Lucybespro It is a performances centric movie

MonsterPerfect Good idea lost in the noise

Asad Almond A clunky actioner with a handful of cool moments.

Brennan Camacho Mostly, the movie is committed to the value of a good time.

NycLondon "Are clothes Art?" This film addresses this question. A documentary about organising the Metropolitan Museum of Art annual fashion exhibition and dinner for celebrities and rich people that occurs on the night before the exhibition opens. The exhibition is organised by the so called "Costume Insitute", the department at the museum that collects clothes. The department clearly feels that it is considered a second class citizen at this museum, as we hear many, many, many times from all of the main players in this documentary, that the Costume Institute is part of making a modern Museum that "does not have the traditional C19th view of art".However, what these people forget is that the Metropolitan Museum of Art is already very far from that. Indeed their stereotypical image of "what Art is", namely 'paintings and sculpture' was never true of many Americans museums, let alone this museum. Such American museums collected "non-Western" art from the beginning of the C20th. Thus, collecting "clothes as Art" not radical as Anna Wintour (editor of US Vogue) and the Costume Institute (lead by Bolton and Koda) suggest. However, what is confusing is the blurring the line between curatorial scholarship, and commercial sponsorship which the Costume Institute often proposes. (This is far from unique, as many museums in the Western world now suffer from this dilemma.) Thus, the exhibition organiser Andrew Bolton wears the clothes designed by his husband in at least half the film (this is not revealed, but the designs are very distinctive). The tension between scholarship and fashion is also featured in the film. A curator in the Asian Dept at the museum (who speaks Chinese to the Chinese designer of the exhibition) is always worried that the gloss of the high fashion will over shadow his galleries. Frankly, what did he really expect?! As viewers will see, for this exhibition the museum decided to put half the clothes in the Asian gallery space, and not in normal exhibition gallery space. I saw the exhibition and have to say this unique design ploy was very nice to see.So what is lacking is this documentary? Any serious discussion of the important intellectual issues. Any real attempt to edit idiosyncratic details from an objective account how to to mount a scholarly exhibition at the best museum in America. For example, why does Andre Leon Talley feature so strongly in this documentary? What do we have to see a photo of Bolton as 19 year old and vintage footage of London fashion in the 1980s and Bolton ruminating on the "bravery of new Romantics"? Nothing to do with China or the exhibition. Who comes off well? Karl Lagerfeld: "We make clothes, not art." Jean-Paul Gaultier, who knows the history of fashion. He walks around the opening and knows about cabinets' contents and artists - amazing!Weird facts: if you are a "special" museum trustee (Wintour) you can walk around the museum with cup of coffee whenever you want! For those who do not no visit museums, this is strictly forbidden for the rest of the world.The gala raises "$12,500,000" for a museum that requires $390,000,000 annual, OK every dolla 'elps, but all da hoopla fir … waah?Would I recommend this film? Not really, as we learn nothing new about fashion, fund raising, or mounting museums exhibitions.

JonathanWalford What I like about this documentary is that it unabashedly shows Anna Wintour and her colleagues express their perceptions of what is fashion, what is art and what is important in their lives. We observe Wintour's meetings with trembling underlings pushing endless cups of coffee at her, waiting to hear her snide comments about who is important and who is not and what will be done that day according to what she wants. Its hard to take Anna and her withering looks and Bolton's ill-fitted Thom Browne suits seriously. However, every industry is like this -- you could have a documentary about the New York Yankees, and everyone there would be just as serious about winning the pennant as these people are about creating a blockbuster exhibition. Questions are raised from watching this film that make you think: Is fashion an art form? Does art have to be relevant to be taken seriously? Is it fine art or is it a commercial product?

athenamuses-308-200437 A very good documentary that perhaps unwittingly reveals the shallowness of the participants. To me, Andrew Bolton is the only person who appears to have any substance at all. Watching Justin Bieber screeching in the hallway, people sniping at each other, sycophants gurgling over Rihanna's bizarre outfit which she caresses like some exotic animal and proudly announces that it took two years to make. What for? The dominant feeling of the entire movie was displacement and, for me, depression. I don't think one person laughed, took a walk, relaxed, or expressed an original thought in the whole movie. All this effort, all this tension, for what? To pay Rihanna twice the amount that any other celebrity has ever asked for? Why not just make a contribution to the Met? It was really an eye opener into excess, narcissism and a kind of professional, daily misery. I felt a little ill after watching it. The excesses of preening, posturing and vanity were all too much to bear. But the strangest thing is not one of these people except for Mr. Bolton, had anything remotely interesting to say.

jdesando "It's quite easy to dismiss a fashion designer's engagement with China as being inauthentic." Andrew Bolton The First Monday in May sumptuously depicts the activity surrounding the 2015 China Through The Looking Glass exhibit at The Metropolitan Museum of Art. The star is Bolton, curator of the museum's Costume Institute, who engineers everything from costume production to how wide the train on a gown should be displayed.In addition to that micromanagement, he has to deal daily with trustee and fashion icon, Anna Wintour, who seems blessedly serene and helpful with suggestions. In other words, everyone defers to Bolton, a genius in whom anyone would trust for the right taste and talk.The show itself seems more interested in catching celebs (Justin Bieber appears more than once) than deconstructing the cross cultural richness implied by the title. In fact, I couldn't find many Asians around any of the events or work. "appropriating Chinese symbols" is the point made by a Wintour questioner.But then, execs must have been more worried about the outlandish sum they paid to Rihanna to perform. BTW, her costume took two years to make, and it's a true spectacle. Kim K's butt is also generously displayed.Any cultural inauthenticity didn't seem to hamper the spectacular displays, right down to a dress covered with dishes. As one of the thousands who saw the Alexander McQueen retrospective in 2011, I commend the museum for the splendor of which it is capable.