Juliette Binoche IS Coco Chanel and Ben Mendelsohn IS Christian Dior

Love her.

coco was a nazi bitch

Does this portray Coco as the Nazi that she was?

[quote]The anticipated series from Todd A. Kessler

Oh wow, I loved Providence, I'll check this out for sure.

Did Christian Dior have a lisp?

Eldergays are just happy that the casting of the main characters has not changed gender, race, or sexual identity.... in other words - the way casting of historical characters should be done.

To R3...Thank You!! Did they shave Coco the "Nazi loving cunt" Chanel hair after the Liberation of Paris because of all the NAZI CUM she swallowed& all the Nazis she fucked during WW2.

All lies, put out by competitors, you ungrateful homos.

If Robbie Rogers produced this, Coco’s Nazi lover would be rewritten as a heroic Trans Woman of Color Resistance fighter.

Coco turned her Jewish seamstresses into the Nazis when they demanded a living wage.

I think of this when I see anybody wearing the suits or those ugly monogram accessories.

Really r10? She sounds like a really evil Lucille Bluth.

Two geniuses. Does Apple have a free trial?

If r9 wrote it, all the characters would be Trump supporters like himself

Who gives a shit about Coco Chanel’s personal life? She’s dead - do you want to dig up her corpse?

Can’t wait to see this. Bar is my absolute favorite.

Ben looks great, but he's much more attractive than Christian Dior ever was. Malkovich's wig is problematic.

Binoche is much more beautiful than Chanel ever was, which is how I like my biopics.

Today Chanel is owned by The Wertheimers, a French, Jewish family.

Now if they’ll just do a movie or limited series on Estée Lauder!!

But can Juliette SING?

Chanel was a Nazi collaborator, & despite the fact she was bisexual, she hated gay men.

The books, the show and another movie dealing with Cocos' personal life.

People seem to be interested r14.

And the betrayed and imprisoned Jewish seamstresses are just a small part of her evil.

I never heard that seamstress bit about her before..oy.

Chanel didn't have "seamstresses." The women who made her clothes were fine artisans at the top of their game.

Ben’s cute

She was a cut throat whore from the gutter who [italic]stopped at nothing.

I mean, agonizing and moralizing over a long dead woman’s personal life and “evils” is something for Gen Z retards. Just enjoy the clothes and cuntery.

No, r11, she didn't. The business was closed during the war, anyway. Coco did try to rip off her Jewish business partner, Pierre Wertheimer because she felt that he'd ripped her off, but he outsmarted her and then became the full owner of the company after the war. He is the one who after the war convinced Coco Chanel to restart the brand Chanel with him. The brand Chanel is now owned by his Jewish grandsons. Chanel is a Jewish-owned brand.

Because it's a lie, r23.

R10, do you have a credible source for your previously unheard of claim?

I don’t know what it is about Ben Mendelsohn, but he really bothers me—like he has a really creepy or off side to him. It’s unfortunate because I think he’s a gifted actor but I don’t want to watch him.

Chanel has been Jewish owned for a very long time. Interestingly enough it was Stanley Marcus of Neiman Marcus who raised the brand from the dead after the war by placing orders for a Chanel that no one else wanted to touch. So it was really post war America that breathed new life into the brand.

Anyway, there is an interesting component to the classic Chanel bag that the brand has tried to romance away over the years. I worked for Chanel, selling handbags for many years. On their classic bags, if you lift the flap, there is a secret, shallow zip pocket they they still put in to this day. They call it the "Love Letter" pocket. But originally Chanel created it so that whenever she was stopped and searched by the Allies, she could open her bag and show them there was nothing in it, all the while any notes she was passing along for Nazis could be hidden.

The Chanel classic bag was created in February 1955, that is why it's called the 2.55. But it was modelled after what she would have carried at the time. It has a chain strap and turnlock closure. Karl Lagerfeld created the interwoven leather Chanin strap and CC closure in 1983.

Chanel is the last and largest privately owned fashion house in the world with an evaluation close to $20 Billion. LVMH and Gucci group have been chomping at the bit for years to acquire it. Coco Chanel's dubious past is mitigated by the fact that the brand itself, owned by the Wertheimer family, has probably contributed 100s of millions of dollars to Jewish causes over the last seventy five years AND her immense and undeniable contribution to the world of women's fashion.

