The 1990s were more than ever on the rise, as shown by the eventful reissue of the Tamagotchi and the resales of the original Polly Pockets, which can reach staggering prices. But in addition to the gadgets, it is fashion that is reappropriating the codes of the decade, and the younger generations are asking for more! An emblematic series particularly influences this renewed interest in past trends:it is Friends whose characters – and more particularly their looks – have unleashed passions since its arrival on the Netflix streaming platform. Tight crop-tops, high-waisted “mom” type jeans, wide sweatshirts, mini-skirts, plaid shirts worn around the waist, overalls… The show is simply full of vintage trends that have never aroused such enthusiasm during the original broadcast that began in 1994 (apart from the long bob by Rachel, alias Jenifer Aniston, which for a time became a real reference in hair salons).
It was on Twitter that fans of the series shared their very positive impressions of the look of the group of friends. “I want all the outfits in Friends… How cute! I dare you to say otherwise », « I am currently watching Friends and I am absolutely in love with the clothes of Rachel and Monica [playée par Courteney Cox, ndlr] “I would like the person in charge of costumes on the set of Friends to dress me every day for the rest of my life, please », « I watch the episodes again (like the rest of the country) and I DREAM the night of their clothes. Come on, give me your wardrobe, what “, can we read in a series of tweets. Another Internet user named Alisha Jordan, agreeing with the general opinion, makes an exception all the same:“I am watching all the episodes of Friends for the first time… I want all the outfits, except the horrible shoes ". And obviously, she said out loud what everyone thinks quietly since her post has gathered more than 1000 “likes”. Not sure that the return of the Slinky, this wedge sandal that was all the rage 20 years ago, will delight this handful of reluctant people... It will do more for us, won't it?
