logo
In Defense of The Devil Wears Prada 2 Outfits—Fashion Tastemakers Weigh In

In Defense of The Devil Wears Prada 2 Outfits—Fashion Tastemakers Weigh In

Elle12 hours ago
The modern media landscape has undoubtedly changed since the original The Devil Wears Prada nearly 20 years ago. The film was set among the 'old guard' of fashion and media—one that feels faraway now with the change that the internet has wrought. And thanks to social media, paparazzi, and filming on the streets of New York City, online debate about a movie's style can start as soon as filming does, whether you like it or not.
The Devil Wears Prada 2, which sees the return of Anne Hathaway, Meryl Streep, Emily Blunt, and Stanley Tucci, began shooting earlier this month. Though the May 1, 2026 release is nearly a year away, our feeds have already been inundated with looks. Perhaps the flood of photos is meant to gauge public reactions to the fashion—Ryan Murphy recently defended early photos of Sarah Pidgeon as Carolyn Bessette Kennedy released from the set of American Love Story, pointing out that they were test shots (Pidgeon's icy blonde hair has since been softened to include some CBK-esque brunette roots). Regardless of intent, each street scene brings on a whole new round of style discourse: the good, the bad, the ugly, and the 'do people in fashion actually dress like that?'
First things first: any blockbuster fashion-centric production is going to capitalize on a sense of fantasy. This is something that the film's reported costume designer Molly Rogers learned while working under the legendary Patricia Field. (Field costumed the original movie, for which she received an Oscar nomination, as well as Sex and the City; though she did not return to And Just Like That, which is now co-styled by Rogers).
Is it realistic that Andy Sachs spent close to $30,000 on a fresh-off-the-runway Gabriela Hearst dress, Fendi carry-all, and Jemma Wynne jewelry? No. But would her character (who has presumably achieved success in media since the last time we saw her) likely splurge on a designer bag and pair it with a colorful and relaxed maxidress to board the Hampton Jitney? Yes. The same goes for Emily Blunt's Dior and custom Wiederhoeft corseted look, though if the rumors about her character's billionaire boyfriend are true, then it's likely a little bit more on the nose.
The high-low nature of many of the looks also reflects the way many real insiders dress. Fashion might have changed a lot in the last two decades, but 2006 Andy wasn't running around as a second assistant freely pulling whatever she wanted from the sample closet, either. And in 2025, wardrobe stipends and borrowing clothing still exist, albeit on a less grand scale.
People loved that the first film glorified the corporate glamazons who ruled Runway, or as Andy once called them, 'clackers,' referring to their stiletto heels on the lobby's marble floors. The sequel seems to be taking a more contextually toned-down approach to style, even if it is to the dismay of die-hard fans. Interestingly enough, many of the movie's looks so far have resonated with media and media-adjacent young professionals.
Sophie Wood, director of strategy at the influencer marketing agency Fohr, finds it refreshing that many of the costumes don't seem like an algorithm-driven caricature of how people think an editor dresses like in 2025, even if Pauline Chalamet's Margiela Tabis are currently ultra-on-trend. Wood loves the Gabriela Hearst mosaic-print dress and compares it to the personal style she sees in her own New York City-based workplace on a daily basis: 'We're not beholden to business attire. So people are able to get really eclectic with what they wear to the office.'
Despite depictions in media, fashion editors and industry professionals are not a one-size-fits-all carbon copy of the runways. This is why when we see Andy mixing Chanel with AGOLDE or Valentino with Levi's, there's a sense of realism to these outfits—and hey, maybe she's even discovered the Ssense sale like the rest of us. The casual mixing of high and low feels appropriate to many who are familiar with the realities of the day-to-day of the fashion industry. Plus, the true marker of good style is being able to shop anywhere.
Fashion content creator and PhD student Vivian Li echoes Wood, finding that because of social media, modern-day style is heavily associated with aesthetic and polish and not function or fit. When volunteering backstage at shows during New York Fashion Week, getting street-style photographed in a 'full look' was the last thing on her mind. 'People in fashion aren't necessarily using all of their brain power to 'throw a fit' everyday when they probably have a million deadlines by 10 A.M.' she jokingly explains, adding that someone like Andy is 'working, not performing.'
For Li, a standout outfit was the all-white Phoebe Philo and Nili Lotan ensemble, paired with Prada heels, which felt appropriately offset by Andy's beat-up vintage Coach satchel and messy hair. The balance of designer labels and curated undone-ness is very 'The Row' but also feels like a natural compromise to the high-fashion Andy of the first film who, as Li notes, likely over-accessorized as a way to signal her head-first plunge into an industry she previously knew nothing about.
Though much of the plot is still under wraps, there are sure to be more photos from set, and with that, countless more looks to ID and dissect. But when it comes to what editors and industry professionals are actually wearing in-office? Says ELLE's deputy news and strategy editor Alyssa Bailey, 'I find it really exciting and refreshing that real-life fashion editors wear labels of all price points and still look amazing. I thought as a teenager I needed to be like Andy and wear head-to-toe designer to make it in this industry.' This Andy looks a little bit closer to the real thing.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

