When the Textiliste and I shared our first flat, we discovered the delights of Marks & Spencer’s ready meals. Precooked meals that you could reheat were hardly novel – Vesta curries had been around for a while – but these hinted a certain sophistication. One that I still remember was their seafood pasta with its multi coloured strips of pasta and prawns and chunks of cod in a creamy sauce. It took us a while to realise an essential truth about this dish – it was always the same. Every time it looked the same, had the same amount of pasta and fish in it and each tasted identical to the last. And that realisation killed my love for it.
Keira Knightly reminds me of that meal. She is a good actress but, and here’s the thing, she’s always the bloody same. Not the same like Sean Connery who played every part as a grumpy Scotsman even when he was meant to be Irish or quintessentially English, but her anger, her happiness, her frustration and her sadness are portrayed in identical ways. It’s almost like she’s a bit too middle class to really let it go, to surprise us. If Waitrose taught acting…
And this film is a bit like that too. Bland. It centres on the life of Colette the famous French author, and her relationship with her husband Willy and how he manipulated her, effectively stole her early books from her. Willy, played well by Dominic West, equals bad; Colette, aka Keira K equals good.nonce we’ve nailed that dichotomy we can pop out to the bar and come back for the credits
Yet when I first heard about Colette – at university I think – it was as someone who didn’t so much as break barriers as marmalize them, someone who became a feminist icon. But for all the talk of scandal here you’d not know she’d done anything more socially improper than serve M&S ready meals and pretend they were her own.
This has the feel of an old fashioned biopic, centring on the main relationship (it’s not really – I mean you’d not expect Trevor Howard to hump Greer Garson without one foot kept on the Persian or for Margaret Rutherford to method act an orgasm). It’s essentially inward looking, though. The impact Colette had on the wider society, on the women around her is mentioned as one might hear mention that Megan Sparkle has bought a new set of tupperware which has sold out. It’s off stage, almost an incidental. A bit of gossip affecting other people. Not that relevant. But that’s the point these things mattered – they still matter – they should have been front and centre but they were anything but.
We meet Colette’s long term love, Missy a brave example of gender confusion. We see Colette, apparently a respectable society women, performing on stage in the music hall. But we get no insight into how her writings, her behaviour had a wider impact on the society around her.
Nope, that’s not the theme the director wants us to take away. The big message is how an old duplicitous, lying toerag of a bloke exploited the young and naive Colette and how, finally, she breaks free. Is that what Colette is to be remembered for? Is that all? Hasn’t that been done to death by others and better?
Of course that remains an important message but I’d hazard a guess that Colette herself would have rather hoped a wider canvas could have been used.
Shame Really. She’s got nice cheekbones.
TanGental 
🙂 Keep up the critiques. Please!
LikeLike
Will do, I enjoy the sound of my own pen scratching…
LikeLiked by 1 person
…just not in verse?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ah verse… that’s so much harder…
LikeLiked by 1 person
Oh, that sounds so disappointing. I’m a huge fan of Colette’s work. I think I might just re-read her books and the biography I have of her.
LikeLike
Do and if you go let me know if, like me, you feel they could have made a much more rounded piece. I fear a little bit of #metoo has infected the direction of the film. You might say that’s not a bad thing, but I think, we’re imto ask those of my contemporaries what they think of when Colette is mentioned, it’s not that part of her life. So, perhaps it’s right that part is aired but coming form the perspective of my own prejudices it fell rather flat.
LikeLike
You’ve effectively put me off the film 😬
LikeLike
Oh dear. Not my intention. It’s enjoyable enough in its own way but a trick missed I fear. But as with all these opinion pieces I love for people to go and make up their own mind. We want cinema to continue to thrive ….
LikeLike
And, according to other critics, very nice frocks.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Very nice. And Paris in 1900 was fragrant with clean streets… all very realistic…
LikeLike
I was wondering about the ‘me too’ infection (I’m not a fan) I’ve noted the bites happening in all kinds of places and in many a movie/TV tale I’ve seen in recent times. I rather feel you have described the delightful Ms K aptly – no matter who she plays she remains the delightful Ms K. and sometimes it works (Love Actually) and sometimes it doesn’t ……. I might wait til the DVD comes out for this one.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes probably wise.
LikeLike
Had me laughing. Good review, Geoff
LikeLiked by 1 person
The problem with many writers is they lead more boring lives than their characters. I could never imagine Kiera Knightley as a writer. Too glamorous even in rags.
LikeLiked by 1 person
And cheekbones forged in a steel mill
LikeLike
I remember reading Colette in French when I was in high school. I can’t imagine Keira playing her. I always pictured her as my French grandmother as a younger woman–short and busty.
LikeLiked by 1 person
That’s what the photos suggest, too.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Good. I’m glad it wasn’t just my imagination.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I was similarly disappointed. I expected something … more. 😦
LikeLiked by 1 person
yes, it missed such a big trick
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks for review, confirms I shouldn’t worry about missing it!
However, it sounds more cheerful than the current Hugo on tv – can’t cope with too much misery in January if I don’t have to 😐
LikeLiked by 1 person
actually it’s good but yes true to the book and so necessarily lacking a joie de vivre
LikeLike