The CDG loves "Barbie" pink but doesn't care for "The Color Purple"

by Cláudio Alves

Don't be sad, Mr. WONKA. Better luck next time.

Once upon a time, the Costume Designers Guild differed from the Academy on the regular. It wasn't even that long ago when three of the Oscar nominees got nothing from their guild, including winner Jacqueline Durran for Little Women. However, since that year, every Academy lineup has been entirely made from CDG-honored titles. It's hard to tell if the trend will continue, but, at the very least, one can surmise that the absence of a film indicates a lack of broad industry support. So, it's bad news for Wonka and The Color Purple. In the former's case, it's especially galling when you notice it was beaten by such critically lambasted projects as Disney's Haunted Mansion and the first Rebel Moon movie.

From Barbie pink to Crown gold, let's explore the complete list of nominations…

EXCELLENCE IN CONTEMPORARY FILM 

• Sophie Canale, SALTBURN
• Kelli Jones, NYAD
• Lisa Lovaas, RENFIELD
• Rudy Mance, AMERICAN FICTION
• April Napier, MAY DECEMBER

Like most Hollywood guilds, the CDG's taste leans mainstream to a detrimental point. If you're not already in the awards conversation in some capacity or considered within the Hollywood circle, it's hard to catch their attention. In other words, as sad as it is, the lack of Passages in this ballot is unsurprising. Renfield, however, makes for a somewhat sweet shock, getting the nod despite no buzz. It must have been Nicholas Hoult's fuzzy sweater that did it. In other news, Saltburn continues to garner guild support, Nyad reemerges from the depths of hopelessness, and American Fiction stakes its claim on the race. 

Still, my preferred winner would be April Napier, whose May December designs prolong and complicate the mirror images of actress and subject, leaning into an hyperfeminist that's toxic to the touch. 

Regarding galling inclusions, I must proclaim my distaste for Saltburn as a design showcase. Why go to the trouble of setting your story specifically in the mid-00s if next to no visual element follows that mandate? And even if anachronism is the thing, it should be a no-brainer to avoid distracting pieces like recognizable couture from the late 2010s. It just feels sloppy.

EXCELLENCE IN PERIOD FILM

• Mark Bridges, MAESTRO
• Dave Crossman & Janty Yates, NAPOLEON
• Ellen Mirojnick, OPPENHEIMER
• Holly Waddington, POOR THINGS
• Jacqueline West, KILLERS OF THE FLOWER MOON 

This is where CDG's weird categorizations show up. They've always been inconsistent about it. In 2005, a film set in 1989 was period, but in 2009, another late-80s story was deemed contemporary. This year, the conundrum comes in the Frankenstein-esque shape of Poor Things, whose narrative content should push it to the fantasy ballot. However, the costumes are a spin on actual period fashions, moving the novel's 1880s story a decade later to do some zany things with lug-o-mutton sleeves and the like. When exactly does stylization turn into the fantastical? It's especially interesting because that aesthetic is unequally distributed among the characters, with Stone sporting the craziest fits while the remaining actors keep their feet planted in a semblance of reality.

If the vote were up to me, I'd give it to West, whose historical research produced a fascinating wardrobe at the intersection of various cultural facets of early 20th-century America. Moreover, the exactitude doesn't preclude the designs from being character-specific, as with Ernest Burkhart's adoption of Osage textiles into his clothes and Hale's owl-like goggles.

On the other hand, there's no outright disaster to report among the nominated few. For all the issues one might have with Maestro, the costumes are unimpeachable – give or take the Judge Judy comparisons – and the same can be said for Oppenheimer. Napoleon is the only potential sneak, though I was enamored by its depictions of military uniform and revolutionary trends. If only the fur trimmings didn't look so much like IKEA bathmats. In other words, those mourning The Color Purple's snub should direct your hire at Ridley Scott's biopic extravaganza.

But also, Ann Roth was robbed.

EXCELLENCE IN SCI-FI/FANTASY FILM 

• Colleen Atwood & Christine Cantella, THE LITTLE MERMAID
• Jacqueline Durran, BARBIE
• Jeffrey Kurland, HAUNTED MANSION
• Stephanie Porter, REBEL MOON – PART ONE: A CHILD OF FIRE
• Trish Summerville, THE HUNGER GAMES: THE BALLAD OF SONGBIRDS & SNAKES

Again, these categorizations make little sense. While Barbie's narrative is pure fantasy, its costumes follow contemporary fashions or play with reproductions of iconic doll looks from the 20th century. Similarly, while The Little Mermaid is fantastic in nature, its costumes pull from 1830s-40s Caribbean styles, similar to how Poor Things references the late Victorian period. Haunted Mansion is so beholden to Disney-branded spookiness that its historical sources matter very little, leaving a fairytale understanding of the past as basis for its spirits and ghouls. At least the Hunger Games prequel and Rebel Moon's first installment are cut-and-dry sci-fi.

