To Rome with Love - The Fashion of American Women?

Judy Davis as Phyllis

Feminine wares of To Rome with Love?

So I ventured off to see To Rome with Love and it was more of a like.  I'm not sure what Director Woody Allen and Costume Designer Sonia Grande are trying to communicate about American women throughout this film.  Both Ellen Page's character Monica and her best friend Sally (Greta Gerwig) for the most part are clad in low rise jeans with button down shirts and masculine-reading likely-Italian-leather belts.  Both give off the vibe of 21-year-old boys dressed to go into a local bar rather than dressing as the sexy love interests that the film purports them to be.  Even Allen's character Jerry has a wife Phyllis (Judy Davis) who is draped in dull outfits (if you can call them that) and T-shirts.  All three American women look breast-less and androgynous.  Upon first glance a feminist may say this is a good thing--women don't need to wear skin-revealing outfits a la Scarlett Johansson to appear feminine.  I agree.  But in this case it comes off as making women look like they are trying to look more like men.

Perhaps Allen is attempting to highlight Penelope Cruz by shoving the other female characters in baggy attire.  Cruz's tight red dress can only make her stand out from the other women, but unfortunately the costume enforces the cliched Italian prostitute who doesn't have much to say but has much to do with her clients.  Cruz looks amazing, but I would rather have seen her clothed in something more surprising and quirky.  I will say, however, that the red dress is so ridiculous that it has a humorous life of its own.  So while Cruz and the other Italian female characters give off their feminine charms in dresses the American female characters linger in their western wear.

Regardless of the costumes, Allen delivers with his usual characters filled with neurotic tendencies, insecurities, and palatable narcissism.  Such consistency in Allen's films is what makes his films work.  In an age when most people only post flattering pictures and personality traits on their Facebook profiles, it's nice to go to a fiction film to get a slice of reality where people are just people, wrought with problems.

Like us on Facebook

Young Adult

Young Adult should be called Jung Adult.  The reason why David C. Robinson's costumes are so appealing is that he makes clear delineations between Mavis' Jung-like psychological stages--who Mavis wants to be and who Mavis thinks she should be.  Mavis' outer appearance can't help her assume her desired persona which makes watching her slip into her alcoholism and depression all the more uncomfortable to witness.  Too bad good old Carl isn't around to step into the film and help her have a much-needed spiritual experience to drive away that craving for whiskey.

Mavis' transitions from sweats to leather to tweed do nothing to help her make a transition to a better life.  Somehow watching Mavis in a mustard cardigan and a tweed-trimmed dress is more distressing than watching her shuffle around in her juvenile Hello Kitty shirt and sweats.  [On a side note, why do grown women still like Hello Kitty?  Women won't be caught carrying around a Barbie pencil case, for instance, but I reluctantly admit I have seen a woman or two pull out Hello Kitty pencil cases in my graduate school classes.  Help.  Someone explain.] 

The one constant is the gold heart necklace Mavis wears, yes the heart-of-gold-inference, that perfectly symbolizes what is really going on inside.  The close-up shots of her wearing her heart necklace are intense when you look closely and you can see the pendant move up and down with the beat of her heart.

Film critics claim that Mavis is a narcissist but I disagree.  To a point she is self absorbed but why shouldn't she be when all she desperately wants is for someone to simply care about her enough to understand her without judgement and to fulfill her emotional needs?  I think it best to call in Jung for an assessment.