Jimmy Choo, what are you doing?
I'm admittedly biased against Michael Kors, so when it was announced Jimmy Choo was acquired by Kors earlier this summer, I was upset. It bothered me that it was kept a secret and it bothered me that such beautifully crafted footwear had become a subsidiary of an "affordable luxury" brand. Affordable luxury is an oxymoron. It isn't real. And this could become a tangent I would prefer to stay away from.
Dinner feeds me more than Vogue, but I still keep my subscription to various Conde Nast publications because there's nothing like torturing yourself with images of things you can't afford (because they're a luxury, ya know, and therefore not affordable. Michael, your merch is not a luxury because your price point makes it attainable). I love a little Romy but this season's shoes are safe and boring with a flair of what the fuck.
So you're taking these funky cut pumps and overbearing boots and putting them in a dull and dreary setting, are you sending a message like "sorry we killed the brand?" And what makes it most unfortunate is that YSL has these high contrast black and white shots, Moschino put someone in a bag, Gucci is cranking out these alienesque people, Valentino is working the white space and if I didn't know what Jimmy Choo made I wouldn't know what is being advertised.
Jimmy Choo, I'm frustrated with you. What is your angle?