or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

D&G sneakers opinions

post #1 of 28
Thread Starter 
Hi guys,

im not sure if this is allowed to ask here, but i know many of you have great taste in fashions. so yeah my question is what kind of jeans can i wear with this sneakers?

i have thanaz 72c, viker 8bg, slammer 71b, onijo 71g, paddom 71l, zathan 71j, some ddg and fankers.

or is it any good?
post #2 of 28
those are fugly. if you want high-end sneaks check out margiela, dior, lanvin, or common projects.
post #3 of 28
and if you really like the style of shoe that you posted, buy some chucks and call it a day. you'll save yourself a ton of money and will have a better looking pair of shoes anyway.
post #4 of 28
Thread Starter 
i kinda dont wanna spend more than that. so this is a no good with anything? i just hate to pass on the deal though. how would those other sneaks cost me?
post #5 of 28
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jskidder View Post
and if you really like the style of shoe that you posted, buy some chucks and call it a day. you'll save yourself a ton of money and will have a better looking pair of shoes anyway.


ok thanks. ya it does look like chucks
post #6 of 28
if you are on a budget and want an interesting pair of sneaks modeled somewhat after chucks, check out double identity which is sold here. you will need to do some clicking but they are easy to get to:

SEVEN New York - TEL : 646.654.0156 FAX : 646.654.0158

they are available elsewhere, but if you like them i figure you can google them on your own.
post #7 of 28
Thread Starter 
oh!!! thanks a lot man!!
post #8 of 28
wow some of the sneakers look really good. now idk what to get.... SNEAKERS OR ANKLE BOOTS for my thanazsssss
post #9 of 28
To me, fashion sneakers are an object of self-parody. If you want some kicks in the style of classics from Converse, Adidas or Nike, why would you buy swagger-jacking knockoffs that cost five times more?
post #10 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by jskidder View Post
and if you really like the style of shoe that you posted, buy some chucks and call it a day. you'll save yourself a ton of money and will have a better looking pair of shoes anyway.
Topic closed!
post #11 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grondie View Post
To me, fashion sneakers are an object of self-parody. If you want some kicks in the style of classics from Converse, Adidas or Nike, why would you buy swagger-jacking knockoffs that cost five times more?
Converse,adidas,nike,those ARE the parody of 'footwear'.They are as nice as would be an XXL sweatpants from umbro.
You can't compare them to Lanvin or Hi-Dior,I mean there is NOTHING in common except the fact that they are worn over your foot,and that people name them 'sneakers'
better check detailed pictures about the shoes jskidder and I are talking about....IMO they are the best shoes right now.With round-toed boots not far behind.The rest is trash.
post #12 of 28
Well, I wouldn't pay $700 for a pair of Lanvin hi-top. Désolé Ben.
post #13 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Audioteknika View Post
Well, I wouldn't pay $700 for a pair of Lanvin hi-top. Désolé Ben.
Quote:
To me, fashion sneakers are an object of self-parody. If you want some kicks in the style of classics from Converse, Adidas or Nike, why would you buy swagger-jacking knockoffs that cost five times more?
I think the problem that Grondie/Audoteknika are hitting on, is you get a pair of classic high tops that could easily be mistaken for a pair of chucks, and they go for $600+ and up just because they are Dior or Lanvin????

No one could convince me that the quality is that much better to justify such a dramatic increase in price, for such an average looking pair of shoes

If your talking boots, dress/casual shoes,ect then I hear ya, go with the above companies if you have the money.

But to pay such a huge price for something that could be had for the price of a $30 pair of chucks, sounds ridiculous to me.

Just look at these pics

The Lanvin sneakers craze

For $670 and up, give me a break.
LL
post #14 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aarendil View Post
Converse,adidas,nike,those ARE the parody of 'footwear'.They are as nice as would be an XXL sweatpants from umbro.
You can't compare them to Lanvin or Hi-Dior,I mean there is NOTHING in common except the fact that they are worn over your foot,and that people name them 'sneakers'
better check detailed pictures about the shoes jskidder and I are talking about....IMO they are the best shoes right now.With round-toed boots not far behind.The rest is trash.
Since you look your nose down on the brands that originated the very styles being copied by designer labels I rest my case. You're part of the emerging, label-conscious demographic that makes "sneaker couture" commercially viable.

Next thing we'll see Dior basketball jerseys, and some guy here will be telling us how they make Starter and Russel Atheletic look like junk.
post #15 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aarendil View Post
The rest is trash.
So whatever isnt "in" according to the rest of the fashion world right at this moment is trash???

Man you must spend a lot updating your collection whenever something new and trendy comes along

I mean your more then entitled to your own opinion, just as we all are. I just dislike it when someone looks at fashion through such a closed perspective, its that type of attitude that makes people look at members of a fashion forum as a bunch of elitist self absorbed jerks.

Not calling you that at all, just saying that just because you have to be on top of all the trends/styles at this exact second, doesnt mean everyone else has to be to have a sense of fashion
post #16 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aarendil View Post
....IMO they are the best shoes right now.With round-toed boots not far behind.The rest is trash.
...Are you being for real?
post #17 of 28
Yes he is. I like him that way.
post #18 of 28
whatever guys,I'm not willingfully being rude to anyone's opinion,I just voiced mine about hi-sneakers,those d&g suck but it's getting tiring when people think 'fashion-sneakers=customized chucks'.

If people here cant stand someone that loves higher end sneakers I dont know why there is a thread dedicated to shoes other than ted baker largos or diesel boots.

