Spooky Scary
Yep, that's Heidi as Shiva. Courtesy of Seventeen.com
As we’ve discussed before, Heidi Klum LOVES dressing up for Halloween. Here are some of her costume ideas, as highlighted by Seventeen. Sephora windows are highlighting looks for Halloween, but Bare Minerals is giving away treats today for every day looks when you spend $50. Treats included are the hydrating mineral veil – (it that goes on after you apply your makeup to lock in moisture), primer, exfoliator called RareMinerals renew & reveal, cleanser, a moisturizer called RareMinerals purely nourishing that’s supposed to increase cell renewal as well as an additional moisturizer. Not to shabby, and zero calories, unlike many other treats available today.
If you’re like some of us at Philly Weekly and decided to wait until the last minute to figure out a costume, be sure to watch this Daily Candy video on costumes you can throw together including a Cereal Killer and a Kraft Singles cheese slice. The Today Show also had costume ideas on this morning that can be pulled together last minute, including the Fanta girls.
Glamour has some do’s and don’ts for Halloween, including walking around like a stripper. Hmm. We tend to think that Halloween is the day when you can get away with almost anything but we guess there are still some rules.
And, if you’re having buyers remorse about your Halloween costume, don’t worry. At least you didn’t buy these $400 Louis Vuitton Bunny Ears that Rachel Zoe is in love with. Usually we like Rachel’s picks, even the high end ones, but $400 bucks for ears? Really?
I clearly should have gone into factory art. Or gourmet butter
Nutshell recap: Takashi Murakami does art in which retail, mass consumption and mass production are often themes. One of the more recent things he’s done is a collaboration with Louis Vuitton on a very colorful reinterpretation of their logo, which went on a limited-edition line of handbags. In Murakami’s Superflat exhibitions in L.A. and Brooklyn in 2007, Louis Vuitton set up mid-exhibit stores in which you could buy handbags with the special print for about $1000 and “art” prints of the pattern (comparison above) for more.
L.A. apparently-has-more-money-than-knowledge-of-modern-art guy Clint Arthur sued after reading an ARTINFO interview with the MOCA show’s curator, specifically this part:
Whose idea was the Vuitton boutique?
It was Takashi’s idea to the degree that he had worked with them on two occasions. I don’t think he thought they would do it. But Takashi had full control through Louis Vuitton of what has gone on inside that space. And there have been some things that have surprised me.
Like what?
Takashi found exactly the point that would irritate both me and Louis Vuitton. He took the materials that he had printed for various [Vuitton] products—the white one, the cherry one, five different sorts of patterns—and he had them stretched like paintings and made into a very large but numbered edition. He’s sort of selling this rather high-end multiple up in the Louis Vuitton boutique.
We hoped beyond hope that this wouldn’t just get settled out of court, because if it goes to trial it is perhaps one of the most interesting excuses for a national discussion of what art is, like, all about that we’ve had in recent memory.
And it’s going to civil court!
An earlier judge tossed out a case Arthur filed against the museum, because they had offered Arthur (and anyone else displeased with the prints bought from the museum store) a full refund, which he turned down because he wanted to keep the prints; the ruling read “To allow a purchaser to both keep his allegedly defective purchase and to get his money back … rewards opportunistic litigation (of which this case is a prime example).”
The surviving lawsuit is against Vuitton, on the same grounds; Arthur claims Vuitton kept it a secret that the above print was made of the same materials as the handbag below it. Although the lawsuits are very similar, and Vuitton has also offered to refund Arthur’s money, a judge ruled yesterday that it was going to court, baby!
I kind of find it hilarious how all the art magazines that mention this case, not allowed to just say “This guy’s an utter idiot,” make up for it by taking the douchiest possible picture of him and mentioning at every possible opportunity that Arthur is a “manufacturer of gourmet butter.”
Photo: Stefano Paltera for the L.A. Times
L.A. Times blog: Art fraud lawsuit against Louis Vuitton over Murakami prints to go forward [updated]
ARTINFO: Murakami Print Buyer Wins Right to Pursue Lawsuit Against Vuitton
Superflat First Love
Harajuku Vuitton store decorated for May Murakami release, from Hypebeast
Multicolore Spring Palette... key holder? to be released in May.
So you may recall how Japanese artist Takashi Murakami hooked up with Louis Vuitton back in 2003 to come up with a special-edition pattern to be used on those famous bourgie handbags that used to be a status symbol, and people were calling him the new Warhol, and then there was that big Murakami exhibit in L.A. in 2007, then it went to Brooklyn, then Murakami did Kanye’s “Graduation” cover?
Well, Louis Vuitton and Murakami have collaborated again, coming up with a new series of little wallets in a multicolored print that, let’s be honest, looks almost exactly like the colorful 2003 print that was such a departure from the normal brown-and-gold LV colors.
But Louis Vuitton handbags are not interesting. What is fun is some of the is-it-shameless-marketing-or-is-it-really-clever-commentary-on-art-and-commerce advertising stuff that surrounds their collaboration. Because not only is it kind of fun to think about where you want to place it on the continuum of pure art/commerical art, it’s also super-colorful and MANIC.
For example, take the image above of a Vuitton store gussied up all colorful, or here’s a preview released yesterday of a five-minute video called Superflat First Love, available as a mobile download in Japan:
Also on the Vuitton-Murakami collaboration front, there was an interesting article a couple of weeks ago in the LA Times about how some of the people who bought prints of the Murakami Vuitton pattern for $6,000-$10,000 a pop are now pissed (and at least one is suing) after finding out that the prints are just the same stuff used to make the handbags, framed.
This kind of makes you want to slap your forehead, because if anyone is going to drop $10,000 on a piece of art one would hope he or she did their homework enough to recognize that factory art is, uh, kind of what Murakami does. But on the other hand, I kind of hope for Murakami’s sake that this case gets a lot of press, because it would be harder to come up with a more perfect situation to make people really think about what qualifies as art.
Art Observed: preview of superflat first love
LA Times: Louis Vuitton suit adds fraud allegation
Slightly NSFW picture behind the jump…
We Ain’t Sayin’ He’s A Gold Digger … But Really, Kanye?
Like these sneakers?
They’re from the newly priced Kanye West for Louis Vuitton line, which features sneaks starting at $840. The ones pictured here are $1140, not including tax (or shipping if you’re planning to order online). The shoes will be available in June.
Apparently Kanye’s unaware of the economic recession going on in America these days and thinks the average consumer will drop over a grand on shoes. We can’t fathom this actually happening, but if you’re planning to save your nickels, let us know.
Our rant about Converse sneakers suddenly seems misplaced. Consider this our official apology.