The major contribution being she was the first designer to use jersey, a fabric used for men's underwear at the time, to create clothes for women that liberated them from the constricting corseted dresses of the late 19th, early 20th century. She was also the first designer to use the color black as everyday color instead of just for women in mourning. That is where we get the "Little Black Dress" from. She is the reason why black is seen as the ultimate fashion color - as in "Orange is the new Black' whenever a color of a particular season pops up as a replacement for black. She also created pants, cardigans, sweaters, tailored jackets (menswear) for women which leads me to believe she was a big old sporty dyke who slept with rich men to advance her career - her rumoured lover being fellow designer Elsa Schiaparelli. She is credited with inventing costume jewelry, the sling back shoe and the first designer to put a strap on a handbag to liberate women from having to carry a purse by hand. She was the first designer to really invest in personal scents and perfumes with numerous different ones, with Chanel #5 being the most popular. She was a strong believer in women being independent and having their own money, even though she probably whored herself out to rich men to advance her brand. So her contribution to the world of fashion as we know it now is HUGE, pretty much the foundation of it.

She was a scrappy poor chorus girl who's father dropped her off at an orphanage because he couldn't afford to take care of her and her sister. She is a survivor and probably did a lot of ruthless things to make sure she survived. And now here we are.

R31 I'm deeply attracted to him for the same reason.

[quote] I don’t know what it is about Ben Mendelsohn, but he really bothers me—like he has a really creepy or off side to him.

An actor who has made a career playing villains comes off as creepy? Well never in my life

I also forgot to add at r33 that she practically invented the idea of Ready To Wear. That is probably her biggest contribution to the world of fashion. Instead of custom made-to-order clothes she was the first to create clothing in sizes that women could purchase. Before that a sample line of a particular season would be made and women would order what they liked to made in their size. She was the first to make the sizes in advance so women could just buy it directly.

So really she is credited with creating what we now know as the fashion house, designing things in all areas from clothes, shoes, handbags, perfume, jewelry. Even to this day, fashion houses basically follow Chanel's lead as a business model. Most recently the Wertheimer family brought every single Chanel store in the world under one umbrella - meaning all the boutiques you see in other department stores are leased from Chanel. They control the movement, pricing, display and marketing, every aspect of their brand globally, no one else. If you buy a Chanel bag from Saks, you are getting a Chanel shopping bag, not a Saks bag. And they control who works in every single one of their stores or boutiques. And shortly there after Dior and Goyard followed suit.

I'll watch anything with Ben Mendelsohn in it. Looking forward to this.

The Chanel exhibit at the V&A right now, that's been sold out for months, is astounding. Decades of beautiful beautiful works of art, I loved it all.

Is this the first time in his life Mendelsohn hasn't played a crim or a villain of some kind? I've been watching him since his teens and he's always the bad 'un.

Whitewashing Cocos Nazi collaborations is idiotic as it is well documented.

Not a lie r29.

It's a lie that Chanel turned her Jewish seamstresses in to the Nazis, r40.

R39 He was not a villain in "The Outsider" series based on the Stephen King novel.

[quote]R27 Agonizing and moralizing over a long dead woman’s personal life and “evils” is something for Gen Z retards.

Collaborating with the Nazis is innocuously dismissed as ones “personal life”?

What did YOUR family do in the war, pray tell?

[quote]r28 The business was closed during the war, anyway.

I thought the perfume shop stayed open.

I don't know about a shop, r44, but Pierre Wertheimer handed control of the fragrance to a Christian to operate it on his behalf during the war, so the Jewish Wertheimer didn't have a problem with the fragrance.

In any case, seamstresses don't make fragrances, so the fragrance can't be used as evidence that Coco turned her Jewish seamstresses in to the Nazis. We've still not been presented with any evidence for that. It's odd that the person who made this allegation becomes physically sick at the thought of it when it isn't even true. Just shows the power of belief, even over fact.

[italic]In “Sleeping with the Enemy: Coco Chanel’s Secret War,” the veteran journalist and investigative reporter Hal Vaughan offers convincing evidence that she was a Nazi intelligence operative and an incorrigible anti-Semite.

Does he offer any evidence that she turned her Jewish seamstresses in to the Germans, r46?

Even Vaughn says Chanel was simply an opportunist - she used anti-Jewish laws on Jews owning businesses to try to get a better deal from her business partnership with Wertheimer. She fed her Nazi boyfriend gossip info to protect her nephew. Her anti-Semitism was of a casual type all too easily widespread in Europe and the US in that day, but it didn't amount to wanting to see Jews dead. She never turned any Jews in to the Nazis.

[quote]I have no feelings against Chanel. You can’t put someone like Klaus Barbie and Chanel in the same category: she didn’t kill anybody; she didn’t torture anybody. Madame Gabrielle Labrunie—Chanel’s grand-niece—said something to me that I found fascinating. She said to me: “You know, Mr. Vaughan, these were very difficult times, and people had to do very terrible things to get along.” Chanel was, very simply put, an enormous opportunist who did what she had to do to get along.

Ben is hot.

