Coco Before Chanel (B or 3/4 stars)
I knew very little of Coco Chanel going into Anne Fontaine's 'Coco Before Chanel'. Nothing personally intrigues me about her life, rise to stardom, career, icon status, etc. But I figured I'd give the film a shot because of its recent nominations at both Britain & America's Academy Awards. Well ... though it lacks a stirring narrative, this movie is simply one of the most gorgeous films that I've seen all year. Though it's intermittently boring (for me), it's exceedingly well made. And as the title character, Audrey Tatou works her mysterious, beguiling magic (as she did in Amelie) once again.
Perhaps a detriment to the overall proceedings, this movie focuses on Coco Chanel's upbringing and early life BEFORE she made a name for herself in the fashion world. Based on a novel about her "early" years, the screenplay could only replicate its source. So, as a standalone film, it's fine. But you feel like there should be a part 2/sequel somewhere in the works. And I don't believe there is. Anyway, back to the film at hand. It opens in the mid-1890's in the orphanage of the Roman Catholic monastery of Aubazine, where headstrong Gabrielle 'Coco' Chanel lived for 7 yrs. following the death of her mom & the abandonment of her father. Nice, huh? The movie then skips ahead to right after the turn of the century; where she & her sister, Adrienne (Marie Gillain), are working as singers in a saloon to avoid prostitution (this is very reminiscent of 07's La Vie En Rose).
There, Coco meets the wealthy Etienne Balsan (Benoit Poelvoorde), who becomes her friend, her lover, & offers to advance her "singing career". Obviously, that doesn't pan out. But as his mistress, she moves into his Parisian suburb mansion, anyway. Due to her dowdy looks (& knack for wearing masculine clothes), Balsan kept her hidden from most of his elitist guests. Smoking her head off, bored beyond belief, & repulsed by the way elite women dress ... Coco takes hold of stubborn ambition & starts creating clothes for herself (not for fame or recognition - she just wants to make some $$, & better her life). Coco then meets a popular stage actress (a great Emmanuelle Devos) who loves Coco's hats so much that she becomes a sort of confidante & client. While staying at Balsan's mansion, she then meets & falls in love with one of his British acquaintances, Arthur 'Boy' Capel (Alessandro Nivola). Though the affair is tainted by his impending marriage (to a girl of higher social status), it gives Coco the initiative to leave Balsan & move to Paris, where she sets up a shop selling hats (her specialty) & dresses. And by the beginning of WWI, she'd already re-invented herself to become one of France's most revered designers, & one of the first symbols of the 'modern woman'.
As seen in the film, Coco Chanel's early life was defined by hardship, star-crossed love, & tragedy (as you'll see in the final 15 minutes). But she persevered, & became a brilliant icon of freedom, success, & style. After becoming Balsan's mistress, it appeared that he was using her. But she flips the tables & winds up using him for her social/monetary betterment. Kudos to Coco. To her, there was no love/romance attachment, just a source for transaction. Later, when caught in a love triangle (she, Balsan, 'Boy'), she struggles to remind herself not to feel emotion. She did love 'Boy', but settled with being merely his mistress. She wanted more from life. All of these plot points sound pretty riveting, but all of them aren't. I mean, though Chanel's early life had its share of fascinating moments, & though she went on to influence the way women dressed from the early 1900's-1971 (her death) ... the film's dramatization of those early years lack tension.
Everything's a bit too muted. But what I was enthralled with was the excellent, nuanced acting (from all), & the beautiful, languorous visuals. Audrey Tatou becomes Coco Chanel, here. There's such an unbelievable level of physical & emotional restraint in the performance that it could be completely written off as seeming unbothered - when really - I found the portrayal to be exceptionally nuanced (due to the restraint). Her interpretation may come off as too-determined, charmless & aloof, but that's who Chanel was; neither soft or sentimental. And in the moments when she does let down her hair, let her tongue fly, crack a smile, & feel - the portrayal feels completely full-bodied.
Thanks to her performance, I can see how Chanel goes on help women (through female empowerment, & her innovative designs). Still, while I found her a heavy asset, it was the sheer beauty of Fontaine's film that I was most taken with. I sat in mouth-drop awe at the lush cinematography, sets, variance of costumes, & Alexandre Desplat's memorable musical score. You know, to me, Coco Chanel (& her fashion) leaves little impression. I don't really care. And her tepid lifestyle 'before' stardom doesn't help matters. However, while the proceedings could have benefited from a wider scope & some melodramatic propulsion, I was lulled into complete submission by Tatou's intimate portrayal, & the film's lavish details. I didn't expect - at all - to be as taken with this film as I am.
