Audrey Tatou for Chanel No. 5

The last film for Chanel No. 5 featuring Nicole Kidman was cringe worthy (except for the dashing figure of a man they chose for the lead. Beautiful). This film, however, is a visually stunning success. The brilliant Jean-Pierre Jeunet is the director behind it and the reason for the emotional feel and look of it all. He previously directly both Amelie and Delicatessen, two films in which you can easily see his style and how it's translated in this romantic short. Delicatessen is a masterpiece and one of my favourite films (highly recommend renting it for the look of it and its dark sense of humour).

I don't necessarily possess the vocabulary to speak about film so, in my own words, there's something magical about his work generally and here specifically for Chanel. I feel like I'm watching the world through a view finder or standing in front of a moving diorama at the museum. This is the way travel used to be and the way love and romance are written about in bodice rippers. This idealised universe exists parallel to my rushed reality where travellers squeeze into micro-seats in economy, speaking to no one, and dates are found on the internet.

Visually, he makes me feel like I'm seeing colour for the first time... it's like that moment when Dorothy steps out of black and white and into Technicolor. The detailing is at once old-fashioned and modern eclectic... sleepy train stations, tropical promenades, slow-moving river boats... the sounds are muted and are truly the sounds of travel. The song is a favourite. It all simply make me want to pack up a shift dress, scarf, sunnies, sandals and bottle of Chanel No. 5 and book a berth on the Orient Express, which means, it seems, that his cinematic genius is working for Chanel. The Victorian era of grand travel is evoked here in all its glory.

What a perfect marriage between the allure and glamour of travel (as it was) and the exotic with an iconic beauty product.

• Listen to the inteview with Jean-Pierre Jeunet and Audrey Tatou.
• Watch the flim on YouTube or Chanel5.com
• View the image gallery of shots during the making.

Agy not channeling Marilyn at Met

As this is going to be an op-ed section, the first post, fittingly, is my strong opinion on Agy's channelling of lead female in an episode of Magnum PI with her look at the Met Costume Institute Gala last week.

Not working.

Wipe off the bronzer and brush out the bouffant. I read a journo's comments on her, saying she was  'channeling Marilyn Monroe' that night. Hardly. The only similarity (notice that word is singular) lay in the platinum tresses. She's no more Marilyn than Pink is Marlene Dietrich.

One of the behaviours in the beauty/fashion media that sets my teeth on edge is the ability to draw comparisons between iconic figures and model/actress/girl du jour based on a single feature or characteristic, natural or not. The single feature that caused the Marilyn comparison here? Blonde coif.

Silver screen? No. 1980s glamour? Yes. Call a spade a spade, friends. Thomas Magnum would look more at home on her arm than Arthur Miller would in this get up.

Agy is an interesting model so why water it down with attempts at retro, calendar girl glamour? She falls left of the model center with her flat cheek bones (well done with the contour powder here) even though she possesses requisite button nose, doe eyes and big lips. She's an English punk, which is endearing, not a traditional beauty with mass appeal. Part of why she's a good, successful model is her everyday-ness. She's almost like a -- gasp! -- regular person with slightly exaggerated features and a thinner, tallish physique.  Work with that and put her in a cool shift or tartan frock with funky makeup. I'd take an edgy Agy any day over the packaged version in this picture.

Drew Barrymore finally finds a look that suits her

To me, Drew Barrymore seems like the sort of woman who just always looks like a little girl playing dress up with her mum's cosmetics and jewellery. She never seems to sport looks that really fit her body and personality, with the blue confection of a dress and the tranny bouffant on the red carpet recently driving that point home.

What must make it difficult is that she doesn't sit at either end of the conventionally attractive spectrum for white girls: she's not a bombshell and she's not a girl next door (although I'm sure thousands of you will disagree with me on that point). She's somewhere in the middle... To date, I have never seen her in anything I really like... until now. It looks like somebody finally figured out her attractiveness.

It's 1920s glamour, a look I never would previously associated with Barrymore. It's the most flattering and natural thing I've seen her in. She should do a lot more period dressing from this era... Seeing her in pics at this premier she looks very Daisy as played by Mia Farrow (not in personality). She rocks the Gatsby-era garb and make up.

The round face, arched brows, sharp little nose, pale complexion, wavd bob and soft (in a good way. I am so sick of seeing vein-covered biceps on women) figure are exactly what was au fait in the 20s. Just look at Mary Pickford, Clara Bow or Louise Brooks (my absolute favourite) and you'll get what I mean.

Whoever styled Miss Barrymore for the Grey Gardens premier, well done you.

Photos of Drew Barrymore are from Just Jared.