Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Umm...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Cannon
    replied


    You all know how I feel about Bond, so there is no contest here for me.


    Those hands. It's like a Photoshop fail or something...

    Leave a comment:


  • greg_s
    replied


    Regardless of their intent, the dude on the right looks ridiculous

    Leave a comment:


  • @damenefreghista
    replied


    I think what they were trying to say here is that a few months ago they suggested that it would look nicer to add an element to your tux that was different (tie, jacket, pocket square, etc.) to stand out from the "traditional". And that's what he did that night. So I don't think they're trying to say that the dorky looking dude on the right looks better per se, but that he supposedly followed their advice because they wrote the piece months ago. Which is extremely condescending and annoying when they talk like that. Like Daniel Craig actually took time out and read their lame article and followed their advice last night. It's possible but doubt it. By the way, that guy's hands do look enormous compared to the size of his head. So it could also be that he has a below average size head??

    Leave a comment:


  • LesserBlackDog
    replied


    @trash - Or maybe just a really small head?

    Leave a comment:


  • trash
    replied


    Is it just me or does the guy on the right have gigantic hands?

    Leave a comment:


  • Jeremy B.
    replied


    $2400 for cotton pants. Let that sink in. $2400 for a pair of chinos.

    Leave a comment:


  • jicarv
    replied


    I think Daniel Craig's outfit looks sooo much better.

    Leave a comment:


  • LesserBlackDog
    replied


    Entities like Esquire and GQ can be useful in the menswear world. But they are also bloviating morons whose dual primary purposes are to sell ads and to sell magazines. A lot of good knowledge in there, but also a lot of hype, hyperbole, and simple absurdity. Keep in mind that their primary purpose is not to make you look good, but to keep you buying magazines and keep the fashion industry buying ad space, and you will be ok.

    Leave a comment:


  • scrambledpotato
    replied


    "He paid attention to our invaluable advice on breaking away from the formalwear pack."


    Wow, I'm amazed they can see the keyboard with their heads so far up their own ass. Esquire was an 'avoid' site to me before, it's just become an 'easily avoid' site now.

    Leave a comment:


  • kbrown
    replied


    Honestly, it's impossible to judge without seeing people of comparable appearance. Very good looking people look great no matter what they wear.

    Leave a comment:


  • Teej
    replied


    I should have clarified. By he looks better, I meant the outfit.

    Leave a comment:


  • kbrown
    replied


    How to look better than Daniel Craig:


    1. Be born with exceptional genetic material.

    2. Spend many hours in a gym with a personal trainer and/or take steroids

    3. Hire a team of professional stylists, tailors, and cobblers.

    4. Only allow yourself to be seen in videos created by professional cinematographers and edited by professional editors


    Daniel Craig might look better in the outfit on the right than in the left, but the guy on the right is Danny DeVito to Craig's Arnold.

    Leave a comment:


  • Teej
    started a topic Umm...

    Umm...



    So I have learned to take some of Esquire's and GQ's advice with a grain of salt but this is just ridiculous. The title mentioned how to dress better than James Bond (Daniel Craig). I don't know about you but I think Daniel Craig looks much, much better than the guy on the right. The price tag is insane too (though that is usual for Esquire). Just wow...


    http://www.esquire.com/blogs/mens-fa...33035?click=pp

Working...
X