Perhaps a detriment to the overall proceedings, this movie focuses on Coco Chanel's upbringing and early life BEFORE she made a name for herself in the fashion world. Based on a novel about her "early" years, the screenplay could only replicate its source. So, as a standalone film, it's fine. But you feel like there should be a part 2/sequel somewhere in the works. And I don't believe there is. Anyway, back to the film at hand. It opens in the mid-1890's in the orphanage of the Roman Catholic monastery of Aubazine, where headstrong Gabrielle 'Coco' Chanel lived for 7 yrs. following the death of her mom & the abandonment of her father. Nice, huh? The movie then skips ahead to right after the turn of the century; where she & her sister, Adrienne (Marie Gillain), are working as singers in a saloon to avoid prostitution (this is very reminiscent of 07's La Vie En Rose).
There, Coco meets the wealthy Etienne Balsan (Benoit Poelvoorde), who becomes her friend, her lover, & offers to advance her "singing career". Obviously, that doesn't pan out. But as his mistress, she moves into his Parisian suburb mansion, anyway. Due to her dowdy looks (& knack for wearing masculine clothes), Balsan kept her hidden from most of his elitist guests. Smoking her head off, bored beyond belief, & repulsed by the way elite women dress ... Coco takes hold of stubborn ambition & starts creating clothes for herself (not for fame or recognition - she just wants to make some $$, & better her life). Coco then meets a popular stage actress (a great Emmanuelle Devos) who loves Coco's hats so much that she becomes a sort of confidante & client. While staying at Balsan's mansion, she then meets & falls in love with one of his British acquaintances, Arthur 'Boy' Capel (Alessandro Nivola). Though the affair is tainted by his impending marriage (to a girl of higher social status), it gives Coco the initiative to leave Balsan & move to Paris, where she sets up a shop selling hats (her specialty) & dresses. And by the beginning of WWI, she'd already re-invented herself to become one of France's most revered designers, & one of the first symbols of the 'modern woman'.
As seen in the film, Coco Chanel's early life was defined by hardship, star-crossed love, & tragedy (as you'll see in the final 15 minutes). But she persevered, & became a brilliant icon of freedom, success, & style. After becoming Balsan's mistress, it appeared that he was using her. But she flips the tables & winds up using him for her social/monetary betterment. Kudos to Coco. To her, there was no love/romance attachment, just a source for transaction. Later, when caught in a love triangle (she, Balsan, 'Boy'), she struggles to remind herself not to feel emotion. She did love 'Boy', but settled with being merely his mistress. She wanted more from life. All of these plot points sound pretty riveting, but all of them aren't. I mean, though Chanel's early life had its share of fascinating moments, & though she went on to influence the way women dressed from the early 1900's-1971 (her death) ... the film's dramatization of those early years lack tension.
Everything's a bit too muted. But what I was enthralled with was the excellent, nuanced acting (from all), & the beautiful, languorous visuals. Audrey Tatou becomes Coco Chanel, here. There's such an unbelievable level of physical & emotional restraint in the performance that it could be completely written off as seeming unbothered - when really - I found the portrayal to be exceptionally nuanced (due to the restraint). Her interpretation may come off as too-determined, charmless & aloof, but that's who Chanel was; neither soft or sentimental. And in the moments when she does let down her hair, let her tongue fly, crack a smile, & feel - the portrayal feels completely full-bodied.
Thanks to her performance, I can see how Chanel goes on help women (through female empowerment, & her innovative designs). Still, while I found her a heavy asset, it was the sheer beauty of Fontaine's film that I was most taken with. I sat in mouth-drop awe at the lush cinematography, sets, variance of costumes, & Alexandre Desplat's memorable musical score. You know, to me, Coco Chanel (& her fashion) leaves little impression. I don't really care. And her tepid lifestyle 'before' stardom doesn't help matters. However, while the proceedings could have benefited from a wider scope & some melodramatic propulsion, I was lulled into complete submission by Tatou's intimate portrayal, & the film's lavish details. I didn't expect - at all - to be as taken with this film as I am.