R31 He has been around for fucking ever but is still relatively unknown in the US.

Ben young

Thank you for the new reading materials, just ordered "Sleeping with the Enemy", by Hal Vaughan.

My Uncle Lucca was an OSS agent during WW2 in Europe, spoke 7 languages, easily learned Russian. I always told him he should write a book about his Spy days in Europe. Uncle Lucca always called Chanel a "Nazi fucking Bitch" He said "the Americans and the British had the "goods" on Chanel& Duke of Windsor and their wartime involvement with the Nazis-Germany. It never happened for reasons that the BRF and DeGaulle didn't want to happen.

There is a lot of information on the spying in WW2.

And one thing you will absolutely not read in that book, r51, is that she handed her Jewish seamstresses over to the Nazis.

In fact, you might finish reading it thinking that your Uncle Lucca was exaggerating about Chanel and she was simply a wartime opportunist using good relations with the locally stationed Nazis to help protect her business and family. Vaughn never says anywhere that Chanel was a Nazi.

After 30 years I still get Ben Mendelsohn mixed up with Noah Taylor.

Both were in The Year My Voice Broke, then Mendelsohn made Spotswood and Taylor made Flirting. Mendelsohn made Sirens and Taylor made Shine.

They've both worked consistently and have so many big name movies to their credit.

[quote]R47 Her anti-Semitism was of a casual type

In his 2011 biography, author Hal Vaughn actually states, “Chanel’s fear and hatred for Jews was noxious and notorious.”

I love this excerpt:

Shockingly, Coco Chanel spent the war years living at the Ritz in Paris with a Nazi officer. After the war was over, Chanel was arrested by the free French for suspicion of collaborating with the Nazis. She purportedly offered this explanation for sleeping with the enemy:

[quote]“Really, sir, a woman of my age cannot be expected to look at his passport if she has a chance of a lover.”

It is generally believed that Winston Churchill intervened with the French government, convincing them to let his old friend Coco Chanel escape to Switzerland rather than be paraded through the streets of Paris with her head shaved like other female Nazi collaborators.

And so was plenty of people's attitude towards the Jews in that period, r54. (I think you mean "[Chanel's] fear and hatred for Jews was noxious and notorious”, by the way).

You can find that quote in plenty of places. For example:

[quote]At the time, the Catholic Church was highly anti-Semitic, especially after the scandal of the Dreyfus affair, involving the “1894 arrest, trial, and conviction for high treason based on false evidence of Captain Alfred Dreyfus, a French artillery officer of Alsatian-Jewish decent.” Vaughn writes that “Chanel could not have escaped the Catholic Church’s propaganda campaign against the Jewish officer Dreyfus,” and, that later in life, “[Chanel’s] fear and hatred for Jews was noxious and notorious.”

Unfortunately, that's just how many people were. That doesn't mean, however, that Chanel turned Jews in to the Nazis or that she was even aware of what was being done to the Jews (which few people were aware of).

As for Chanel's "collaboration" with the Nazis, it primarily involved trying to use her influence abroad in order to help her nephew, Andre, a soldier in the French army who had been captured and was being held in a prisoner-of-war camp in Germany.

[quote]By 1941, now 57, Chanel was, according to Vaughn, “very well connected with political figures in London, Madrid and Paris,” and had begun a relationship with Baron Hans Günther von Dincklage, a Gestapo spy and major asset to the Abwehr, the Nazi intelligence organization. For Chanel, spending time with her new lover often meant rubbing shoulders with other senior officials, and the designer quickly entered a social circle of powerful Nazis.

[quote]Later that year, Dincklage traveled to Berlin with his colleague, Baron Louis de Vaufreland, to personally meet with Adolf Hitler. Not long after, the Abwehr learned of Chanel’s anxiety over her nephew’s condition and they were eager to strike a bargain — the release of André in exchange for communication with some of Chanel’s powerful Allied connections. With Dincklage’s help, Chanel made a deal with the Abwehr — she and Vaufreland would travel together to Madrid, in neutral Spain, where Chanel would then “make a trip to England, so she could give her important friends economic and political information.”

[quote]What occurred during that 1941 visit to Madrid is unknown, however, as no documentation from Chanel’s mission was ever recovered. But Vaughn notes that upon Chanel’s return to Paris in the winter of 1941, she learned that the Germans had held up their side of the deal and André had returned home safely.

[quote]By the winter of 1943, with the Allied forces gaining traction against Hitler, some Parisians began to take action and staged violent resistance against the occupying Germans, as well as punishing known collaborators. Nazi leaders contacted Dincklage and told him it was time to leave Paris — and Chanel — behind. Unwilling to be left alone in Paris, Chanel decided to devise a new plan with Dincklage, attempting to leverage Vera Bate’s connection with Winston Churchill.

