Meryl Streep’s Camp Says That Chanel’s Karl Lagerfeld Is Being Untruthful, Chanel Agrees
This week, withering bitchqueen of evil fashion designer, Karl Lagerfeld, claimed that Meryl Streep effed him and Chanel over by nixing an Oscar dress that he was tailoring for her. Karl’s story was that Meryl and her people informed him that they were going with a different fashion house.
The pony-tailed dude who looks like he’s about to leave James Bond in a stylish deathtrap said that there’s a reason why Meryl’s last name rhymes with “cheap!” He claimed Meryl’s reason for bailing on the dress was because other guys, er, gays were willing to pay Meryl to wear their shit.
I’m not sure Karl is aware of who he is, and who Meryl is. Karl is an interesting-looking weirdo with a bias against the fat and the ugly. Meryl is “The World’s Greatest Living Actress” (apologies to Kristen Stewart), and recently irritated president Donald Trump so much that he almost lost the radioactive orange. America’s going with Meryl on this one, Karl. Because if there’s anyone who can stand up to your particular brand of cuntery, it’s Miranda Priestly!
Meryl’s stylist, Micaela Erlanger, informed Business of Fashion that Meryl merely decided to go with another dress.
Erlanger’s version of the story reads very differently from Lagerfeld’s. “As a stylist working with a nominee for any major event, it’s industry standard for designers to propose gown ideas and sketches — some custom, some not depending on the occasion,” Erlanger told BoF. “In the case of Chanel’s submission, which was presented with full knowledge that Ms. Streep and I — her stylist — were having conversations with various brands, we were shown sketches of a dress from their most recent couture collection,” she continued. “Although [it was] an exquisite gown from the existing collection, we decided to go in a different direction, with another designer.”
As for the sordid topic of coin, tee hee, silly man, this is Meryl Streep! She doesn’t need to get PAID to wear your rags. She had the faucets in the carriage house’s guest bathroom made out of Oscars!
“At no point were there any conversations regarding monetary compensation,” Erlanger said. “Nor were any other brands considered based on their willingness to pay for placement. This is not how my company operates and is very much a practice in conflict with Ms. Streep’s personal ethics. Any reports or quotes stating otherwise are a complete fabrication.”
To double down on the “ponytail is full of horseshit” defense, Meryl’s rep fired off an e-mail, and even named a name over at Chanel who could back it up. Methinks a certain Nancy at Chanel is about to receive a ragey phone call from a hissy old queen telling her to “fuck off” in German.
“This is a completely untrue story,” representative for the actress wrote via email. “Ms. Streep would never wear anything in exchange for payment. This can be corroborated by Nancy Walsh at Chanel.”
Heading off a scandal (seriously, since Meryl elegantly shit on Trump at the Golden Globes, her “Beloved American Icons” stock has risen even higher, so she’s not the one you want to come for), Chanel released a statement that managed not to admit that Karl is a senile loony. (As a member of the fat and ugly community, I’m more than happy to watch his ridiculous fingerless driving gloves decay and fall off his rotting corpse bone hands out of public humiliation!)
In a statement issued to BoF, a Chanel representative wrote: “Chanel engaged in conversations with Ms. Streep’s stylist to design a dress for her to wear to the Academy Awards, with the full understanding that she was considering options from other design houses. When informed by the stylist that Ms. Streep had chosen a dress by another designer there was no mention of the reason. Chanel wishes to express our continued and deep respect for Ms. Streep.”
If Chanel still needs someone to wear that sad garment, I’m sure that the Oscar red carpet glory known as Sally Kirkland will be more than willing to shoulder that burden.
Pic: WENN