A still from the Proenza Schouler video. There are few high fashion houses who’d dare make a commercial. Some, like Alexander Wang, won’t even engage in print advertising—instead, Wang calls his posters “image pieces”—but good luck finding one who won’t spend thousands on a fashion film.

A few years ago, Gareth Pugh started showing creepy beautiful shorts staring his collections with ShowStudio’s Ruth Hogben. Maybe two years before that Chanel released its first “film” starring Nicole Kidman for Chanel No.5. Now Lady Gaga makes mini-movies for Nicola Formichetti at the house of Mugler, Abbey Lee‘s dancing around town for Pierre Balmain and instead of just shilling perfume via film, Karl Lagerfeld’s selling an entire lifestyle through nearly 30 minute long movies stuffed with major models and Baptiste frolicking in St. Tropez or Biarritz (when, of course, Martin Scorsese isn’t free to film Oscar-winning actresses on behalf of the house) and even Wang’s teamed up with Santigold for T. But how effective are they, if at all? The only one, off the top of our head, that really changed the way we thought about a brand, was Lanvin’s dancing-to-Pitbull spot last month. It was fun! And from a house better known for glamour. But here’s another one, the second collaboration between Proenza Schouler’s Jack McCullough and Lazaro Hernandez and filmmaker Harmony Korine. Yes, the brand’s fall collection used Navajo prints, and the boys were inspired by the American Southwest, but we’re kind of lost on the “crystal meth trailer park” thing. Is there a particular fashion film that’s altered your opinion on a brand? Do you think they matter? Or are they just a bit of fun?