Colette

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.

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.

"Colette" is a biopic about noted French writer Gabrielle Colette. As the movie opens, we are in "Saint Sauveur 1892" where Colette is in a passionate relationship with an older guy nicknamed "Willy" (whose real name we don't know), an entrepreneur/writer/publisher/womanizer. Next we are in "Paris 1893", and the two are now married, and feeling at home as socialites. As always, they need more money to support their life style, and one day, at the encouragement of Willy, Colette writes a book loosely based on her own childhood and youth, "Claudine At School". Published under the nom-de-plume Willy, the book is an unexpected critical and commercial success... At this point we are 15 min. into the movie but to tell you more of the plot would spoil your viewing experience, you'll just have to see for yourself how t all plays out.

Couple of comments: this is the latest movie from UK director (and co-writer) Wash Westmoreland, whose previous film was the Oscar-winning "Still Alice". Here he brings the improbable story of Gabrielle Colette to the big screen. Given the many twists and turns that she encountered in her life, some (but certainly not all) of which are reflected in the movie, I don't want to say a whole lot more about that, so as not to spoil your viewing experience. Do allow me to alert you to the fact that Colette was nominated for the Nobel Prize of Literature in 1948, a fact that is never even mentioned in the movie, not even in the closing moments as to what became of her in later years (the movie covers roughly the years 1892-1905). "Colette" is, as a movie, neither a masterpiece nor a disaster. That is not a strong recommendation obviously, but it's still worth checking out for the stellar performance of Keira Knightley in the title role. It seems as is Knightley threw herself into this role without holding anything back. Dominic West, as Willy, does quite well too but of course plays an inherent unlikable character. I also have to say that I found it a bit off-putting to see all of these characters, living in France, reading French language newspapers, writing French language letters and diaries, etc. all speak... English.

"Colette" premiered to good acclaim at this year's Sundance film festival. It finally opened recently at my local art-house theater here in Cincinnati. The early evening screening where I saw this at was attended nicely (and mostly by seniors for some reason). If you are interested in finding out more about one of the best French female authors of the 20th century, even if the film is far from perfect, I'd recommend you check this out, be it at the theater, on VOD, or eventually on DVD/Blu-ray, and draw your own conclusion.

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.

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.