What do people generally feel about the post-war 40's Bold Look?

[Mathematicus]

I have probably typed up too quickly and my message ended looking like a royal proclamation or kind of that! I must add that those are my opinions and have their relative weigth as anyone else's opinions.

That said, let me zoom in better in my comment. If you note, I didn't say that the suit was big on him or that it was complimenting his body frame - in fact, it is not doing that even a minimal bit. The suit is actually swallowing him down, but I believe the cut, at least, is correct.

As you interpret correctly, his shoulder are at least 1.5 inches narrower than the jacket shoulders, and this is proved by the presence of that divot/notching above the lapel. In the aestethics of the era, this behaviour contributes to the overall effect of chest "bulging" towards the front. You may object that it is unsightly, but that was the look.

The reason I said the cut was well executed are indeed the straight line of the shoulders (very difficult to prevent the shoulders from sagging down and looked awfully roundish, especially if the wearer has slight bones), the fit of the collar (with so much excess cloth it would have been almost natural to cut an disproportionately wide neckline, which would stand miles away his neck) and the clean, precise roll of the lapels, which are not rumpled, nor bent, nor sagging, but look like the inside edge sticks to the actual wearer at every stage. This wicks away the feeling that the jacket is oversized: there is no visible gap between the body and the garment.

The sleeve is outrageously wrinkled and wide - indeed it is the style but it is also an element of balance. With such drape, cutting a cleaner and narrower sleeve would have looked clownish - like he had skinny arms in a giant body.

On a closing note, there is no winner in such a discussion. We just share different viewpoints!

 

[MondoFW]

Last night, I finished watching Mildred Pierce on TCM. It was released in 1945, and it sort of conflicted with my pre-conceived notions with WW2-era fashion. Every damn character (except for Mildred's daughters) seem to wear wildly large-cut clothes, and it looks more like a picture you'd expect of the booming post-WW2 era, with extra expendable fabric galore. Was this unusual at the time? I know that many people avoided buying the "victory suits" by hanging onto their pre-war clothing, but surely the Bold Look wasn't too popular prior to WW2? Is Mildred Pierce just an exhibition of the 1% that could afford to have miles of fabric hanging onto themselves while everyone else was at the mercy of fabric rationing

Couldn't find the still with the two detectives that inform Pierce of the husband's death, but they both look gargantuan in their coats.

 

[Mathematicus]

Fashion from the mid 40s became much or less oriented towards the thing that you call "bold look". It is not surprising that baggy clothes were popular in that time already, as they were the natural evolution of the "drape cut" popular during the second half of the 30s.
Plus, this is an American movies, and excess cloth in American fashion has always been preponderant even before the war.