Colette

Very well done, interesting. A nice period piece. However, at the end the director states, after I thought I was watching a movie that was historically accurate, that he had changed several characters and other aspects to make them more contemporary (meaning: what he thinks the way things ought to have been 100+ years ago, vs reality) re: gender, sexual preference, racial matters, etc. As such, the movie to a degree is fiction; a lie. Which is sad, as it detracts from the ground breaking path that Colette lived.

The tale of Gabrielle Colette is a fascinating one, as it turns out. I was completely unaware of her story before seeing the film, and emerged from the cinema feeling as though I had learnt a lot about this literary legend.

Keira Knightley is remarkable in the title role. This is career-best form from her. She carries the film wonderfully. Denise Gough is also great in the role of 'Missy'. The direction from Wash Westmoreland was also superb. He was able to successfully take the script, and deliver it in the best way possible.

However, the film lets itself down from a weaker story/script where it constantly struggles to find and execute more positive moments from Colette's story. Instead, it focuses on the more gloomy moments from her life, leaving the happier moments sidelined. Some of the supporting characters lack depth, including: Eleanor Tomlinson's 'Georgie' and Aiysha Hart's 'Polaire'. These characters play an integral part in Colette's story, but, their lack of screen time, and the way in which they're written in to the story makes the characters have no real impact in driving the film forward.

This movie does have a few flaws which, overall, lets it down. But, it was still an enjoyable movie.

This movie is truly beautiful to watch. Elegant period dress, recreations of turn-of-the-century Paris inside and out that had me wondering how they were achieved. And the acting by the two principles is truly first-rate.

Keira Knightley has it all and does it all as the title character. A truly beautiful performance, including some line-reading that was worthy of Shakespeare - which this screenplay most certainly is not. (See below.) She held me riveted in many a scene.

Not far behind her in the acting dept is Dominic West, who turns Willy into a real if very flawed human being. Modern literary history sees him through Colette's later eyes, so it dismisses him terribly, but here he comes off as a real charmer.

So what's not to like? A great deal, unfortunately. The script, at least through the first half of the movie, is paint by numbers: very obvious, very flat, very unrevealing. Though Knightley clearly could have conveyed anything, it doesn't do a good job of helping us to understand the very complex woman we see. Too often, it sounds like a summary of a Wikipedia biography of the author. What made her so interesting? What made her tick? What made her so remarkable? The script gives us no clue. Is it because the script was written by two men and, third billing, one woman? I don't buy that. Madame Bovary was written by a man, as were many other great female characters in literature. Perhaps the problem lies, at least in part, with the directing as well.

If you want to see this movie, I would wait until you can watch it at home, so you can pause it to do other things when you get bored or just want a break. Having to sit through all 111 minutes in a theater without a break was too much for me - though it did get more involving near the end. Kudos to Knightley and West, certainly, for doing a great job with their roles. But this was too much like a beautifully costumed and filmed history lesson, and not enough like an engaging story.

My thoughts regarding Collette are conflicted to say the least. On one hand, the film is a well-acted, complex love story. On the other hand, it's a well-acted mess that doesn't know what it wants to say. I'll begin by covering the one element of the film I know I liked: the leads. Keira Knightly and Dominic West are a great onscreen couple. They both have human flaws, but the script also acknowledges the true affection between them. In addition to their romance, they also share a relationship as business partners, adding another layer of complexity to their relationship. Through the progression of this love story, I didn't hate one or idolize the other, which I admired on a screenwriting level. However, about halfway through the film, the dialogue and tone start to side with Collette more and more even though the previous scenes never indicated the story held this ethical position. I understand that her name is the title of the picture, but there are still biographical films that don't necessarily support the central figure's motives or actions. In the first hour or so, the film seemed to simply display Colette's life without assigning the roles of a good or bad guy. The story focused and kept the central dramatic elements in check. After this, Colette starts, I don't want to say "falling apart", rather biting off more than it can chew. New characters are introduced quite literally out of nowhere even though they play very important roles. Colette also starts pursuing a career in theatre for reasons that are never really explained. And her husband Willy (Dominic West) is suddenly made out to as the film's antagonist. I would not mind this dramatic shift if more time was dedicated to the relationship. But like I said, there are so many separate events unfolding in the last hour or so that it's impossible to make sense of it all. In fact, the end credits reveal even more important events took place later in her life, that I quite frankly would have liked to see. I think the film makers struggled deciding what approach to use while telling this story. At first, the film seemed purely subjective as it took a neutral stance and simply showed the events one after another. Perhaps the writers later decided they weren't comfortable with this approach and took a one-sided angle for the rest of the project. I don't prefer one point of view over the other, but I wish Colette would have committed to a single method of cinematic storytelling. I've though about this film a lot and have decided to give it a small recommendation. It is a well acted, well-directed, and well-shot picture from beginning to end, but there is a distracting perspective shift that audiences should be aware of.

This is based on a true story and an interesting one at that. The only thing was the story was a little slow and one paced. Even the sex scenes were quite dull and added little to the film.

The highlight was Keira Knightlys Performance in the main role, she played it superbly.