‘The Devil Wears Prada 2' is shooting now. Will it hit?
‘The Devil Wears Prada 2' is shooting now. Will it hit?

Washington Post

time29 minutes ago

  • Washington Post

‘The Devil Wears Prada 2' is shooting now. Will it hit?

'The Devil Wears Prada' sequel isn't set to release until next year, but some fans of the first movie are already whipping themselves into a frenzy, picking apart images from on-location shoots in New York City, speculating and fantasizing about potential plotlines and otherwise looking for clues as to whether we're in for an improvement on the first (like 'The Godfather Part II') or a cringey sequel (like 'Sex and The City 2').

‘Boys Go to Jupiter' Fulfills the Radical Creative Promise of the Internet
‘Boys Go to Jupiter' Fulfills the Radical Creative Promise of the Internet

Yahoo

time6 hours ago

  • Yahoo

‘Boys Go to Jupiter' Fulfills the Radical Creative Promise of the Internet

'Flow' winning an Oscar for Best Animated Film has been celebrated — specifically by us here at IndieWire — for its use of the free-to-download software Blender, which enabled the film's Latvian animation team to craft a lush, human-free world of staggering beauty and rising water. Practically at the other end of the spectrum of what's possible, director Julian Glander has created a lo-fi, distanced, painfully, poignantly pastel vision of Florida in 'Boys Go to Jupiter.' The film was also made in Blender, but this vaporwave coming-of-age story couldn't look or feel more different. More from IndieWire No AI Was Used on the Last Shot of 'Together' Sharon Stone Wants to Portray Phyllis Diller in Biopic: 'I'm Desperate to Play Her' The story follows intrepid (and intensely sleep-deprived) teenaged deliverista Billy 5000 (Jack Corbett) as he tries to hustle for the $5,000 he hopes will give him the independence he craves, even as absurd and miraculous things keep happening around him, his friends, and an orange juice factory run by Janeane Garofalo and Julio Torres. In the exclusive clip above, you can watch Billy's long walk home, over a musical interlude and the equally transporting landscape of the Florida highways, after his phone and his trusty swagway die. IndieWire spoke to Glander about creating the feature on a regular MacBook and how the look of the film was influenced both by the timeless alienation of being a teenager and this specific moment of Internet enshittification, why Florida is the Petri dish of America, and how independent films can find surprising, rewarding ways to make financial or logistical constraints work for the stories they want to tell. The following interview has been edited and condensed for clarity and length. IndieWire: As someone from Louisiana, I really appreciate the oppressively hot winter vibes going on in the film. There's this humid weirdness you're able to capture through the animation style. Julian Glander: ​​ I'm glad to hear you say that. It's definitely the same region and has some of the same weirdness. I actually don't know Louisiana very well, but for the purpose of your enjoyment of the film, let's say it's the same thing. Oh, I mean, it doesn't have to be. The aliens are in Florida. That makes sense to me. Yeah, it does make a lot of sense. I feel as if we all understand Florida as America's hell. It's like the Petri dish where America kind of happens. I kind of think of it as all coming out of Disney World — the invention and the construction of Disney World 75 years ago, the conquering of the swamps, and then the sort of decay of that whole magical fantasy is the world where this movie takes place. It looks like it was made in Blender. Is that how you created this world? This was made in Blender. Hell, yeah. We love anything anyone can download for free to make art. Well, this is the radical promise of the Internet. We love Blender — the software of the year, the hot software of the moment. I think about 20 years ago, when I was on AOL Kids, [there was] this idea that all these tools would come to us and all this amazing creative expression would happen, and I certainly started my career during what I think of as a golden age of that on Tumblr. We've almost seen a constriction of it and a re-platforming and a reorganizing of the Internet that's very unsatisfying. I think you'd be very hard-pressed to find someone in 2025 who's like, 'I enjoy going online. I like the Internet.' And that wasn't the case 10 years ago. Being someone who went on the computer all day was, for a moment, almost something to be proud of. That's also something the movie is talking about: The way we've all been kind of hoodwinked by the gamification and by the pastel fantasies the tech industry sold us, and the way that they restructured our entire lives — in some ways without our permission, and in some ways with our completely willing buy-in. I