Often, fashion is described as a nightmarish realm—a world of constricting clothing, impossible beauty standards, and a distorted sense of value. It’s a place where discomfort and superficiality often reign supreme.
Yet, it’s incredibly rare for a designer, especially one as celebrated as Jonathan Anderson, to directly confront this darker side of the industry.
But that’s exactly what Anderson did. In his audacious debut as Dior’s new creative director for women’s wear, he chose to launch the collection with a shocking horror film, immediately signaling a dramatic shift.
Projected onto an inverted pyramid suspended above the runway, the film depicted Dior as a house besieged by the specters of its legendary designers—from Christian Dior himself to more recent names like Maria Grazia Chiuri. This cinematic introduction masterfully blended archival fashion show footage and celebrity endorsements with jarring flashes of blood, thunderous lightning, and chilling screams, creating a frenetic, high-speed fusion of Hitchcockian suspense and ‘The Devil Wears Prada’ satire.
Crafted by the renowned British documentary filmmaker and social historian Adam Curtis, the movie served a dual purpose: a whirlwind retrospective of Dior’s storied journey and a stark declaration that the fashion world has devolved into a ruthless, cutthroat battleground. It was a clear ‘knives out’ statement.
However, the film also asserted Anderson’s creative authority, reminding us that while Dior has lately been seen as a go-to for sophisticated, almost ‘cosplay’ elegance (think Melania Trump’s signature suits), Christian Dior’s groundbreaking post-war collections originally startled audiences with their sheer extravagance. This aggressive opening perfectly set the stage for Anderson’s vision: Dior reimagined as an experimental playground, not a stuffy historical archive.
What emerged on the runway wasn’t a straightforward clothing proposal, but rather an intricate exercise in ‘Dior-concepting’ — familiar house codes were deconstructed, reassembled, abstracted, and liberated from the confines of their historical context.
Iconic Dior bar jackets appeared in a miniature, doll-like scale, deliberately shrinking their historical presence. These were cleverly paired with equally tiny pleated skirts, creating a combined silhouette that mirrored the volume of a single traditional bar jacket. (A brilliant conceptual move!) Other iterations featured peplums dramatically reimagined as large, bow-like loops over the hips, matched with denim miniskirts for a more contemporary, wearable appeal.
The collection also featured sleeveless satin dresses with striking, basket-weave skirts extending dramatically from each side (a preview of which was seen on Anya Taylor-Joy at the Toronto International Film Festival). Then came draped, off-the-shoulder jersey frocks stretched over what appeared to be bulbous panniers—or perhaps even rubber exercise balls? While potentially stunning in editorial photographs, on the runway they had an unfortunate resemblance to a botched Brazilian butt lift. More elegantly, a delicate A-line dress crafted from hundreds of ivory beaded petals offered a contemporary halter interpretation of the legendary 1949 Dior Junon gown, now housed at the Met’s Costume Institute.
The collection was overflowing with ideas, constantly playing with the tension between formal evening wear and casual day dressing. Knit capes, seen previously in Anderson’s June men’s wear show (which acted as a precursor to this collection), were paired with jeans. Miniskirts featured playful, duck-like ruffles at the back (a motif also present in the men’s wear as cargo shorts, showcasing Anderson’s unique dual role as creative director for both lines). Hats blended the classic French military tricorn with the sleek lines of a supersonic jet. Many design elements echoed Anderson’s signature aesthetic developed during his tenures at Loewe and his own brand, JW Anderson.
Overall, the collection exuded a long-absent playfulness at Dior, injecting a much-needed sense of fun into the brand’s aesthetic.
However, a distinct profile of the ‘Dior woman’ under Anderson’s direction remained elusive. She’s clearly a woman who loves to experiment, shuns conventional norms, and is definitely not the type to favor a traditional ‘First Lady’ look.
During a preview, Anderson asserted that the collection’s eclectic nature was intentional, aiming for a Dior that offered something for everyone. Yet, the execution felt more unfocused than truly groundbreaking. It wasn’t shocking or horrifying in the way the introductory film suggested.
While Anderson’s new Dior might prompt some loyal, traditional clients to gasp in dismay, a truly terrifying aesthetic revolution would require even bolder moves (and realistically, plenty of classic pieces will still hit the stores). Despite the dramatic prelude, the collection itself ultimately fell short of genuine horror. Though, in its own way, it was still quite a ‘scream’.