"When hedonism was chic." - Whitney Sudler-Smith, Director of Ultrasuede: In Search of Halston (2009)

The world premiere of Ultrasuede: In Search of Halston was held during the TriBeCa Film Festival this past Friday, April 30th.  The industry was well in attendance with the likes of Marc Jacobs, Lorenzo Martone, Naeem and Ranjana Khan, Linda Fargo, Amy Fine Collins, Cathy Horyn, and the actress-turned-Halston-Heritage-designer Sarah Jessica Parker.  The post film forum panelists included Halstonette Pat Cleveland, heir apparent Ralph Rucci, Vogue's André Leon Talley, the movie's director Whitney Sudler-Smith, and Valentino: The Last Emperor director Matt Tyrnauer.

While I would have loved to see more Halston vintage samples worn (especially on a gloriously summer night where caftans would have been apropos in true form), I am glad that Pat Cleveland decided to wear the most relevant, SS10 Marc Jacobs-esque, iridescent purple pant suit with flanked, cascading ruffles.  Though her rather senile dialogue during the forum was an all too familiar reminder of the effects of 70's social habits, she did represent a time gone by which was refreshing to the conversation.  Highlights of her wild speech included her "moth" analogies present in the movie and in her forum attempt at describing Halston's legacy of movement in clothing.  This included her trying to dance while tied down by her lapel mic.  "The moth is caught!", she cried, while flapping the ruffles as wings.

The movie was enjoyable and will overall contribute to the genre of the fashion documentary.  But, the point-of-view is faulted due to its seemingly fanatical, infallible portrayal of Roy Halston Frowick.  The generalized notion of Halston's reign in the 70's neglects the story of his downfall via addiction.  This film slightly covers it at the conclusion, but fails to elaborate on its importance to Halston's legacy.  Ralph Rucci, in his forum dialogue, seemed to be starkly opposed even to the mentioning of the drug addiction, insinuating that it taints the memory of Halston.  I beg to differ, as it only supports his legacy of balanced extremism.

I say "balanced extremism" because what worked in the 70's was Halston's ability to live and create extremes--extremes that are both symbiotically linked in a delicate balance of excess and simplistic purity.  His life was full of hedonistic indulgences of Studio 54, Andy Warhol, Liza Minelli, and Victor Hugo, yet his design focus was luxurious, global minimalism--a direct contrary to the opulence of million dollar orchid arrangements that inhabited both his abode and atelier.  His designs were direct reactions to his own life; they were escapes to purity.  It is only when these two modes were in balance that Halston was able to exist.  Once the indulgent nightlife and habits took hold, the purity vanished.

This is Halston's legacy: the legacy of the frail human condition on beauty.

(Images from life.com and NY Magazine)