Coco avant Chanel

COCO AVANT CHANEL simply means Coco's life before Chanel as we know her now. So here is a film about her 'then'. This very well produced film has many pluses and two glaring and irritating minuses. On the plus side we have a costly film that displays delicious art direction and production values with lavish or complicated vintage scenes set in extravagant re creationed times or within gorgeous mansions and breathtaking seaside locations... all with superb costumes. However, this film, more about an hour of its running time suffers from the same annoying factors that spoiled the recent film MA VIE EN ROSE, the bio pic of Edith Piaf: 1: a cranky and rude personality who is ungrateful when benefactors assist and 2: idiotic photography closeups where the hand held camera darts about between people talking or following someone's hands when they are doing something eg: Coco is at a table sewing so the camera is gawking about in closeup of her reaching for things. There are several grand set pieces: racetrack and ballroom magnificence, well dressed and filmed and a fashion sequence later in the story that is (again) all too brief. The first 40 minuets of orphanage and cabaret misery and rudeness mirror LA VIE EN ROSE too much and only later when Coco falls in love with "Boy" (Alessandro Nivola) and they romance by the sea does the film lighten a bit and she actually for a few minutes becomes likable. Oherwise it is Gallic aloofness well dressed but at odds with allowing the audience in too far.

"Coco before Chanel" is exactly that; the life of an impoverished girl up until the start of what became a fashion empire.

This I must say is a different kind of a biopic. There was some sort of subtleness about it, everything was going too slow and not much was happening in terms of demonstrating that this hopeless little girl from nowhere had this extraordinary talent for cloth-making. Yes we did see her advocating simplicity in times of great extravagance and even dressing up (probably) her first clients but had the viewer not been aware of the brand "Chanel" he or she would have to wait until the finishing titles to realise Coco turned out to become a fashion icon.

If there is one thing about Coco is that she was a rebel; in a late 19th century puritan society she stood up for what she believed, refused to get married and instead of settling for a wedlock with a rich spouse she chose to live the adventure, go to Paris and start up a hat shop.

It seems however that her rebellious nature extended to her design skills. To use her own words: "Simplicity is the keynote of all true elegance." Coco Chanel always kept the clothing she designed simple, comfortable and revealing. Unlike most designers in that Europe, she kept the woman inside the clothes at the center of her creations. "I gave women a sense of freedom; I gave them back their bodies: bodies that were drenched in sweat, due to fashion's finery, lace, corsets, underclothes, padding." Perhaps it was fate or desperation from her impoverished upbringing but the affair with the playboy millionaire and, later, his best friend were pivotal to give her the push she needed to make a start. Though not an expert on French upper class culture but were quite impressed how civilized and elegant the two men were when it came to loving and pursuing the same woman.

All in all a decent film but no wow factor.

Overall, I liked this movie. Technically, it is a well made film, and well acted. I enjoyed watching it and recommend it for a good entertaining film.

However, I just want to say that the film is not always that factual, at times. I would recommend reading a biography of Chanel (such as "The Gospel According to Chanel") to get a more realistic idea of her life.

This film has some fact, but also includes some idealized fantasy of her, which makes for good storytelling for a film. The film is good; the factual part, not so much.

The film shows Chanel as very skilled sewing and as a skilled pattern maker - but I believe in real life she was not that skilled; she could sew straight seams, but not necessarily intricate tailoring; she was more the creative genius with the fashion vision; she hired the skilled seamstresses and hired someone to make the patterns from her ideas and her rougher designs.

This film does cover the early part of Coco Chanel's life - up to about the beginning World War I. And in fact, it was because of the start of WWI in 1914-18, that Chanel got her big break in designing fashion - but the film does not include that historical background.

(As an aside, I think that a film would not have been made to cover her whole life, because during World War II, Chanel did live in Paris with a Nazi lover for a few years - and the whole part of her WWII years is usually hushed up. She then later lived in exile in Switzerland after the war with her ex-Nazi lover. So, they would not want to have included this unpopular part of her life in a big budget film, as it would be too controversial.)

Coco avant Chanel focuses, quite literally, on the roots of Coco before the whole Chanel business.

I noted the movie seemed to frustrate those with no grasp of the French language at all. Many seemed to go in unaware that the movie was set before her 'Chanel' days and I couldn't help but feel a sense of disappointment at the end from others; via looking at their faces, overhearing conversations and talking with friends. It's interesting, but it does plod on very slowly.

We are treated to a very rude, harsh character in Coco. Full credit goes to Audrey Tautou for her performance though. She really does fit into this movie's feel and tone very well. Her cheeky performance is definitely a highlight.

I don't know what to make of Alessandro Nivola as 'Boy'. The character was and looked rather sleazy. I'm not sure if that was meant or if that was Alessandro. Other than that, mentions go to Benoît Poelvoorde for his solid performance and Emmanuelle Devos as the sexy and self-assured Emilienne d'Alençon.

Other than that, it's a solid biopic. 7/10

It may be a subject that will not automatically appeal to many. However, this movie is certainly worth watching.

Audrey Tautou, complete with all the mannerisms and dark looks of Coco Chanel, plays a magnificent role. We start of at the miserable beginning of Gabrielle Chanel's life, in an orphanage. It quickly becomes clear that this is not the story about some high-society woman who got bored and decided to make clothes in a style that was unheard of at that time, even for people who don't know anything about the life of Coco Chanel. We see her, slowly but surely, clawing her way up in society, using her charm and wit, but most of all: her outspokenness, always telling what she thinks.

Cinematographically, this film is outstanding too. Throughout the film, certain elements of clothing (black and white patterns, stripes, men's shirts) are shown through an unclear lens, to point out that even the most early views of Coco on fashion were incorporated in her style later.

This film is not just a story about Coco's success, it's also about her struggle to fit in in a society that differed so much from her own opinions, about her losses and heartaches. All in all, we get a complete picture of the icon that is still loved and admired today.