Barbie is the obvious winner, while Wonka is the most surprising absence. The "snub" isn't even comparable to the many times Powell and Durran have missed the guild honors since the CDG has no history of ignoring Wonka's couturier, Lindy Hemming. She's been nominated five times before and won twice, for The Dark Knight and the first Wonder Woman movie. The designer was, however, ignored in 1999, the same season she won the Oscar with Topsy-Turvy.

EXCELLENCE IN CONTEMPORARY TELEVISION

• Tayce Gigi Field, POKER FACE "The Orpheus Syndrome"
• Helen Huang, BEEF "The Birds Don't Sing, They Screech in Pain"
• Debra McGuire & Sophie de Rakoff, THE MORNING SHOW "The Kármán Line"
• Cynthia Ann Summers, THE LAST OF US "Endure and Survive"
• Courtney Wheeler, THE BEAR "Fishes"

Putting The Last of Us in contemporary is such an exciting choice. Within its inner logic, the character's clothes are frozen in 2003, which, by this point, should probably count as period costuming. However, the main action happens in 2023, making its setting contemporary. Only the show is classic post-apocalyptic fare, presenting an imagined reality where a mutated fungus has turned most of humanity into zombies. There's no right or wrong way to categorize it, so this choice is as valid as any other. Still, it's hard to imagine it winning unless the program's popularity propels it forward as the frontrunner. 

But of course, all these shows have their fans, some more legion-like and passionate than others. Beef and The Bear could pick up an additional trophy to the many they're bound to win at the next Emmys.

EXCELLENCE IN PERIOD TELEVISION 

• Sharon Long, THE GREAT "Choose Your Weapon"
• Kasia Walicka Maimone & Patrick Wiley, THE GILDED AGE "You Don't Even Like Opera"
• Amy Roberts, THE CROWN "Ritz"
• Mitchell Travers, GEORGE & TAMMY "Two Story House"
• Denise Wingate, DAISY JONES & THE SIX "Track 8: Looks Like We Made It" 

Like the TV Academy, the CDG isn't against repeat victors. The Crown won for its first two seasons and fifth as well, but one wonders if it can sustain that level of love now that its final hour was met with such derision. More notable is The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel's absence, considering it's won twice before. The other returning champion is The Great, now vying for the win with its third and last season.

The Gilded Age returns after last year's nomination with a season fuller of aesthetic atrocities. Part of me loves how the design team behind the show's wardrobe indulges in the period's eccentricities, reproducing the ugliest fashion plates imaginable so that one can't help but notice that money, old or new, can't buy taste. Then again, do these fashions always need to be so tacky? It's a puzzle maximized to spectacular proportion this season when the opera wars took center stage, and Carrie Coon got to model countless House of Worth homages. 

Finally, one must consider the limited series in the group. Historically, regular series and TV movies have had more luck with the CDG. For example, the only other miniseries to get this particular prize were The Queen's Gambit in 2020 and Life with Judy Garland way back in 2001. However, it must be noted that, from 2005 to 2014, both miniseries and TV movies had a category all to themselves. Neither of this year's limited contenders seems popular enough to triumph, but I'll always be rooting for Mitchell Travers – he should already have an Oscar for Hustlers!

EXCELLENCE IN SCI-FI/FANTASY TELEVISION

• Laura Montgomery, WHAT WE DO IN THE SHADOWS "Pride Parade"
• Shawna Trpcic, ASHOKA "Part Eight: The Jedi, the Witch, and the Warlord"
• Shawna Trpcic, THE MANDALORIAN "Chapter 22: Guns for Hire"
• Christine Wada, LOKI "1893"
• Lucinda Wright, THE WITCHER "The Art of the Illusion"

Why nominate a sci-fi show and purposefully pick an episode characterized by its period costuming? That's the question one may ask themselves when considering Loki's presence here. However, one must note that the CDG didn't always pick individual episodes, so this sort of imbroglio wouldn't have mattered or even happened a couple of years ago. And even despite it all, I'd still vote for the MCU show out of this bunch. 

