Coco avant Chanel - L'amore prima del mito

"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.

I love Chanel. I can't actually afford the clothes, but that won't stop me from liking them. Just like reading one or two bad reviews didn't stop me from wanting to see 'Coco Avant Chanel'.

The first part of the movie seemed very promising. It didn't take me long to like Coco's character, and everything seemed to have a reasonable pace. Then the movie zooms in on Coco's relationship with 'Boy' and you keep hoping things get interesting, but they don't.

I spent most of the movie admiring the wonderful atmosphere while the lovebirds exchanged meaningful looks. I would have liked this movie more if it paid more attention to things like Coco's hat shop, rather than a relationship of which we all know the ending anyway.

The best thing about this movie is the wonderful atmosphere, but if you don't like slow romance you can skip this one.

Directed by Anne Fontaine and based upon the book by Edmonde Charles-Roux, Coco Before Chanel is a biographical tale of Gabrielle "Coco" Chanel set a timeline which is just that, before she founded the fashion empire. So for those who are more intrigued about the fashion world and the impact Chanel has on it, then this is not the movie you're looking for, as it firmly dwells on Coco as a person, and her romantic dalliances with two men who played significant roles in her life, be it in support of her daily sustenance, or inspiring and providing fuel for her desire to make a name for herself.

The film dedicated plenty of time in Coco's awakening toward the French high life of the time, since she became a voluntary kept mistress of rich playboy Etienne Balsan (Benoit Poelvoorde), who in a way had rescued her from poverty, and whose riches afforded to her provided that access to the slacker lifestyles of the rich and famous. The audience too get reminded time and again of how stifling a woman's place in high society was at the turn of the century, made worse by the restrictive clothing like corsets, frills, and lace from the neck right down to sweeping the floors. Coco's disdain and penchant for freedom led to bold designs that do not conform, starting from her hats which provided her some attention and notoriety even.

As Coco Chanel, Audrey Tautou epitomizes that level of elegance, vulnerability and rebellious streak to do things differently. Her petiteness and somewhat boyish cut figure probably suited the role really well as the initial designs by Coco were those inspired by menswear, though you only get glimpses of her design genius from short montages scattered throughout, and from some scenes which show her working at a tailor shop, but other than that you will gain very little from this bio-pic other than the messy love life that she got herself into, first with benefactor of sorts Etienne, who treated her nothing more than an object to bed in exchange for lodging, then Alessandro Nivola's Arthur "Boy"Capel, a businessman with whom she falls head over heels with. The romances do make you wonder about how careless the treatment of emotions are, where love and issues of marriage are quite trivially handled.

While Anne Fontaine nailed down the look of the film, the feel somehow was found to be lacking, as apart from the romantic angle, nothing else really rang through until the last act, which was a very hastily down finale to show the tremendous progress Coco had undergone once she had closed her heart, where she had broken through a society and introduced radical changes to an industry, from hats to influencing a lot more in the fashion world. How she did exactly that, is best left to another film because this one had little else other than repeated shots of scissors going through fabric.

Without a doubt the clothes here are the star of the show, from the fashions of societal norms in both directions of the rich-poor spectrum, to Coco Chanel's designs for her own with her menswear inspired pieces, and unfortunately, the glamour-chic pieces only making it through in a parting shot at the finale, since the founding of the business empire was grossly passed over deliberately. The opulently designed clothes of that era stand in stark contrast to the Chanel pieces, which celebrates sheer beauty and elegance in their simplicity, and probably from there, stamping its mark on the fashion industry.

Don't approach this film with an expectation that you would learn something of the beginnings of Chanel the brand and how it became the icon of today. In fact, it's more about the love and early life of its founder, who without her accomplishment and the name backing her, could have turned out to be nothing more than a generic, average, and perhaps even strange romantic picture. And of course, this is also for Audrey Tautou fans who'll lap up her look as Coco Chanel in those chic garbs.

Coco Before Chanel (2009)

Audrey Tatou has had a heck of a time maturing from her astonishing role in Amelie (2001), and if she showed her young true self better in He Loves Me (2002), she faltered badly in The Da Vinci Code. Now, playing the young Coco Chanel, she seems to have some solid footing. Oddly, it is partly by playing a part that requires seriousness, even a dour gloom. It's a solid role and a good performance.

The idea of the story is odd, in a way, because it shows very little of those turning points in Coco Chanel's early career as a fashion maven (and this is what we really are dying to see). This really is before Chanel, the brand, and at first it comes off a little routine, showing the young years, and her trying to get out of having to do silly song and dance acts. Eventually she moves up and meets people of influence (the two always go together, don't they?), and turns a corner by making hats for some well off women who have taken to them, and to her.

What makes the movie interesting is Chanel's relationships with other men, two in particular, and in the general libertine scene she found herself joining, if not always liking. She does find love, maybe twice (one more paternal, replacing the father who abandoned her as a child). And all three male actors are spot-on believable.

As is Tatou. The whole affair is interesting but with little magic or surprise. It's well made and well paced and you won't get drowsy, but expect a routine exploration. And learn something about a truly self-made woman who would change the look of the Twentieth Century, head to toe.

I watched this film for two reasons--I like French films and I like Audry Tautou. However, about midway through the movie I realized that I just didn't care all that much about what I was watching. Perhaps you'll have a different reaction.

After being dumped at an orphanage with her sister by their indifferent father, the film jumps ahead 15 years. The two sisters are now singing in a dive--with hopes of getting out and getting a gig at a nicer venue. However, when the sister falls in love with some rich guy, the act falls apart. Soon afterwords, Coco herself moves in with another rich guy and becomes his lover--though why he would want such a dour and indifferent person was a major question that plagued me. In fact, ALL of Tautou's performance confused me, as she almost always seemed depressing to be with--yet, people oddly were drawn to her. It was almost like she was sleepwalking through life. In addition, it was very, very difficult to connect with not only her but anyone in the film--a severe deficit to the film unless there was more action and suspense. Unfortunately, there was almost none. In fact, where there clearly must have been some energy or excitement...there was still none. And, what irritated me most is that although a huge portion of the film took place during WWI, the war was not mentioned or even alluded to even once. You'd think that a war that resulted in at least 11 million deaths and the destruction of a third of France would at get a mention! And, after meeting her second lover (with which she spent nine years), you get the impression that he died only months later. As a result of this style of film making, the context for EVERYTHING is missing--and it's even worse at the end of the film where Coco appears to have aged very little--yet many of the models around her are dressed in clothing from decades in the future.

Unlikable characters and poor/confusing history make this a rather tedious film. Mildly interesting, but not much more...and it certainly SHOULD have been more engaging.