Chanel, commercialized.

I am absolutely not the only who, when the word "Chanel" is pronounced, thinks of elegance, style, luxury and something that is over all the rest of fashion houses. All this due to an elderly German genious who somehow manages to find the thin line between the tradition that should be followed and the new, modern vibes.
Yet, I am anything but happy that the aforementioned gentleman is about to commercialize this brand with choosing Lily Allen for a new ad campaign.
The thing is, I could not understand what Lagerfeld saw in the more-dirty-chic-than-classy-and-fabulous Olsen twins, or, what's even worse, to Lindsay Lohan or Beth Ditto and when the rumours of a collaboration with teenage star Emma Watson (who, let's face it, is only famous for that series of blockbusters and still looks like a 14 year-old), I thought this could not get any worse. And now it did.
If he had to pick a star as the face of Chanel, why couldn't he go with a person who deserves to be called a "Chanel girl", who impersonates everything it means, who would have been approved by Gabrielle herself as well? He did it so well in the last decades, from Vanessa Paradis to Audrey Tautou, not to mention Keira Knightley who, I think, was the best possible option, her ads for Chanel are marvellous and very recognizeable, very Chanel. And now here is this commercial girl who would be a more authentic face for anyone but Chanel.
Just look at this picture below and you'll see even she is embarassed and obviously doesn't know how to play her role properly. The outfits just don't work and she herself looks way too immature to represent such an iconic fashion house.
And do not get me wrong, it is nothing personal, I do not hate this girl but it's probably the first time I am deeply disappointed in Chanel and it's not even because of the fashion part but because with this contract Chanel is officially commercial. And this, in my opinion, is a tragic loss.