Moving on, Loki, The Mandalorian, What We Do in the Shadows, and The Witcher are all past nominees, though they have yet to win. That said, Trpcic has taken this prize in 2021 for another Star Wars series, The Book of Boba Fett. Back then, she wasn't splitting votes with herself, so it's hard to predict a repeat triumph.

EXCELLENCE IN VARIETY, REALITY COMPETITION, LIVE TELEVISION

• Tom Broecker, Ashley Dudek & Christina Natividad, SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE "Aubrey Plaza Host"
• Tim Chappel, THE MASKED SINGER "80s Night"
• Michelle Page Collins, A BLACK LADY SKETCH SHOW "Peek-A-Boob, Your Titty's Out"
• Daniela Gschwendtner & Steven Norman Lee, DANCING WITH THE STARS "Monster Night"
• Steven Norman Lee & Marina Toybina, THE MASKED SINGER "One Hit Wonders Night"

Including episode credits in the nomination process means the same show can receive multiple nods, as it's happening with The Masked Singer this season. Interestingly enough, A Black Lady Sketch Show is the only first-time nominee. Just for that, I'll be rooting for Michelle Page Collins.

EXCELLENCE IN SHORT-FORM DESIGN 

• B. Åkerlund, MADONNA X VANITY FAIR – THE ENLIGHTENMENT (Short Film)
• Heather Allison, PEPSI: GREAT ACTING OR GREAT TASTE (Commercial)
• Paula Bradley, AMERICAN HORROR STORY: DELICATE (Commercial)
• Trayce Gigi Field, DORITOS: JACK'S NEW ANGLE (Commercial)
• Julie Vogel, BLINK 182: DANCE WITH ME (Music Video)

Historically, commercials tend to dominate this category, with the occasional music video succeeding against the odds. That should spell doom for Maddona's Vanity Fair shoot. However, despite the CDG naming it a short film, one can argue it's a music video by another name. Moreover, its visuals are so striking that a win wouldn't be amiss. B. Åkerlund is a CDG mainstay, with this being her sixth nomination. She won previously for a Swarovski commercial, while her other nods came for collaborations with Madonna, Katy Perry, and Beyoncé.

EXCELLENCE IN COSTUME ILLUSTRATION

• Barbra Araujo, HAUNTED MANSION
• Maggie S. Chan, 1923 "War and the Turquoise Tide"
• Oskana Nedavniaya, THE HUNGER GAMES: THE BALLAD OF SONGBIRDS & SNAKES
• Jason Pastrana, REBEL MOON – PART ONE: A CHILD OF FIRE
• Felipe Sanchez, LOKI "1893"  

While some costume designers do their own illustrations – Sandy Powell's predilection for watercolor sketches is a good example – some employ illustrators to make their final vision more legible and enticing to producers and remaining crew. As media attention on costuming increases, these illustrations also become another way for a film to promote itself. Hence, the creation of this category. It'd be interesting if other guilds honored artists whose contribution to screen productions gets lost in the behind-the-scenes process.

Critically, this also allows productions to get an additional nomination than they would otherwise. Voters keen on honoring the Hunger Games prequel might be more inclined to pick it here rather than in the category where it's facing off against Barbie. The same goes for the other nominees, 1923 excluded.

What's your favorite nomination from these CDG honors? Alternately, what snub hurt you most?

Comments

[andrewfraser]

Some of the categorisation here is very weird. Why is Poor Things in Period and not Fantasy? Why is Saltburn contemporary?

Like you I mourn nominations for Are You There God? and Passages. I also think Past Lives and Theater Camp would've been very worthy contemporary nominations.

Napoleon has a lot of industry support it seems, but I would've loved to see Asteroid City in either Period or Fantasy. Similarly wish Priscilla had made it into Period.

Haven't seen The Color Purple yet but I don't mind the Wonka snubbed. I found the costumes so bland and a real missed opportunity. Especially compared to the two previous versions.

[Joe G.]

It's great seeing the Gilded Age here, though I do think the premiere (with the hats) was especially impressive.

Loki's nomination makes sense since you get a few quick scenes at the TVA alongside the 1893 romp.

I'm a bit disappointed to see the Color Purple missing from here. I thought the costumes mostly worked. I despised Nettie's shoes at the end - maybe that did them in?

[Paranoid Android]

1 - I think most people *really* like the costume designs from The Gilded Age, especially the hats

2 - It seems like the film categorizations take into account how the period is treated in the film. In Poor Things for instance, obviously the whole premise of the movie is fantastical. But the characters don't treat the storyline as bonkers or crazy. They accept the wild concepts as "nomal"-ish within the world of the movie. Thus, it's a strange, but not unrealistic, movie set around the turn of the century. Whereas the characters in Haunted Mansion, Barbie, etc. are shocked/surprised by the plot developments.. they are seemingly unreal at first glance.

