car. Thus, our lives will be empty and meaningless from this moment on, while our American officers are the ones who will dance on the tables:
We want to cry at the injustice of it all.
On a serious note, though: what do you think of this collection? Will you be buying any of it?
