Natashenka_S

I saw the film almost a month ago, when it was released here in Israel. I like Edith Piaf's songs very much, and the movie makes you believe that a woman who gave us those songs was the one we see on the screen. Marion Cotillard is superb in this role, her heroine is vulnerable, doomed and dignified at the same time. I don't agree with those who say her performance is melodramatic, because the singer WAS very emotional and even melodramatic (though in a perfectly natural way) in real life too (as all the biographers remark).

One thing about the movie that annoyed me a little was the switches of time frames. I understand the purpose of it. During the first 15 minutes we get to see the sickly little girl, then Edith Piaf's days of glory and' finally, her last days, when she was a tortured creature and looked like a 70-year old woman. So even while living through the singer's happiest days we never forget how it would end quite soon. But sometimes these switches seem unnecessary and distracting. The other flaw is that a viewer must be well-familiar with the singer's biography, otherwise it would be difficult for one to understand certain moments in the film.

I don't have much to say about the director's masterful work, honestly there is none. The director had the story of life, he had the music and the haunting voice of the great singer. The latter is what makes most of the emotional impact. But I would recommend this movie sincerely, Marion Cotillard's acting alone would make it worth watching, and there are other beautiful things in it as well. The movie never seems too long, and its last minutes are very emotional, when Edith Piaf is led to the stage, she can hardly walk, and then she starts to sing 'No regrets' and transforms completely.

I saw this movie twice (and will certainly watch it again), it is a sad a pure story that still leaves feeling that life is always beautiful. Lillian Gish as Sarah reminded me of one of my grandmother's friends. In some episodes it seemed like she hadn't even changed since her young years (only some wrinkles added). I disagree with those who say that Bette Davis is hammy in this film. Some moments with her were really touching and made me feel sad for this woman, for example, when Sarah says that she encountered a stereoscope with the old family pictures. There is such sadness in Libby's eyes because she won't be able to see those faces, she can only remember them in her mind. The episode when she takes out her husband's lock of hair is moving and wonderful, she has strange beauty in her face, even though the actress' illness is clearly seen in this film (the consequences of a stroke etc.). Lillian Gish has beautiful close-ups, her eyes are unusually expressive. Mr Maranov is strikingly different from so many Russian caricature-like characters in American movies. He is a man of dignity who says a touching monologue about the beauty of life that can never be too long, even if it seems that one has outlived one's time. Tisha seemed to me a little annoying, the only weakness of this film. But the film is in my opinion a must-see because of the two old sisters. It is one of the best duets I have ever seen in the cinema.

It might seem weird but as I re-watch this film, Ingrid Bergman's character appears to me far more human than it previously did. For this reason I disagree with most reviewers' interpretation of Charlotte. It is true that she has been neglecting her family both physically and emotionally, she must be partly (but not entirely!) to blame for Eva's inner disharmony, she is self-centered in a way many artists are; but at the same time she is (and always was) aware of her faults (many of which are rooted in her own childhood), and her behaviour is a constant painful attempt to escape this awareness. When Charlotte talks to herself after having greeted Helena, we see she is terrified (as it's her own flesh and blood she faces so hideously crippled), the ill daughter is a reminder of the mother's helplessness, so Charlotte's attitude towards Helena, though shocking, is anything but indifferent.

For similar reasons the famous Chopin scene seems to me much subtler than a plain 'mother's demonstration of superiority'. While listening to Eva playing the music, Charlotte starts crying, and those are genuine tears that even came against her wish. Then, it is Eva who asks Charlotte to show her a different interpretation. Charlotte is reflecting on how this music should be played, but Eva feels that it's a tactless reminder of her mediocrity. I can imagine that it's a way Charlotte used to make her daughter feel, but in this particular scene she doesn't seem to have such an intention.

Ingrid Bergman wrote in her autobiography that she wanted Ingmar Bergman to change her heroine a little. It was too hard for her to understand how a woman can be such a cruel mother. Charlotte has been away from her daughter for 7 years, which means that she never came to see her own grandson, nor did she come to support Eva after the boy drowned. But at the end the actress achieved the impossible, as one feels sympathy for this heroine (as I did really), despite all of her moral crimes. In the scene of the night conversation it was difficult to me to be on Eva's side, which is a paradox in a sense. After all, we know that Charlotte brought unhappiness to her family, while Eva dedicates her days to helping other people. But I do suspect that one of the reasons why Eva invited Charlote to stay was her (i.e. Eva's) wish to resolve the old painful matters. Some of the accusations are unbelievably cruel and seem irrelevant even before Eva herself admits it.

For me one of the central themes in the film is a price an artist must pay not only for his fame, but also for a true noble joy of dedicating his life to Art. We see that Charlotte loveless childhood is a reason for her motherly faults, but the same early loneliness probably made Charlotte an artist, because music was the only way she could express herself. Eva reproaches Charlotte for using the talent as a justification to all her minor and major sins, but this moment is present in many artists' lives. One sees how helpless he is in the commonest human relationships, it's hard to face the truth that people suffer because of you, so the only consolation is a hope that your talent making your listeners happy would compensate for the faults. For Charlotte this didn't work, because the damage she caused is too severe, and she probably doubts whether her artistic life had any meaning.

Still, the ending of the film leaves me with some hope that a new conversation between the two women will take place, because after their confrontation they would never be the same.