wrestle with this all the time, where it's like, 'Am I just getting older? If I were a teenager now, would I still be experiencing exciting connections online?' Probably. But that's also something I want to talk about in the movie. Part of being a teenager is finding a way to have a beautiful life or see the beauty in the world when you basically have no good options. Can you talk a little bit about character design for your teens and others? I'm curious if you experimented with the scale of the world or the level of expressiveness on the characters, and how you finessed all your weird little guys. I've been doing 3D illustration for about a decade now, and a lot of the visual language has developed from the constraints of Blender — specifically the constraints of using Blender, which is infinitely powerful, on my tiny little computer. I just have a MacBook. But I would say part of the look of the movie comes from Florida. I grew up there. I haven't been back in a long time, so this is how I remember it: This very dreamy, sun-drenched, acid pastel place with a little bit of gunk on it. The other part of it is this idea of the gamified world, where we see these characters a lot through the isometric point of view and from some distance. That is a very economically efficient way to make scenes and make a movie. It avoids some of the most expensive stuff in 3D animation, which is camera movement and character movement — specifically moving around within scenes. But I also think, creatively, the sell there is that we're looking at characters who have been isolated from each other and dehumanized in a way because of this new way of working that has been foisted upon us over the last decade. It's this really lovely blend of the logistical and economic realities and creating characters that fit those constraints and a story that really thrives off of them, actually. That's the story of independent filmmaking. To me, it feels like we're at the same moment live-action films had 15 years ago, when all of a sudden everyone had iPhones and everyone started being born with some camera literacy. I think the same thing is happening in animation now. The tools are definitely there — and beyond the tools, the educational resources are there and the communities are there. We had to find every shortcut there was, and then we also had to find a way to make that work creatively. Like, almost nobody walks in the movie, because walk cycles in animation are very time-intensive and when they look wrong, you can really tell. It just shatters everything. So we have characters standing behind gates, characters on wheels a lot or behind doors. Billy, our main character, is on a swagway for most of the movie because it's the easiest thing to animate, but also, I think, sells his character as an aimless young man who's floating through life in a very ghostly way, trying to be unobserved and unnoticed. The swagway is so key to him. Can you talk about the scene where he actually has to walk home in the dark after his phone and his swagway die? That also has a great song, in that moment, too. I really like that scene because it takes place at night, and so we get to see everything we just saw in a different light, and it's new again. The thinking there was, 'OK, Billy has to move through town, and this is the moment where we can show how small he is by putting him up against his actual surroundings.' This is something people talk about a lot in urban development — when you live in car-centric America, the scale of everything is off. It's not done at human scale. I think Billy's point of view in that scene is like he's in a world that's too big for him; and the billboards that he walks past — I think one of this is for the lottery, one of them is saying you're gonna die and go to hell, and that just sort of hangs over the movie. That's a scene that kind of bridges Day 1 of the movie into the next day, where his life really starts changing. Like in a traditional musical, I guess that would be the end of the first act song. This is the stasis. This is how things are. But let's see what's going to happen next. 'Boys Go to Jupiter' will be released on Friday, August 8 by Cartuna and Irony Point. Best of IndieWire The 16 Best Slasher Movies Ever Made, from 'Candyman' to 'Psycho' Martin Scorsese's Favorite Movies Include 'Eddington': 87 Films the Director Wants You to See The Best Thrillers Streaming on Netflix in July, from 'Vertigo' and 'Rear Window' to 'Emily the Criminal'

Sharon Stone on why she didn't cut ‘Basic Instinct' crotch shot despite having ‘legal right' to
Sharon Stone on why she didn't cut ‘Basic Instinct' crotch shot despite having ‘legal right' to

New York Post

time6 hours ago

  • New York Post

Sharon Stone on why she didn't cut ‘Basic Instinct' crotch shot despite having ‘legal right' to