Grondie : if you read carefully I wrote 'IMO' which means In MY Opinion and didn't make any personal assumption,so keep it respectful dude,thanks.I never understand why people take it like that,I mean what I say relates to those d&g sneakers that awfully look like overpriced chucks,so keep it low,I'm not THINKING (or caring) anything about anyone's wardrobe....

Quote:
Originally Posted by CUTUP View Post
So whatever isnt "in" according to the rest of the fashion world right at this moment is trash???

Man you must spend a lot updating your collection whenever something new and trendy comes along
I buy what I like on me,and that's not many things a year.Pretty sure that half of people here spend more into jeans than me in other 'fashion-stuff'.But do I say that spending a lot in 20 diesel jeans is idiot?
post #19 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aarendil View Post
Grondie : if you read carefully I wrote 'IMO' which means In MY Opinion and didn't make any personal assumption,so keep it respectful dude,thanks.I never understand why people take it like that,I mean what I say relates to those d&g sneakers that awfully look like overpriced chucks,so keep it low,I'm not THINKING (or caring) anything about anyone's wardrobe...
It's not so serious Aarendil. You've been around HF long enough to know that we're an extroverted and fanatical bunch. Anything I write here is IMO by default, and I apologize if my comment was below the belt.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aarendil View Post
I buy what I like on me,and that's not many things a year.Pretty sure that half of people here spend more into jeans than me in other 'fashion-stuff'.But do I say that spending a lot in 20 diesel jeans is idiot?
You could easily make the argument that the pot is calling the kettle black, because I have spent an inordinate amount of money on Diesel jeans ever since I joined HF. Why do I have all these jeans, and would I really care about collecting so many of them if there wasn't for the "unobtanium" factor? Maybe, but I don't think my focus would be nearly as intense or obsessive.
post #20 of 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aarendil View Post
whatever guys,I'm not willingfully being rude to anyone's opinion,I just voiced mine about hi-sneakers,those d&g suck but it's getting tiring when people think 'fashion-sneakers=customized chucks'.

If people here cant stand someone that loves higher end sneakers I dont know why there is a thread dedicated to shoes other than ted baker largos or diesel boots.

Grondie : if you read carefully I wrote 'IMO' which means In MY Opinion and didn't make any personal assumption,so keep it respectful dude,thanks.I never understand why people take it like that,I mean what I say relates to those d&g sneakers that awfully look like overpriced chucks,so keep it low,I'm not THINKING (or caring) anything about anyone's wardrobe....



I buy what I like on me,and that's not many things a year.Pretty sure that half of people here spend more into jeans than me in other 'fashion-stuff'.But do I say that spending a lot in 20 diesel jeans is idiot?
I know your not trying to be rude on purpose man, your just a fashion fanatic. As a matter of fact, we had a discussion like that between the 2 of us before.

And I do agree with your last statement, there are people that buy 20 pairs in a year and only wear a couple of them. My comment was directed at those particular shoes only, I like Dior and Lanvin, but would never spend that kind of money on that model of shoe.

To each their own.....
post #21 of 28
a brief history lesson
It's so ironic. Converse were basketball shoes in the 60's and early 70's....simple...period. There was no Nike, no Puma, no Reebok, no Addidas. The only alternative to Cons were "skips" or 'skippies"...these were sneakers that weren't Cons..ie Keds and PF Flyers. Keds actually came out with a better shoe to compete with Cons and they called them "Pro Keds". I'd say I bought my first pair of Cons (they were never called Chucks ) in 1968 for $7 They weren't a fashion statement; they were sneakers....no colors..just white canvas shoes to play ball in. They were the best sneaker cuz they were heavy duty. The canvas was double layered. My family moved from NYC to California for 6 months. All the kids laughed at my Cons....and they never heard the word sneakers. To them, my beloved Cons were ugly tennis shoes. My nickname became sneakers...oh, they never heard of dungarees either....just jeans.

IMO:
The term "fashion sneaker" is an oxymoron. Spending hundreds of $$$ on sneakers to wear as a fashion item is obscene, not to mention an obnoxious example of over indulgence.
post #22 of 28
^ Very well said sonic
post #23 of 28
ok my 2 cents... Most of the new designer sneakers these days are upgraded versions of classic shoes,thoese lanvin's pictured up top are very reminescent[shape and strap wise] of some puma's I had a few years ago,also not only lanvin, but also I have seen classic shapes being used on lv's,gucci's and dior.


p.s. This post is not to trash lanvin,dior or any other label,becuase as soon as go on winter clothing ban Iam getting some new kicks's lol...............
post #24 of 28
HAOOOY AHPPY NOU YEAR thats where it's at :hug:
post #25 of 28
as with anything else, for some it is worth it and for others it is not. this example may be over-used, but 90% of the world thinks $200 jeans are insane. so who are any of us here to judge the practicality of $600 sneakers? for me personally, i would not spend nearly that much. i like some of them, but i am not really into sneakers so it isn't worth it to me to buy a pair. i have picked up a few nice margiela sneakers and some helmut langs on sale for under $200, which i think is an ok price. and i would consider some common projects at that price as well. for someone who is really into sneakers though, i could see the appeal of spending much more. for both the style as well as for the appreciation of the art form. yeah, they are based on cheap old tennis shoes, but they are a new and interesting take on those styles by using interesting colors, leathers, and textures to create something entirely different. is it really any worse that all the sneakerheads who pay $500 for limited edition dunks or deadstock jordans? and i don't hear anyone hating on those folk. so to sum it up, to each their own i suppose.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Diesel Jeans