L'amante di Lady Chatterley

This production of LADY CHATTERLEY'S LOVER neatly summarizes the plot of the novel upon which it is based, and it retains a surprising amount of the naughty bits that earned the novel its notoriety. In the process of condensing the story, the filmmakers lost some of its emotional appeal. Emma Corrin in particular brings depth to an underwritten role, but the rest of the cast capably acquit themselves with similarly underdeveloped material. Unfortunately, the romance often feels more like something that hits the beats of the story rather than something genuine and romantic or erotic. Most of the production values are good.

Based on the notorious last and often banned novel by D. H. Lawrence this film is it's most recent adaptation. Set during WWI Lord Clifford Chatterly marries Connie Reid. He almost immediately goes back to the front where he is injured in the war. When he comes home he is unable to father children or use his legs. He moves his wife to his family's country estate, taking her out of the bustling London that she loves. Isolated and alone, Lady Chatterly becomes more of a caretaker than lover to her husband. In this version her husband discusses with her the idea that she could discreetly choose a lover to impregnate her so that they could have an heir, sine he can not father one...it only they know that. He set boundaries, that he trusted her judgment, but never wanted to know who the true father is. At first she is upset by his suggestion, but starts taking long walks by herself where she eventually meets the estate's gamekeeper and former soldier himself Oliver Mellors. Eventually Oliver and Connie start a torrid affair that does end up with her being pregnant.

The novel touches on several themes involving the class system existing in England, infidelity, and the conditions of laborers like miners. The film also touches on these theme but only in the broadest of strokes.

The setting for the film is beautifully filmed and the costumes are wonderful and period appropriate. I really appreciated that they had both male and female full frontal nudity. The film r ally makes a pitch for this story being about a great love story and a woman willing to give up everything for this great love...only in the film I was watching I never saw that love built or nurtured. I would argue that there was a woman desperate to be touched physically and that there was lust...but I failed to see any love. I am afraid having good physical timing so you can satisfy each other's desires simultaneously is not love.

There were some decent performances by the actors and in particular by the actress who played my favorite character in this film, Mrs. Bolton (Joely Richardson).

I am not sure how I would rank this in a list of adaptations of this book, but I do know it is not my favorite. It is a beautiful film that I can recommend to fans of classics and those who are fans of historical dramas. I don't think I would recommend this to a true romantic however...and if lust is your thing, I think you would be better off watching 365 DNI in my opinion.

This Netflix dud ruined my favorite novel. First of all, I hated the camera work. Cold hues of blues throughout, in a story about sensual love? Then it was wildly miscast and mis-directed. Corrin was too skinny, neither she nor Mellors exuded any sensuality, and had no chemistry. A young anorexic filmed in hues of blue in a story of sexual passion? Very misguided. No buildup of tension between Connie and Mellors at the onset of their relationship. Then, when they go at it, Connie looks like she is 14 and Mellors like he is 16. Clifford is a cardboard character.

The wit of the novel was put in the grinder. The costumes were too modern and 'on the nose' (see the red day dress). The dialogues mediocre, the sex scenes either cringing or just dull. So the directing was just terrible - and I am surprised at the high ratings offered by the supposed critics. Even more surprised with the fact that a team of Creative Execs at Netflix greenlit such a dud on the basis of the well-known actors.

And what is the matter with all the anorexic young British actresses? In the Crown season 5, the new Diana (played by Elisabeth Debicki is also anorexic and about 20 pounds skinnier than the rea Diana). When Corrin takes off her top and looks at herself and her naked breasts in the mirror she looks like freshly out of Auschwitz. I imagine the casting directors are pressuring young actresses to be so skinny, but someone should stop this fad.

So, no emotion for story and characters until like the last 15 mins.

This is just another one of the many films that gets remade over and over again. The remakes never get any better, in fact often the reverse. And this film fulfills that formula perfectly. It's dumbed down, unsexy and uninteresting.

There is no chemistry between the two titular characters whatsoever and the acting is no very good. I didn't particularly hate the performances but I also didn't find them in the least believable.

The writing was pretty terrible. It seemed as though they wanted to have somebody be the "bad guy" but they just weren't sure about who to make it. Direction was poor. Too concerned with the surface appearances and ignoring the substance. The set and costuming were basically BBC average.

Like man Netflix "originals" they are scared of offending anyone and spend so much time and effort on avoiding that offense that the end product is as bland and tasteless as cafeteria food.

While not completely awful, this latest adaptation feels a bit like the suburban woman's book club version of Lady Chatterley's Lover. Connie is given a light feminist makeover, which is not necessarily a bad thing, but in most respects the writing and the direction loses the muscularity and the rawness of the novel. The scene with Connie and Oliver frolicking naked in the rain is emblematic of this director's approach. It's cute and maybe a tad naughty, rather than erotically charged or daring or liberating. And poor Mellors, while beautifully played by Jack O'Connell, feels somewhat emasculated by both the script and the tepid direction. It's also telling that they chose a boyish, svelte, hairless, almost twinkish type like O'Connell, who doesn't exactly embody Mellors as written by Laurence. So it's fair to say this movie is more Connie's story than it is Mellor's. The actors are fine though - particularly Joely Richardson as Mrs Bolton. And the cinematography is some compensation for the lack of literary cred.