Sharon Stone is tackling her infamous leg-crossing scene and explaining why she didn't pull it from 'Basic Instinct.' The Oscar-nominated actress, 67, discussed the controversial moment from the 1992 erotic thriller in a candid interview with Business Insider published on Monday. In the film, Stone played Catherine Tramell, the seductive crime author-turned-serial-killer, who was investigated by Michael Douglas' character, Det. Nick Curran. 13 Sharon Stone's memorable scene from 'Basic Instinct.' ©TriStar Pictures/Courtesy Everett Collection 13 The 1992 movie featured Sharon Stone and Michael Douglas. Corbis via Getty Images The most famous scene included Stone crossing her legs to reveal she wasn't wearing underwear while being questioned. That shot caused the star to face scrutiny over the years, with Stone even claiming she lost custody of her son over the scene. Now, she's revealing why she didn't make director Paul Verhoeven remove it from the movie, despite alleging she legally could have forced his hand. 13 Sharon Stone played Catherine Tramell, a seductive crime author-turned-serial-killer. ©TriStar Pictures/Courtesy Everett Collection 13 Michael Douglas starred as Det. Nick Curran, who was investigating her for murder. Corbis via Getty Images 13 Sharon Stone revealed why she didn't force the director to remove the controversial scene. sharonstone/Instagram 'I very much believe that none of us knew at the time what we were getting in regard to that shot, and when Paul got it, he didn't want to lose it, and he was scared to show me. And I get that,' Stone explained. 'Once I had time to calm down, I didn't make him take it out of the movie when I had the legal right to,' she continued. Stone said time helped her process that the scene enhanced the flick. 13 Stone also claimed that she got into a shouting match with Michael Douglas before landing the role. Corbis via Getty Images 13 Michael Douglas seemingly denied her allegations. Corbis via Getty Images She acknowledged that she 'did have the chance to do it differently,' but said, 'I didn't because once had the chance to step back, I understood, as the director, not the girl in the film, that that made the movie better.' Stone also revealed whether she regretted taking on the role. 'It made me an icon, but it didn't bring me respect. But would I do it again? We don't get to make these choices in life. I don't participate in the fantasy world in this way,' she stated. 13 Sharon Stone has previously been vocal about her claims that she was made to believe the crotch shot scene was far less revealing than it was. Instagram 'What I did with what happened is exactly the way I wanted to do it. Verhoeven and I have a wonderful relationship. I would work with him again in a second. We both understand. Even though we have different public ways of discussing it, we understand very well what happened regarding the crotch scene,' Stone explained. The actress was vocal about her claims that she was made to believe the crotch shot scene was far less revealing than it was in her memoir, 'The Beauty of Living Twice.' In it, Stone claimed that she saw the shot for the 'first time' with a room full of agents and lawyers. 13 She alleged she didn't see the actual footage until she was in a room full of lawyers and agents. WireImage 13 Her 'Basic Instinct' director claimed Stone was 'lying' about now knowing what would be shown. Instagram/@sharonstone 'That was how I saw my vagina-shot for the first time, long after I'd been told, 'We can't see anything — I just need you to remove your panties, as the white is reflecting the light, so we know you have panties on,' she explained. Verhoeven previously claimed she was 'lying' about not knowing what would be shown in the scene. 'Any actress knows what she's going to see if you ask her to take off her underwear and point there with the camera,' he told ICON in 2017. 13 Stone said as the 'one with the vagina,' her opinion is the only one that matters and 'the other points of view are bulls–t.' Getty Images However, Stone held firm by stating that as the 'one with the vagina,' her opinion is the only one that matters and 'the other points of view are bulls–t.' The starlet also revealed her alleged explosive first encounter with her co-star Douglas, claiming he 'wouldn't even test with me' after the pair got into a verbal altercation at the Cannes Film Festival before she landed the role in the flick. 'A bunch of us were all sitting, and he was talking about someone and their kids. I really, really knew this person he was talking about,' Stone said of Douglas. 'So I said something and he responded to me, saying, 'What the f–k do you know?' It was in regard to a father-child relationship.' 13 She also claimed that Michael Douglas didn't want to be her co-star following their alleged shouting match in Cannes. Corbis via Getty Images 'So he screams this at me across a whole group of people. And I'm not the person who goes, 'Oh, excuse me, superstar.' I pushed back my chair and said to him, 'Let's step outside.' That's how we first met,' she claimed. Once away from the group, Stone 'explained to him what the f–k I knew about this family he was speaking about, and that I was best friends with the children and the parent. And then we parted. I wouldn't say as best friends, but amicably.' She added, 'I don't think he wanted me to be his costar.' But Douglass shot down those claims, with his rep telling Business Insider he 'doesn't recall seeing or knowing Sharon' until seeing her 'Basic Instinct' screen test. 13 Michael Douglas' rep said the actor 'doesn't recall seeing or knowing Sharon' before seeing her screen test. FilmMagic 'The only time Michael remembers the two of them in Cannes together was when they were there to screen and promote the picture,' the rep stated. The Post reached out to Stone for comment.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store