[Lilly A]

The CDG's website says that for a film to be contemporary as opposed to period, "Any entry with at least 55% of all costumes existing within the last 25 years from the current award year [on or after January 1, 1998] will be considered a Contemporary Film entry" (https://www.costumedesignersguild.com/awards-information/). This is why Saltburn is considered a contemporary film and not a period one. I couldn't find any information on how the guild distinguishes between period and fantasy though.

With all due respect, I have to disagree with Cláudio's statement about Saltburn. Yes there are some anachronisms, and there were some outfits which were clearly much later than 2006-7, but to make a sweeping statement saying that "next to no visual element" of any of the film's design follows the mandate of the mid 2000s is simply not accurate. I lived in Britain while growing up and remember 2006-2007 there very well, I also had friends who were at Oxford at that time, and while I don't know any super-rich people myself, I do remember the kind of visual coverage you got of their fashion, lifestyles and homes in magazines and elsewhere in the media. And I was extremely impressed at how much the film got right, the attention to detail, and how so many things chimed with my own memories of that period. I also read interviews with the film's creatives (including the costume designer, production designer and make up artist) and it was clear they had done lots of research and were working from many specific visual reference points from those years. Here is an interview with the costume designer in which she discusses her research and references (https://www.vogue.co.uk/article/saltburn-costumes).

The film's look might not seem very mid-2000s to everyone, but the majority of what you get on screen visually in the film - costumes, hairstyling, set design etc - is genuinely how it was in those kinds of places and circles in Britain at the time. Fennell was also a student at Oxford herself in those years (which is one of the reasons the film was set at that time and why it takes place partly at Oxford) and is drawing on her own memories and experience of these kinds of worlds.

The aspect of the film's design which I will admit was sloppy would be the scenes which take place later in the narrative, when Keoghan and Pike's characters meet again. It was not at all clear exactly when these scenes take place and how many years were meant to have gone by, and it wasn't until I read the script after it became available on the FYC site that I realised those scenes were meant to be 'present day'. I had thought it might just be a few years after the main events of the film, especially as Rosamund doesn't look any older than she did in the earlier section of the film. They could definitely have done better with that material.

As I said, I don't deny there are some anachronisms, including in the 2006-7 scenes, and fair enough if these are too distracting for some, there are certainly some kinds of anachronisms which can take me out of a film too. But to act like the visuals of the film were made with an almost total disregard to the visuals of these specific places at this specific time (which is what "next to no visual element" implies) is just not accurate. They didn't get everything right, but I know from my own visual experience of life in the UK during those years, as well as the media I consumed at the time, that there was still a huge amount they did capture extremely well.

[Cláudio Alves]

Lilly A -- Thank you for the comment. You're right to call me out for a dismissive statement that falls into hyperbole like a lot of pithy criticism I dislike. I had read that article before, but re-reading it was a good reminder of the effort put into the film. An effort I shouldn't so easily erase. I'll leave the statement as it is, but I will try to be more careful in the future.

Yet, I still find those Valentino 2018 pieces galling - unaddressed in that interview - and your point about there being no discernable difference between the 2006-7 set scenes and the present-day coda further shows that there's an imprecise sense of period. I guess, to me, the film feels like a 2000s-inspired editorial rather than a story set there. It missed more strides into demode trends that didn't age well. Indeed, my favorite bit of costuming was probably the predominance of those preppy rugby shirts that were everywhere in the late 00s. The final result is, again, too editorial.

Sure, realism isn't the only valid approach, but I felt there needed to be wilder swings in costume, like there are in the sets and cinematography, to sustain that aesthetic choice.

I hope you don't mind this response, as I loved reading your insight, even when approaching my choice of words.

Paranoid Android -- That's an interesting way to look at the differentiation between fantasy and period/contemporary. I'm not sure I fully agree, but it makes sense.

andrewfraser -- After the guilds snubbed THE FRENCH DISPATCH, I had next to no hope for ASTEROID CITY. It's sad, especially because Canonero's work is brilliant but unsurprising. I like the WONKA costumes more than you, but I'm a Lindy Hemming fanboy, so that's maybe why. Chalamet also sports my favorite sartorial take on the character, and I love those scarves of his. I know my college Costume Design professor would hate its ambiguous relationship to period, though.