[quote]Citing French historian Henry Gidel, Vaugn writes:

[quote]Mademoiselle Chanel thought she could barter her friendship with Winston Churchill to persuade the Nazis that she and Dincklage had the contacts to broker a separate peace deal with Britain. Gidel believed the Duke of Westminster, well known for being pro-German along with many other senior British politicians and royals, feared that the Soviet Union would grab all of Europe. The Duke encouraged Chanel to act as emissary between Berlin and London.

So, it was fine to collaborate with the Nazis as long as it furthered one’s own interests.

Okay.

[quote]r24 Chanel didn't have "seamstresses." The women who made her clothes were fine artisans at the top of their game.

It doesn’t sound like she valued these “fine artisans” much. Or really, even saw them as more than slave labor.

———

[Italic]Her workforce increased to around four thousand employees by 1935. Chanel's saleswomen as well as her seamstresses went on strike in June 1936 to protest their poor wages and working conditions. In April 1936 the French people voted in a left-wing coalition government headed by Leon Blum, which was followed by a number of strikes including the workers at Chanel. Chanel refused to implement the Matignon Agreement, which introduced wage increases of 7 to 15 percent, the right to collective bargaining and unionize, a 40-hour week and a 2-week paid annual holiday. Instead she fired 300 women who refused to leave the building and only later, in order to produce her next collection, agreed to introduce a workers co-operative on the understanding that she managed it. [/italic] Axel Madsen, Chanel: A Woman of Her Own, p. 216).

No, it wasn't fine to "collaborate" with the Nazis, r58, but people did what they did to survive in far more difficult circumstances than you've ever been in. A lot of things can come under the label "collaboration". What in particular do you find offensive about what Chanel did?

Again, r59, that was how most employers were at the time, not just Chanel It's crap, but not specific to Chanel, who had also been a seamstress herself for several years.

The US today doesn't even offer the workers benefits outlined in the 1936 French Matignon Agreement.

Ben Mendelsohn just hits my slightly-dirty-daddy spot and then rams it over and over so.....yes I will be watching

[quote] So, it was fine to collaborate with the Nazis as long as it furthered one’s own interests.

One's own interests, yes.

I can't believe anybody is defending this woman.

Her "legacy" is beyond me and whitewashing it is just wretched.

^ and I could never afford it, so standing in my truth is THAT much easier!

Have any if you actually smelled Chanel No. 5? It’s horrible. Very chemical and harsh to me.

^To you, maybe.

It's so overwhelmingly powdery to me. Blech. But I used to wear the OG Coco, and people loved that on me.

Yes Cheryl, I'm sure they did.

So has anyone been watching? I want a spin-off sitcom of Binoche as Coco just cunting around Paris

Yeah, here

Remember that Chanel No 5, like every other old perfume still on the market, doesn't smell the way it used to. They've done a better job with it than with many others, but it smells more chemical because it is. Key natural ingredients the expensive scents used to use were banned for cruelty or environmental reasons, and chemicals such as aldehydes were banned for being toxic, so all classic fragrances have had to be remade with "acceptable" chemicals to try to approximate the original scent.

^ Except for the ones not made with chemicals like the ones from Creed, which if you find the right one for your particular chemistry, can be intoxicating.

Creed are based in Paris, and it's France that really cracked down, so they'd be lucky if they hadn't had to alter any of their older scents at all. I appreciate that they use natural products now, but there were a lot of things used very commonly among the luxury brands that did get banned over the years. For example, civet (an ingredient in Chanel No 5) is now almost exclusively synthetic for animal cruelty reasons, whereas the real thing was once a staple of the high-end brands, and you certainly can tell the difference.

If what you say about Creed is true, they must have responded to the bans by saying they would not use synthetic products, and so their new fragrances are chemical-free, but then they couldn't legally maintain their old ones as they were. If they've never used substances that are now banned at all, that would be very surprising but all power to them.

Ben is dirty in all the best ways

Try Aventus or Viking for men R74.

Of the animal scents, Creed only uses natural ambergris excreted by sperm whales that is harvested at the top of the ocean. For the others they use synthetics. Other animal scents include musk, which can come from the sheath of the musk deer, civet comes from anal glands of the civet cat, and castoreum is an extraction of the beavers’ sacs.

A product does not need to be 100 percent natural in order to be nontoxic or considered a ‘clean’ perfume; a number of clean fragrance brands rely on safe synthetics. The advantage of synthetics over some natural materials is consistency — the potency and nuance of natural ingredients can vary from harvest to harvest. There are also risk factors such as allergic reactions to natural ingredients that a synthetic can eliminate in some cases.