I'm just surprised they're calling them 'pants' in the UK. Shouldn't they be trousers? :p

Posted by: The Bag Lady | September 26, 2006 4:01 PM

They should indeed :) All of the advertising in question is for "The Skinny Black Pant", though, so I guess I got brainwashed by it!

Posted by: Amber | September 26, 2006 4:20 PM

So let me get this right, Gap (a mid range "designer" label") have had to negotiate through a mountain of personal, studio and probably copyright admin and then pay for the previlege of actually calling a pair of trousers after a film star (albeit an icon of our time). Surely it would have been much more savvy just to call them "Audrey" or something and let people draw their own conclusions. We the fashion buying public are not so dumb that we need pictures and BIG SIMPLE WORDS to let us know where a "fashion inspiration" has come from, and there's a lot of this style around already for AW06. It does smack of desperation, and it has no effect on me, I think the style is fantastic but would never wear it anyway (I have an ample bottom and tiny ankles) For once in my life I agree with the Guardian.

Posted by: Sista Lou | September 26, 2006 5:15 PM

Yeah, this gets me riled up enough to comment: I HATE THOSE STUPID COMMERICIALS! It's blasphemous! How could they just use the great Audrey Hepburn like that?!?? I would stop shopping at The Gap in protest except, well, I'm cheap.

Posted by: kwugirl | September 26, 2006 6:08 PM

i have only seen the store fronts and they are hideous. they picked the worst pictures of her i've ever seen and they are plastered all over the windows. just horrible.

not that i needed another reason not to shop there though. havent touched that store for years.

Posted by: Princess Sarah | September 26, 2006 6:55 PM

I dont really mind that much..I mean comon!

Posted by: Sam | September 26, 2006 11:50 PM

Would Audrey have approved those ads if she were still alive? I most definitely think not.

The question is not whether Gap crossed all the legal Ts and got the proper permission from the Hepburn estate. Obviously they did. And obviously they also bought the rights to the footage which is from the movie "Funny Face" and no doubt owned by one of the studios.

No, the question is whether Audrey Hepburn herself would have approved of the add and considered it in good taste. Given that she never to my knowledge endorsed products or sold herself for advertising I think the answer to that question is clear.

Posted by: Kent | September 27, 2006 1:23 AM

Again having to be skinny skinny skinny.

Janet

Posted by: janet | September 27, 2006 3:41 AM

I think anything that contributed so greatly to her activism efforts would be worth her time. I doubt she would be adverse to these silly ads.

Posted by: Melissa | September 27, 2006 4:14 AM

All I can say is that it has been so long since an ordinary American could buy anything that wasn't trashy, I can't even remember when. If the Gap is trying to class up its act, great. I remember one thing Audrey Hepburn said about her "look"- that it was attainable by regular girls, and she was very proud of that fact. Also, I remember she thought it was highly ironic that her "look" was partially obtained by very poor nutrition as a child during WWII- thus her permanently childlike look AND why the Audrey Hepburn Fund exists today- helping poor malnourished. I think the media types that sneer at the Gap need a dose of humility from Audrey.

Posted by: Dani | September 27, 2006 12:27 PM

I don't mind the ad campaign at all. I do agree that the posters of her plastered up the windows of the gap stores are horrid. They need a better visual merchandiser. Whatever their motive is for using Audrey H., I'm glad that a) it promotes classy and b) it's serving her charity.

Posted by: honey | September 27, 2006 6:50 PM

Well said Dani. I think a lot of people forget that the reason Audrey looked the way she did was because of all she went through as a child. She's an inspiration for so much more than the way she looked.

Posted by: Gemma | September 28, 2006 1:41 PM

i really like the ad. it actually made me go buy those pants. gap is a good brand. i also shop at banana republic. what can i say? i am from san francisco bay area and SF is the GAP city!!!!

Posted by: jing | October 5, 2006 5:09 AM

instead of worrying about whether or not the gap should be using a movie icon in their ad campaign, maybe we should be worrying about how the gap corporation (and banana republic, and old navy...) obtain the garments they sell from the marianas islands, where US worker protection laws do not have to be enforced and where many foreigners work in slave-like conditions. just something to think about

Posted by: Brigid | October 11, 2006 4:29 PM

Good site! I'll stay reading! Keep improving!

Posted by: Nika | November 10, 2007 8:44 AM